Today as many as 57 cities in the United States have municipal Wi-Fi (Springer, 2013). Nevertheless, these systems are little more than secondary internet connections to most people. Right now, 85% of Americans over the age of 18 have access to the internet and 70% of adults have high-speed internet in their homes. Of the portion of the population, that does not have internet in their home, nearly half claim that they simply do not want or need it. Thus, for the vast majority of the population, municipal Wi-Fi plans will only provide a supplement to household connections (Springer, 2013).
Furthermore, of the people who would use a resource like municipal Wi-Fi, a little over 50% have smartphones with an internet connection as of June 2013 (Rogowsky, 2013). Moreover, the average smartphone download speed can range from 1-5 Mbps for 3G services and 5-17 Mbps for LTE services (Segan, 2013). In comparison, a municipal Wi-Fi connection is typically only 1Mb whereas one could simply go to Starbucks to get a much faster 15Mb connection (Springer, 2013). This all leads to municipal Wi-Fi being treated as a network of last resort when no other options exists in the area of the user.
One of the biggest drawbacks to municipal Wi-Fi is the FCC limitation placed on Wi-Fi by limiting it to a max of one watt and dictating that it operates in the 2.4GHz and 5GHz frequency range (Mims, 2010). These two factors greatly limit Wi-Fi’s ability to propagate a usable signal to anyone outside of the immediate area of the access point. Calculating Wi-Fi propagation at 1-watt max adjusted output power through free space you could see it is capable of reaching out to 1 Km (Freenet Antennas, 2014). However, in a city, you are not broadcasting over free space and as such you can lose as much as half of that range and even more if, you are in a congested area.
With all this being said the 5GHz ranges ability to propagate is even worse. Even at one watt is only able to propagate out to 250 meters over free space (Freenet Antennas, 2014). This means that the 5 GHz Wi-Fi signal is unable to service even one city block effectively. As you can see the limited coverage area for Wi-Fi means that an average of 25 to 30 access points are required per square mile at 2.4 GHz and as many as 60 using 5 GHz in a suburban setting (Cisco, 2014). In downtown settings where you have a larger buildings with more of them built with stone and steel, the number can easily be triple that of a suburban setting.
Should municipal Wi-Fi continue to be pursued? With average deployment costs at or around $80,000 per Sq. mile, this represents a significant investment for the city with a negligible return on investment. The 802.11 Wi-Fi slandered was never meant to provide municipal service whereas WIMAX is. Should a city cover every square inch with Wi-Fi, probably not unless they can make a significant business case as to why it would justify the large outpouring of cash. In most cases, cities would be better off investing in other infrastructure projects like fiber to the home, which has a proven track record in bringing investment taxes dollars into the city coffers.
Then there is the question who should build these municipal Wi-Fi networks? Some say the private sector, some say the government, and yet others still say that it should be a corporative effort between the two. First you have to ask yourself is the internet a utility? Should broadband Internet service be treated as a basic utility in the United States, like electricity, water, and traditional telephone service? That is the question being asked at the FCC right now as it is currently classified as an information service exempting it from common carrier laws (Brodkin, 2014). Once you have made this determination as to if the internet is a utility or an information service, then you can decide if it should be industry or the government that should build your municipal Wi-Fi.
If the internet is a utility then the government by its self or in cooperation with industry should build out the municipal Wi-Fi network. Furthermore, it should be treated as a public service and as such the initial build out will be paid for through a onetime bond measure with a raise in taxes to cover the annual maintenance. Moreover, as municipalities have no shareholders watching for profits, they are able to provide services at near cost for the municipality. On the other hand, if you classify the internet as an information service in which there are no requirements to ensure unrestricted access to everyone, then it should be left whole in the privet sectors hands. This allows them to build out only to profitable areas and gain the most return on investment for their effort.
Overall, municipal Wi-Fi is a dead end, even though it has some successes in some areas it is generally a failure. Municipality’s efforts should instead be focused on a far more reaching infrastructure build out like Fiber to the Home (FTTH). Once fiber is in the ground it requires little maintenance and can effectively be leased out to anyone who wants to use it. Secondly, the fiber network you build today will last you for the next 40 to 50 years as the bandwidth available over fiber has yet to be fully tapped. So call the FCC ask them to reclassify the internet as a utility and campaign you city to start a municipal FTTH project instead of Wi-Fi.
Works Cited
Brodkin, J. (2014, 05 12). FCC chair cracks door open to reclassifying broadband as a public utility. Retrieved from arstechnica: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/05/fcc-chair-cracks-open-door-to-reclassifying-broadband-as-a-public-utility/
Cisco. (2014, 05 18). Evolution of Municipal Wireless Networks. Retrieved from CISCO.COM: http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/wireless/aironet-1300-series/prod_white_paper0900aecd8057255d.html
Freenet Antennas. (2014, 05 18). Link Calculator. Retrieved from freenet-antennas.com: http://store.freenet-antennas.com/linkbudget.php
Mims, C. (2010, 10 02). Where’s All the Free Wi-Fi We Were Promised? Retrieved from technologyreview.com: http://www.technologyreview.com/view/421084/wheres-all-the-free-wi-fi-we-were-promised/
Rogowsky, M. (2013, 06 06). More Than Half Of Us Have Smartphones, Giving Apple And Google Much To Smile About. Retrieved from Forbes.com: http://www.forbes.com/sites/markrogowsky/2013/06/06/more-than-half-of-us-have-smartphones-giving-apple-and-google-much-to-smile-about/
Segan, S. (2013, 06 17). Fastest Mobile Networks 2013. Retrieved from PCMag.com: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2420334,00.asp
Springer, M. (2013, 10 09). 57 Cities Now Have Free Wi-Fi, But They’re Not Thinking Big Enough . Retrieved from PolicyMic.com: http://www.policymic.com/articles/66891/57-cities-now-have-free-wi-fi-but-they-re-not-thinking-big-enough
