London’s mayor recently reiterated his commitment to 5G, which is encouraging, but it may be time to shift the conversation from future promises to technologies that are already available and capable of transforming how people connect to the internet in the “tech capital” he envisions.
When I lived with my parents, four of us shared a single 802.11g Wi‑Fi network from separate rooms. My brother and I enjoy multiplayer gaming, and anyone who’s lost a crucial file transfer or a game connection because of weak Wi‑Fi will recognize the frustration. Dropped connections and dead zones make even small, everyday activities feel unreliable.
To address these problems we installed Wi‑Fi extenders in each room. That approach can be adequate for small homes, but costs and complexity quickly rise in larger buildings and business environments. Extenders help, but they are not a scalable solution for citywide or wide-area coverage.
Back then, the dream of seamless Wi‑Fi throughout a city or reliable coverage in a vehicle seemed distant, especially when a “disconnected” message popped up where you expected service. Cellular networks—3G and later 4G—helped fill some gaps, and many assumed mobile operators would remain the primary on‑the‑move access providers for the foreseeable future.
However, an alternative has existed for some time. In 2011 the IEEE ratified a standard known as 802.22, which operates in lower‑frequency TV white spaces, roughly 54 MHz to 698 MHz, freed up by the digital TV transition. The remarkable advantage of this spectrum is range: a single 802.22 base station can cover up to 62 miles in each direction, or roughly 12,000 square miles from one transmitter. Such long reach makes it ideal for wide area wireless networks.
While 802.22’s peak data rate—up to 22 Mbps—may not match the headline speeds marketed for modern fixed or mobile broadband, it is ample for many practical uses. For municipal Wi‑Fi, remote connectivity, and getting people online while they move about a city, 22 Mbps per user or per cell can provide functional, reliable access until higher‑speed, localized services are available.
Despite the promise of 802.22, mass deployment has been limited so far. That is regrettable because citywide networks based on these lower frequency bands could reduce dependence on mobile operators and deliver consistent coverage across urban and rural areas alike. Encouragingly, large technology companies have been exploring this approach in regions that most need affordable connectivity: for example, Google, Microsoft, and Facebook have invested in projects using the standard—sometimes marketed under the name Wi‑FAR—to expand internet access in parts of Africa and India.
Their initiatives demonstrate the technology’s practical value and scalability in challenging environments. While the immediate focus of these projects is understandably on regions with the greatest connectivity gaps, the same strategies could be applied in developed cities to improve municipal coverage, public services, and on‑the‑move connectivity for residents and visitors.
Adopting wide‑area, lower‑frequency Wi‑Fi technologies would not necessarily replace 5G or high‑speed fiber services, but it could complement them by offering broad baseline coverage where other networks struggle. City planners and policymakers should weigh these existing options alongside emerging technologies when building resilient, inclusive urban broadband strategies.
Do you think cities should roll out Wi‑FAR? Let us know in the comments.