Palo Alto Weekly

Spectrum - May 13, 2011

Guest Opinion: Palo Alto leads in wireless, but needs bandwidth to operate

by Leon Beauchman

A funny thing happened in Palo Alto on the way to the 21st century. There's controversy about the future of wireless technology.

This sounds strange because much of the innovation driving the explosive growth of wireless devices has been created in Silicon Valley. In fact, our region has had a significant role in the evolution of what ITU World Telecom calls "the most rapidly adopted technology in the history of the world." Globally, there are more than 5.2 billion wireless phones, and developing countries see wireless communications as an effective tool to compete with the leading economies.

Few people would be surprised that Palo Alto probably has more smart phones and smart devices per capita than any other city in the world. All of this new technology needs wireless bandwidth to function properly. This apparently insatiable demand for more powerful devices has led Apple to begin work on a new store in downtown Palo Alto. Rumor is its size will rival Apple's store in Manhattan.

Fortunately, our president has seen and embraced the future. Barack Obama understands the strategic importance of building a communications infrastructure that will allow our country to compete in the new century. "For millions of Americans, the railway hasn't shown up yet," the president said recently. "For our families and our businesses, high-speed wireless service, that's the next train station. It's the next offramp. It's how we'll spark new innovation, new investments and new jobs."

The wireless communications phenomenon has already generated thousands of Silicon Valley jobs. Yet, the future holds even greater promise. Smart devices will drive the next wave of innovation and expansion. In the United States, there are more than 300 million mobile phones. More than 65 million people had smart phones in January 2011, an 8 percent increase over the preceding quarter. In addition, American consumers identified smart phones as their most likely technology purchase for 2011.

The operating system for smart devices is dominated by two Silicon Valley companies, Google and Apple, with more than 50 percent of the market. In addition, the global mobile applications market is estimated to reach $25 billion in 2015 from about $6.8 billion in 2010. The emerging devices and applications are right in the Valley's "sweet spot."

What's most amazing are the emerging applications that wireless technology will enable. Health care will be profoundly improved when doctors can remotely monitor a patient's status in real time. Health professionals will have access to medical records on hand-held devices and make better-informed decisions about patient care. Educators have already started including hand held devices in their teaching practices. Digital textbooks and smart devices will revolutionize how students interact with teachers and the curriculum. The Federal Communications Commission recently awarded $9 million in grants to schools and libraries to support the development of wireless applications. Unfortunately, none of the 20 grants was awarded to Silicon Valley schools.

Infrastructure for the future

The potential of wireless technology can only be enabled if there is a robust wireless infrastructure. Ironically, in Silicon Valley, it has taken as long as five years to review and approve an application to build wireless facilities. In some cases, residents have felt that wireless carriers have ignored their concerns by rushing project applications through local bureaucracies. Too often the process has turned adversarial and made dialogue almost impossible.

Much of the controversy has evolved around whether radio-frequency emissions are a health risk. The actual emissions from wireless facilities are a fraction of what the federal government has established as being safe. However, the perception is that cell towers, due to their size, are a greater health risk. To date, medical studies in this country and abroad overwhelmingly suggest that RF emissions are not a health risk.

In a recent Palo Alto Weekly article, Dr. Paul Fisher of the Stanford School of Medicine stated, "The bottom line is there's no known association between cell phones or towers and health effects." "This is the high tension wires of our time" he went on to say, comparing a similar debate about the health risks of high-tension wires 30 years ago.

Another concern in Palo Alto is wireless facilities affecting home values. To date, no one has presented meaningful data to prove any neighborhood or individual has seen the value of their homes negatively impacted. However, communities should be concerned about the aesthetic impact of wireless facilities. Some cities have worked with neighborhoods and wireless carriers to develop guidelines that minimize the visual impact while supporting technology deployment. Public safety is also an issue when approximately 25 percent of homes in the United States have no wired connection and depend exclusively on the wireless telephony. Every day, more than 300,000 wireless calls are made to 911.

A way forward

A new Wireless Communications Initiative (WCI), as part of Joint Venture: Silicon Valley Network, is working with city councils, city staff, wireless carriers and communities to promote deployment of a 21st-century wireless infrastructure. The future of Silicon Valley and local job growth is very much tied to the evolution of the wireless technology. The question is not whether we'll have a 21st-century infrastructure, but rather, how and when.

