Tankio
HomeRainwaterFAQBlogContact

LoRa or WiFi for a connected tank?
The complete comparison

Range, power consumption, installation, reliability: everything you need to know to choose between LoRa and WiFi for your connected level sensor.

You have decided to install a connected sensor on your tank, and you face a crucial question: which communication technology to choose? LoRa or WiFi? This choice has a direct impact on sensor range, battery life, reliability of data transmission and even installation price.

In this article, we compare these two technologies point by point to help you make the right choice depending on your situation. We will see that depending on the location of your tank (underground, in a basement, outdoors) and its distance from your internet router, the answer is not the same.

cell_tower 1. LoRa and WiFi: Understanding both technologies

WiFi (IEEE 802.11) is the wireless communication standard you use daily for the internet. It offers a High data rate (several hundred Mbps) but on a short range, with high energy consumption. For a tank sensor, WiFi requires that the sensor is within range of your router (30 to 50 meters inside) and that it is powered regularly.

LoRa (Long Range) is an LPWAN (Low Power Wide Area Network) technology designed specifically for the IoT. It prioritises long range and low power consumption over data rate. For a connected gauge that only sends a few bytes of data per day, LoRa is perfectly suited. The LoRaWAN standard defines the communication protocol, using the ISM 868 MHz band (free and unlicensed in Europe).

The fundamental difference is philosophical: WiFi is designed to transfer large amounts of data quickly, while LoRa is designed to send small amounts of data over long distances with minimal power consumption. For a tank level sensor that sends a measurement every hour, LoRa is technically much more suitable. Find out more about our page dedicated to connected sensors.

distance 2. Range: 5 km versus 50 meters

This is the most spectacular advantage of LoRa. In rural areas, a LoRa sensor can transmit its data to a gateway (receiving station) more than 5 km away. In dense urban areas, there is still 1 to 3 km thanks to the good penetration of the 868 MHz waves.

WiFi, on the other hand, has a ceiling of about 50 meters inside, and often less through the walls. For a tank in a basement or in the garden, the WiFi range is often insufficient without a repeater. WiFi solutions therefore require the sensor to be installed near the router, which is not always compatible with the location of your tank.

An important point: the LoRa range is not symmetrical. The sensor speaks to the gateway, but the gateway can be placed in an optimal place (attic, upper floor) while the sensor stays at the bottom of the cellar or in the garden. This flexibility of installation is a major asset for existing tanks whose location cannot be moved.

battery_charging_full 3. Energy consumption: years versus days

Low power consumption is LoRa’s second decisive advantage. A well-designed LoRa sensor runs for several years on a single battery (3.6 V lithium battery). Why? Because the LoRa radio module consumes very little during transmission (a few dozen milliamps for a few milliseconds) and puts itself in deep sleep the rest of the time (a few microamps).

Conversely, a WiFi module typically consumes 100 to 300 mA during transmission, and above all, it must maintain a connection with the network, which keeps it in a much more power-hungry standby state. Even in connected standby mode, an ESP8266 or similar WiFi module consumes 10 to 50 times more than a LoRa module on standby.

In practice, this means that a generic WiFi sensor must either be connected to mains power or have its batteries changed monthly, while a LoRa sensor can operate for 3 to 5 years. For tank monitoring, where the sensor is often difficult to access in an underground tank or basement, LoRa’s long battery life is a major advantage.

layers 4. Barrier penetration: buried tank, basement, concrete

Tanks are often in difficult places: basement, cellar, buried garden, garage. The ability of the signal to cross obstacles is therefore crucial.

LoRa uses the 868 MHz band, which penetrates walls, concrete and even the soil above an underground tank better than a 2.4 GHz or 5 GHz WiFi signal. Low frequency waves are less absorbed by building materials, making LoRa the ideal choice for buried tanks.

The 2.4 GHz WiFi can cross a few partitions, but quickly loses power with load-bearing walls, concrete slabs and especially the earth. For a buried tank, WiFi is simply Unusable without a cable going up in the open air. LoRa, on the other hand, can trace data from a tank buried 2 meters underground, with a gateway located in the house several tens of meters away.

settings 5. Installation: with or without a gateway?

The installation differs significantly between the two technologies. WiFi has the advantage of simplicity if you are within reach: your sensor connects directly to your existing internet router. No additional equipment. But this simplicity has a price: limited reach and high consumption.

LoRa requires a gateway (receiving station) that collects data from sensors and transmits it to the internet via your router. This gateway is usually provided with the sensor and simply connects to the electrical and internet network. The advantage is that a single gateway can handle dozens of sensors within a radius of several kilometres.

The gateway is included with Tankio. It receives sensor readings over LoRa and connects to your internet router over WiFi. The sensor therefore needs neither WiFi coverage at the tank nor a WiFi password.

table_chart 6. Complete LoRa vs WiFi comparison table

CriteriaLoRa / LoRaWANWiFi (2.4 GHz)
Max range (open field)5 - 15 km50 - 100 m
Range in town1 - 3 km20 - 50 m
Penetration buried tankExcellentVery low
Power consumption during transmission~30 mA (100 ms)~150-300 mA (100 ms+)
Battery life3 - 5 years3 - 30 days
Data rate0.3 - 50 kbps50 - 600 Mbps
Equipment requiredLoRa GatewayExisting internet router
Frequency band868 MHz (Licence-free ISM)2.4 / 5 GHz
SecurityAES-128 encryptionWPA2/WPA3
Module cost~5-15 €~3-10 €
Ideal forRemote sensors, buried, low power consumptionSensors close to the router, with power supply
LoRa is no better than WiFi in absolute. This is the right technology for proper use. For an autonomous, remote and difficult to access tank sensor, LoRa is clearly the best choice.

tips_and_updates 7. How to choose according to your situation

Here is a simple guide to help you choose according to your actual configuration.

Choose the LoRa if:

  • Your tank is buried or in a deep basement.
  • Your tank is far from the house (garden, garage, outbuilding).
  • You don't want to change the batteries every month.
  • You want a fully self-contained sensor without cables.
  • Your WiFi router is far from the tank (> 30 m with obstacles).

WiFi can be sufficient if:

  • Your tank is in the same room as your internet router.
  • You have a mains outlet nearby to power the sensor.
  • You do not fear temporary WiFi cuts.
  • You prefer not to add an additional gateway.

Tankio offers one architecture only: a hydrostatic-pressure probe for water sends readings over LoRa to the included gateway, and the gateway uses home WiFi to forward them to the app. Tankio does not offer a direct-WiFi sensor version.

If you still hesitate, do not hesitate to contact us. We will help you determine the best solution for your installation.