The National Broadband Network – my thoughts (#nbn)

The Australian Federal Government has announced a $43 billion, 8 year plan to roll out fiber optic broadband to 90% of Australians, offering speeds up to 100Mbps to the homes and business of those within reach of the roll out.

I think by any measure this is a significant event and one that will benefit Australia’s economy, it’s environment and social fabric.  The plan however, has its detractors, and to my mind, some of the criticism borders on the bizzare.

Here are some of the arguments I’ve heard in the past 48 hours:

1. Australia is too large for it to be economically viable.

Australia is undoubtably a vast country, but when you consider we seem to have been successful in rolling out and sustaining roads, plumbing, power cables and copper phone networks over similar distances one wonders why there is a perceived difference with a few centimeters width of fibre optic cable..  I view fiber to the home as pretty much the same kind of basic utility – and compared to running railway track cross 2000KM of rivers, desert and mountains it should be significantly less impact, cost and effort.

2. It will be too expensive for people to use.

Prices quoted are in the order of $80/$90 per month – and yes, for many people, that’s alot of money, but I think it needs to be put into context, most users of home telephony pay similar amounts for line rental and very basic ADSL (and this network would supplant both).  Additionally, a mere 10 years ago I paid up to $5 an hour for internet access!  Finally, $80 a month is approximate to the charges levied for NextG wireless net from Telstra – the main alternative suggested to rolling out fiber.

3. Wireless is cheaper / faster option

Not for mere mortals.  Additionally wireless may be theoretically fast, but my experience with wireless broadband is highly variable – and members of my family regularly have to roam their house looking for a good reception spot.  Speeds rarely reach the theoretical maximums quoted in press releases.  It may get faster, but 5x faster and with always on, trust with your life reliability?  I remain unconvinced.

4. We don’t need it.

This is the category I least understand.  This one seems to be from people who email once a week or who think the Internet is solely for Facebook.  Maybe its hard for people to imagine the kind of things this kind of bandwidth enables, but off the top of my head, here are some of the things the network would support:

• Widespread telecommuting.  100Mbps is LAN speeds, this will make telecommuting a viable occurrence for not just the few, but any kind of information worker.  This could have a significant impact on greenhouse gas emissions and the centralized nature of our cities.
• High Definition video communication (and crystal clear voice).  No more distorted telephone calls, less travel and fewer flights, closer connections with distant work mates, business partners, family and friends.
• Pervasive Tele-medicine, Real time, high resolution medical imaging and remote diagnosis.
• Video on Demand, The availability of subscriber specific IP TV will blow open digital media consumption.
• The end of physical delivery of electronic goods (and subsequent transport, packaging, storage and cost).

It must be recognized that most of these  things can be done now (and are being done), but often with specialized equipment and sometimes at great expense. What this network makes possible is that these services will become utterly pervasive – and it is this pervasiveness where the impact lies.  When everybody is connected it will change the way Australia work, plays and communicates - and this will be as significant to our economy, our cities, our lives and our society as the advent of electricity.