As a way forward, the WCI has launched the Coalition for a 21st Century Wireless Infrastructure. The coalition's objective is to create balanced conversations and community dialogue in support of deploying wireless technology. We need people to advocate by writing letters, speaking at hearings or by lending their name as a coalition supporter. You can join the coalition or get more information at the Wireless Communications Initiative page on the Joint Venture Silicon Valley website (www.jointventure.org).

Silicon Valley is defining the future. We should lead by example when it comes to inventing and embracing our new wireless world.

Leon Beauchman is the director of the Wireless Communication Initiative of Joint Venture: Silicon Valley Network. He can be contacted at leon@jointventure.com.

Comments

Posted by Canary in the Coal Mine, a resident of Downtown North
on May 17, 2011 at 6:15 pm

"To date, medical studies in this country and abroad overwhelmingly suggest that RF emissions are not a health risk."

This is the industry position, not a fact. Radio frequency emission limits in this country are based on the amount the microwaves cause physical heating of sample tissue. These obsolete "standards" do not take into account how microwave emissions effect the subtle energy signaling mechanisms used between cells of living beings. Please read The Bioinitiative Report Web Link

Or watch the recent video, Full Signal: Web Link

Mercola has some good information as well: Web Link


Posted by Mark Weiss, a resident of Barron Park
on May 20, 2011 at 8:48 am

This guy works for the applicant, one of the world's largest corporations. He is paid to write this. He was paid to speak at the various public hearings, yet for some reason he never identifies himself as an employee of that firm -- what's up with that? I wonder if his company beyond paying Leon offered Palo Alto Weekly money to run this piece. It probably more rightly should have been a full page ad labeled ADVERTISEMENT or, if it were my paper, CORPORATE PROPAGANDA. The applicant, according to Wall Street Journal is the leading contributor to political campaigns and spends the most on lobbyists. (I wonder if they lobby locally -- is that what Joint Venture is? A lobby for corporate interests? I wonder what founding executive who we knew of originally as a school board stalwart Becky Morgan thinks of what it has become..)
In the lobby of City Hall one night, as I was discussing with a another attendee my position -- pro-resident and therefore suspicious of huge corporations telling us what is best for us, or worse, that we are not allowed by Federal law they paid for to resist at all, on certain grounds, or only within a "shot clock" - this is basketball now? -- Leon Beauchman, without identifying himself stood behind me and taunted -- I called it "woofing" in my blog -- "Corporate power? Harumph!!!"

Beyond the health issues, beyond the intrusions, beyond the aesthetics I oppose this based on anti-trust grounds, the entities involved are "disturbing" -- that's a web 2.0 buzzword -- democracy. I don't mind the dropped calls; I am more worried about Big Brother some day deciding that dissidents, mavericks, non-comformists, cranks and loudmouths should be removed from the system, and they know where we are at every moment thanks to GPS. Look at China and Ai Weiwei. Our "extraordinary rendition" and elimination of habeus corpus is not so different.

I thought the arrogance of the corporate slickies was appalling. And I was disappointed at how council and commissions caved so easily to the pressure. Some of them, especially Greg Scharf and Nancy Shepherd, sound like corporate shills.

How many wires or non-wires can we wrap ourselves in and still be human? Our El Palo Alto looks like a Christmas Tree, in a Terry Gilliam or Philip K. Dick movie.

Web Link

He probably still is a pretty good basketball player; played for SJSU.

Next they will be offering to pay for our garbage collection if we only change our name to Pal o A t t ("pal of AT&T", with their little logo for the final 'o' in 'alto')


Posted by svatoid, a resident of Charleston Gardens
on May 20, 2011 at 9:00 am

"Beyond the health issues,"

What health issues? Provide proven facts, not Tru-Love-style scare tactics.


Posted by Weiss, a resident of Barron Park
on May 20, 2011 at 7:52 pm

Web Link

My main point is that we should discuss these things and not operate at the speed of the industry. "Health issues" is probably too strong a term. "Health questions" "health concerns"
I am referencing the phones not the towers here. And yes, I continue to use the product. But like I said above, I would put up with a few dropped calls to preserve some aesthetics and not feel that I am on their farm.

The link above is New York Times Feb. 22, 2011 "Cellphone Use Tied To Changes In Brain Activity" Puzzling evidence as David Byrne might say.


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:


Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields