Actually, this whole '5G' thing is full of confusing elements.redflagdealsguy wrote: ↑ Engineers can confirm this, but apparently 5G is energy hungry because of the high frequency bands involved in communication.
- More mini-towers required (higher capital cost)
- Poorer building penetration
- Tot-mom NIMBY-ism (remains to be seen)
5G mini-towers are going up in neighborhoods and commercial areas across the densely populated NE and California.
First off: 5G does NOT suggest a particular band. 5G can run on pretty much any band, and in NA it will likely run on the 600MHz spectrum recently vacated by TV broadcasters, which has relatively excellent in building penetration. Also, there is nothing stopping carriers from eventually refarming 3G/4G spectrum for 5G, exactly what was done when 4G/LTE was new. In addition, there is a world wide effort to standardize 5G deployments in the 3.5GHz range (much like B7 LTE is common around much of the world), it looks like that will happen.
The '5G' you are referencing, and which holds out most of the promises that 5G marketing focuses on, is in the 20+ GHz range:
https://medium.com/5g-nr/mobility-with- ... 2085b83d91
For the 5G-NR range, attenuation in our atmosphere becomes a very major factor for some of the range:
Aside from that, in urban environments anything mm sized will drastically reduce signal.
So, for mmWave, you are basically relying on line of sight.
So are you going to see mmWave towers? Nope. They won't be towers. They'll basically look like the kind of WIFI access points you see in public areas of airports and things like that, a small 'bump' on the ceiling. Outside you MIGHT see little rectangular boxes on light poles or something like that.
But 'cell towers'? Nope. So the NIMBY factor disappears, people won't know anything is 'going up'