“Wireless power today only comes in the form of solar, wind and batteries. Make sure your wireless networking configuration has a power plan,” Nelson advises. “There are some great wireless devices that now support power over Ethernet [IEEE 802.3af-2003 and IEEE 8
02.3at-2009].”

The IEEE 802.3at standard supports up to 25W of power, which is adequate to support most 802.3at standard PoE cameras. Using PoE can help to minimize power cabling and make for a cleaner installation.

No Need for Costly Trenching
As wireless technology continually improves, total cost of ownership (TCO) for using wireless networks for video surveillance is becoming increasingly attractive when compared to the pricier alternative of trenching cable.

Here is a scenario described by Cosimo Malesci, co-founder and vice president of sales and marketing for Buffalo Grove, Ill.-based Fluidmesh Networks, to illustrate the potential cost savings of a wireless system. Imagine having a new warehouse located one mile away from your headquarters and having to provide video surveillance of the warehouse back to the head office. You could decide to dig and use a cabled backhaul, although associated costs are exorbitant compared to a simple point-to-point wireless backhaul via radios.

“You could also use a 3G/4G system but it’s less reliable,” Malesci says. “You will never have a dedicated and reliable broadband for continuous streaming, and you have to pay the bill every month to the carrier!”

Compared to the rest of an enterprise surveillance solution, the part of the system covering the outside perimeter is the most expensive on a cost-per-camera basis.

“In terms of sustainability and cost, longer cable runs translate into more materials being used, and trenching through concrete, aggregate or asphalt negatively impacts drainage and erosion,” Tynan says. “Longer term, corrosion can weaken or terminate signal strength altogether, and even rodents have been known to develop a taste for various flavors of cabling.”

Moreover, the fuel consumption of (and emissions from) a backhoe used for trenching impacts the environment and adds significant time and costs to an installation. Remote sites and associated return trips exacerbate installation costs. Also, extra time and resources are required for permitting, including awaiting approvals.

In terms of technology costs, megapixel and/or premium-priced pan/tilt/zoom (p/t/z) cameras mounted on a building to view distant areas are more expensive than standard resolution cameras mounted nearer the actual area at risk. Additional costs include the electricity used per camera, electricity used by heaters/blowers and the cost of powering incremental lighting.

Wireless surveillance systems help reduce both installation (capital) as well as operating (long-term power and transmission) costs. Wireless cameras can be deployed in a matter of hours to reduce installation times by up to 90% over traditional video systems, saving users tens of thousands of dollars. For example, the cost for trenching is typically $50 to $100 per foot. For concrete or asphalt, costs increase considerably, doubling to $100 to $200 per foot.

“Less-disruptive wireless installations not only reduce cost,” Tynan says, “but eliminate most of the sustainability impact, and lower power consumption over the life of the system promotes ongoing sustainability.”

If you appreciated this article and want to receive more valuable industry content like this, click here to sign up for our FREE digital newsletters!

Related Content