Telecom companies need to set
up more towers to handle the growing voice & data traffic
Kalyan
Parbat & Gulveen Aulakh, ET Bureau Feb 13, 2014, 04.15AM IST
(Spooked by
radiation concerns,…)
The ongoing
battle for telecom radiowaves, via online auctions, in three of the largest
markets in India— Delhi, Mumbai and Kolkata—has an intriguing sub-plot: what it
means for the tower infrastructure of the two largest incumbent operators
there, Bharti and Vodafone.
Both
companies have spectrum, as these radiowaves are called, in these cities in the
900 MHz band. If they lose the pitched battle they are engaged in with other
operators, chiefly Reliance Jio, to retain this spectrum, they will have to
migrate to the 1,800 MHz band. Since this band is a little more than half as
efficient as 900 MHz, the migration will need them to invest more in cellular
towers to maintain coverage. Such retooling is inconvenient. It's also
increasingly difficult, especially in the top 20-25 cities, which are already
tower sprawls and whose residents are doing a U-turn on these easy-money
propositions.
Reports
linking telecom radiation to medical problems, despite assurances from
authorities to the contrary, have scared away property owners. Even local authorities
have become reluctant to give clearances.
"When
the sector was in growth mode, we could easily acquire 1,500 sites a month;
now, that has crashed to under 100," says Sunil Kanoria, MD of Viom
Networks, India's second-largest tower company, with 42,000 towers in all
circles.
For telecom
operators, it's a double blow. In urban areas, they are facing consumer ire for
congested voice networks and not investing enough in them. And now, they are
realising that, even if they want to, they can't do so at will. "We
definitely see greater lead times in our current site acquisitions," says
a director of a large global telecom operator with a big India footprint, not
wanting to be named.
With data
consumption rising, this company planned to invest in 8,000 new sites this year
to build a robust 3G network. Companies like this are now, instead, considering
other options: more tower sharing, another option that allows for remote
presence but means laying more fibre, and using wireless networks.
Radiation
Scare
A telecom
tower, or broadly a base station, is what enables a call at the local mile. It
sends and receives radio signals from a mobile phone. A large number of towers
put together form a network. The greater the traffic on a network, the higher
the capacity it needs in its base stations to avoid calls not going through or
being dropped. But there's no appetite among property owners to have them
perched on rooftops.
According to Umang Das,
directorgeneral of Tower & Infrastructure Providers Association (TAIPA),
tower infrastructure providers are "literally on tenterhooks as their
rollout plans are subject to arbitrary decisions of state authorities and
municipalities". TAIPA is an industry grouping that represents tower
firms, including Indus Towers, Viom Networks , Bharti Infratel, GTL and
Reliance Infratel.
TAIPA says
the government has tightened radiation emission rules for towers—dropping
limits to a tenth of the international norm—but the message has not gone down
to public. "Vast sections of people now, unfortunately, believe towers are
dangerous," says a top executive of a leading European mobile operator,
who did not wish to be named. Adds nuclear scientist KS Parthasarathy,
ex-secretary of the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board and an expert on electromagnetic
field (EMF) emissions: "Public perception on the alleged adverse effects
of cell-tower radiation is totally skewed due to motivated propaganda of
scaremongers with vested interests out to sell their radio-protective
accessories."
Creating
Awareness
The
department of telecommunications (DoT), the government entity in charge of
setting radiation norms for telecom towers, says its jurisdiction is limited.
In an August 8, 2013 letter to chief secretaries of states and union
territories, DoT asked them to put no restrictions on tower installations in
residential areas, educational institutions or hospitals as radiation concerns
had been addressed by lowering limits. "But local municipalities and state
authorities continue to follow their own rules," rues Das of TAIPA.
Uma Shankar, joint secretary at DoT, says the issue is more
about consumer education. "We issue advisories, but it is up to each state
government or local body to define its boundary conditions since there are
different levels of concerns (on radiation emissions) across cities and states,
and getting permission for setting up towers is under their ambit," he
says. Another DoT official, who declined to be named, added that the health
ministry must chip in to educate the public and address concerns on tower
safety.
Prominent resident welfare associations (RWAs), which have been trenchant
campaigners against cell-tower radiation, believe telecom companies, DoT and
state authorities need to do more to address public concerns. "Although
there is no conclusive proof that tower radiation is harmful, people have grown
uneasy and are looking for guidance from all government agencies," says
Veena Singhal, chairperson of the Pedder Road Residents' Association, an RWA in
South Mumbai. "This is especially so after several cancer deaths were
reported in prominent bui ldings in upmarket South Mumbai locations, which
coincidentally faced buildings with a massive bunch of cellular antennae."
The country's highest court is currently hearing petitions filed by two industry
lobbies challenging a Rajasthan High Court order that directed telcos to remove
towers from schools, hospitals, jails and heritage buildings. "How do you
expect a telecom company in Rajasthan to provide reasonable quality of service,
or no drop rates or no channel congestion, if your towers are being removed by
courts?" Rahul Khullar, chairman of Telecom Regulatory Authority of India,
told ET recently. The next hearing of that case is on February 17. Das feels
the Supreme Court's verdict could set a precedent on tower location and
operations.
Even as that happens, Singhal says, the government and telecom companies
need to find ways to reduce towers without compromising coverage quality. The
industry is exploring alternatives, starting by sharing capacity more on
existing towers rather than setting up fresh towers. Besides that, companies
are exploring four other options. One, they are scouting for tower sites in
non-residential, commercial zones.
Two, they are looking to offload data traffic on their wireless networks.
Three, they are considering innovations like base station (BTS) hotels in
places where there are curbs on installing high telecom towers.
Mohit Rana, partner at AT Kearney, a telecom consultancy, says BTS hotels
have worked well in Indonesia and can be a solution in India too. It,
typically, involves micro antennae installed at low heights and linked through
fibre to a centralised location about a km away where base stations of multiple
operators are housed. "A BTS hotel can work in a place like Lutyens'
Delhi, where there are curbs on building high telecom towers," says Rana.
A fourth option is to set up lowemission micro sites. "A possible
solution to mitigate site acquisition challenges could be putting up smaller
cells with lower radiation levels, apart from self-certification," says BK
Syngal, the former chairman of VSNL, who is now a telecom consultant at Dua
Consulting. Since these are smaller than towers, micro sites emit less
radiation, but they also offer reduced signal strength, thus affecting
coverage.
In Delhi, Mumbai and Kolkata, much hinges on the auctions, and whether
Bharti and Vodafone can retain spectrum in the 900 MHz band. "Where they
have to migrate to 1,800 MHz, they will need to reorganise their networks and
manage the transition period," says Rana. "However, such
reorganisation will not require significant investments in new towers. In dense
urban areas, the 900 MHz networks are designed for capacity and can function on
1,800 MHz with some in-fill sites." In the days ahead, the auction results
and the court verdict should provide some clarity.
PICTURE FOR REPRESENTATIONAL PURPOSE
The committee has uploaded the detailed report on norms for installation of mobile towers and its harmful impact on its website.
