The rural broadband gap is narrowing but persists, according to new research from USTelecom. Wired broadband at speeds of 25 Mbps downstream and 3 Mbps upstream was available to 98% of non-rural areas but only 65% of rural areas as of mid-2017, according to USTelecom.
The 25/3 Mbps speed level is particularly important because it is the new target that the FCC has proposed for the high-cost Universal Service Fund.
USTelecom worked with consultancy Telecodata to produce the broadband research, which was based on information reported by service providers and collected through FCC Form 477.
Approximately 79% of housing units are non-rural and 21% are rural, according to U.S. Census figures cited by USTelecom.
Rural Broadband Gap
In general, the rural broadband gap widens as broadband speeds increase, according to the USTelecom data. Nearly 100% (99%) of non-rural housing units can get wired broadband at speeds of at least 3 Mbps downstream and 768 kbps upstream, compared with 81% of rural housing units – a gap of 18 percentage points. But when it comes to speeds greater than 100/10 Mbps, the gap increases to 42 percentage points. Ninety-two percent of non-rural housing units can get service at those speeds, compared with just 50% of rural housing units.
Rural broadband availability is somewhat higher when fixed wireless offerings are included, but the gap continues to widen as speeds increase. The percentage of housing units that can get wired or wireless fixed service at speeds of at least 3 Mbps/ 768 kbps is 99% in non-rural areas and 90% in rural areas – a gap of 9 percentage points. The gap rises to 41 percentage points at speeds of 100/ 10 Mbps, with 92% of non-rural housing units and 51% of rural housing units having service available.
At the critical 25/3 Mbps speed, 70% of rural housing units and 98% of non-rural housing units have service available via either fixed wireless or wired broadband.
“USTelecom believes that every American should have the opportunity to connect to the internet through sufficiently robust broadband service,” wrote USTelecom in the new report, titled U.S. Broadband Availability Mid-Year 2017. “For some areas, this requires government support. The FCC’s Connect America Fund provides a good starting point. Further progress will require additional funding. Policies must be targeted, flexible and efficient. Policies should target support to specific areas where the economics do not support deployment or upgrades. In addition, governments must not fund wasteful, duplicative overbuilding of existing facilities. Policies must also be sufficiently flexible to allow for the most cost-effective solutions rather than adhering to rigid technology or speed requirements. Finally, it is essential that funding be dedicated and direct, using a mechanism like the Connect America Fund for the most economically and administratively efficient distribution of funds.”
Image courtesy of flickr user Sean MacEntee.
The cost of backbone data for providing quality internet service to customers in small and mid-size cities and towns and rural areas is exorbitant to say the least. High-speed lines are hugely expensive for providers, if they are even available at all. Our cable system serves a small town 7 miles away from a bigger town, not too big, we're talking 500 people here and 1000 people there. In the other town, you can get gigabit data via fiber to the home for $140/month, but here, it is costing us $1950/month for just a 250 Mbps fiber line to our headend that feeds our cable modem service. This cost is down considerably from a few years ago, when it cost $1000/month for just a basic T1 line, but it is still ridiculous.
Why not get a Gigabit fiber connection and do a AirFiber link between towns?
The phone company in the neighboring town will not sell to another commercial provider, citing the stress it would put on their network, degrading the service to their local customers.
This is why you can't compare the cost of a residential class service to a provider level service.