Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : LAST MILE TECHNOLOGIES - Let's Discuss Them Here -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Frank A. Coluccio who wrote (2742)	1/17/1999 6:05:00 PM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 12823

Digital set-top boxes contributing to "greenhouse effect?" STBs will affect Global Warming? Hadn't though of it in quite those terms before. But read on. Thanks to Dwight Martin on the IATV - ACTV Interactive Television thread. Regards, Frank C. ============================================= Power fear over demands of digital TV The Scotsman WITHIN ten years set-top decoder boxes for digital television in the UK will consume the same amount of electricity as is produced by a power station, it was claimed yesterday. Consumer and environmental groups say the new technology will mean a surge in power demand because many of the boxes needed to receive digital broadcasts can never be switched off. Manufacturers predict five million decoders will be installed in the UK by 2000. Further demand, combined with sales of special digital TV sets, will lead to an estimated 25 million households across the UK having digital reception by the end of 2008. According to research carried out by the Consumers' Association for the European Commission, this would drain between 350 and 450 megawatts from the National Grid -the equivalent of a new power station's output. The digital broadcasters BSkyB and On Digital have opted for set- top boxes which ensure the continuous flow of data - and electricity - even on standby. Set top boxes on a standby setting will use 16 watts of power - 16 times as much electricity as the most efficient televisions. Consumption is expected to rise to 20 watts for the next generation of units due on sale later this year. It is estimated that the new digital receivers could lift electricity bills by an average of GBP 15 a year. The Consumers' Association is now calling on the European Union to try to limit electricity consumption by set-top boxes. A spokesman said: "The broadcasters and manufacturers should be experimenting with technical solutions to this problem allowing the machines to be switched off at certain times. "However, as far as we can tell most of the designing and manufacturing has already been done and it might already be too late to implement any improvements." Last October the Deputy Prime Minister, John Prescott, unveiled a campaign designed to counter global warming by persuading households to turn off their televisions, video recorders and computers, rather than leaving them on standby. According to the Government, if all televisions and videos kept on standby were turned off, the reduced demand would mean a cut in greenhouse gases emitted by power plants of an estimated half a million tones. Dr Richard Dixon, the head of research at Friends of the Earth Scotland, said European legislation was required urgently to curb the power drain caused by set-top boxes because they posed a greater threat than the current analogue equipment. Last night BSkyB said it was working with set-top box makers to improve energy efficiency. A spokesman said: "At the moment they have to remain functional 24 hours a day to allow us to download software to improve the system. "Digital terrestrial TV needs a huge system of transformers which consume much more energy than the satellite we use which gets its power directly from the sun."

To: Frank A. Coluccio who wrote (2742)	1/17/1999 6:17:00 PM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Respond to of 12823

Firm Wants Global Satellite System Friday, January 15, 1999; 3:54 p.m. EST WASHINGTON (AP) -- Virtual Geosatellite LLC is seeking a license from the Federal Communications Commission to build a global satellite system to offer high-speed Internet access and other data services, the company said Friday. Assuming it wins FCC approval, the Washington-based company wouldn't offer services directly to the public but would lease its facilities to companies that would, Virtual Geosatellite spokesman Brian Willard said. The company plans to begin providing services five years after FCC approval. It believes the system would be attractive to people living in sparsely populated areas or places with mountainous terrain who don't have access to high-speed services from conventional networks on the ground. The $2.6 billion system would consist of 15 satellites in orbit closer to the earth than traditional satellites. As a result, the system would permit people to receive high-speed data using small, 18-inch antennas mounted on rooftops. The FCC recently cleared a portion of the public airwaves for this type of satellite system. The venture is being financed by private investors and venture capitalists, Willard said, declining to identify them. The company is owned by Virtual Geosatellite Holdings Inc. and Ellipso Inc.

To: Frank A. Coluccio who wrote (2742)	1/17/1999 7:53:00 PM
From: Kenneth E. Phillipps	Respond to of 12823

Frank - I am in favor of whatever speeds up the merger and the investment necessary for internet access via cable. The FCC and Congress can deal with the monopoly issue later after ATT recovers their investment. Ken

To: Frank A. Coluccio who wrote (2742)	1/19/1999 12:32:00 PM
From: WTC	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12823

RE: "unbundling" HFC networks for common carrier access, As you note, this is technically awkward at best, but perhaps not significantly more "awkward" than many of the CLEC proposals for unbundling ILEC networks, e.g., subloop unbundling, spectrum unbundling, etc. I seriously doubt that ease of implementation will suddenly become a material factor in FCC rules for network operations. The strong traditional argument that the MSOs usually fell back upon -- the finite capacity of their coaxial-based systems -- begins to look a bit obsolete as the technical imperative precluding unbundling. Blair Levin, who many will remember as Reed Hundt's Chief of Staff not so very long ago, made some comments on the liklihood of MSO network unbundling requirements at a conference last October. I doubt if the situation has changed enough to make obsolete his observations: Levin commented on the Unbundled Cable Proceeding: Predicted the FCC would take no action, even with the ATT/TCI merger (no impact from the AOL petitions.) Basically, the FCC sees the proposals for cable unbundling as "very intrusive" and inappropriate. I asked Mr. Levin during a Q&A if "intrusive" was likely to become a part of the FCC's standard for taking action, noting that the FCC's (CC docket 98-188) proposals for CLEC access to ILEC databases, sub-loop unbundling, and cageless collocation could hardly be more "intrusive." Levin agreed with the irony, but noted that he was not defending the comparative logic of actions to be taken, just simply reporting on his view of the future direction of each proceeding. That prediction: The FCC would not require any cable unbundling, but they would require cageless collocation plus further loop unbundling (by the ILECs.) Three months later, Levin's predictions seem to me to be right on target.