New Tools in the Arsenal for Optimal Perimeter Security Strategies
An analysis methodology for determining overall perimeter security choices is to divide The security components into four major categories; access, detection, prevention and Conviction. Where the security industry has seen an expansion of choices is in the Number of technology options for the detection aspect.
A MicroPower Technologies White Paper 4225 Executive Square, Ste. 430 La Jolla, CA 92037 +1‐858‐768‐5780 www.micropowerapp.com New Tools in the Arsenal for Optimal Perimeter Security Strategies By Allyn Pon, Director of Product Management MicroPower Technologies, Inc. © MicroPower Technologies, Inc. ‐ June 2011 1 Contents Introduction 3 Numerous Detection Choices 4 Table 1 ‐ Detection Technologies Matrix 4‐5 Remote Camera Video Surveillance Options 6 Protecting the Perimeter 8 Summary 8 © MicroPower Technologies, Inc. ‐ June 2011 2 Introduction While technology advances in physical security for buildings or building proximity have been rapid and omnipresent, new tools for improved perimeter security have not been as visible, but yet still play an important role in overall security success. Environments such as large parking lots, stadium events, nuclear facilities, parks and recreational areas, construction facilities, correctional facilities, industrial facilities, government buildings, and major transportation facilities still continue to represent significant security challenges as the ideal solutions are cost‐prohibitive due to the difficulty of the terrain or vast spaces of coverage required. The number of variables and technology choices to consider for perimeter security are significantly greater than indoor security, making the final decision for perimeter security a difficult and arduous task. Numerous Detection Choices An analysis methodology for determining overall perimeter security choices is to divide the security components into four major categories; access, detection, prevention and conviction. Where the security industry has seen an expansion of choices is in the number of technology options for the detection aspect. New technologies have brought improvements in range detections as well as rapidly decreasing overall system costs. Beyond the traditional security guards to patrol the edge, the more sophisticated options for access control and detection systems for perimeter security now include fence movement, microwave sensors, seismic ground sensors, infrared sensors, photo beam sensors, thermal imaging, and video surveillance with motion detection and video analytics. Each has a trade‐off between operational benefits and costs as shown below in Table 1. © MicroPower Technologies, Inc. ‐ June 2011 3 Access Technology Category Description • Simple and easy to install and use Pros • Easy to monitor and integrate into existing security system • Only detects a disturbance Fence Movement • Prone to false alarms Cons • Unable to quantify seriousness of security event • Moderate maintenance for wear and tear • Accessible, so easy to vandalize and damage Relative Cost Low • Simple and easy to install and use • Easy to monitor and integrate into existing security Pros system • Wide range – Up to 1500 feet • Can handle severe weather conditions • Typically requires a cable power source at remote Microwave Sensors locations • Prone to false alarms Cons • Unable to quantify seriousness of security event • Interference from other microwave sources • Expensive equipment and easy access to vandalize and damage Relative Cost Low to Medium • Protection against vandalism • No interference with line of sight views and natural Pros beauty • Hidden security provides ideal non‐threatening Seismic Ground Sensors environment • Prone to false alarms Cons • Unable to quantify seriousness of security event • Requires a shallow trenching around the grounds Relative Cost Medium – High • Simple and easy to install and use • Easy to monitor and integrate into existing security system • Ability to better distinguish false alarms versus valid Pros human intruder detection • Works in foggy and night environments • Effective even in camouflage conditions Infrared Sensors • No cabled power source required. • Only detects a disturbance • Prone to false alarms Cons • Unable to quantify seriousness of security event • Limited coverage as each infrared sensor only extends 40 (low cost) to 300 (high cost) feet Relative Cost Low © MicroPower Technologies, Inc. ‐ June 2011 4 Access Technology Category Description • Quick and easy to install • Low cost installation Pros • No cabled power source required. Battery life run from 3 – 5 years or can use solar • Wireless communication to monitor station Photo Beam Sensors • Only detects a disturbance • Prone to false alarms Cons • Unable to quantify seriousness of security event • Limited coverage as each photo beam sensor only extends 100 to 250 feet Relative Cost Low • Ability to better distinguish false alarms versus valid human intruder detection Pros • Works in foggy and night environments • Effective even in camouflage conditions Thermal Imaging • Difficult to use in naturally hot environments whereby the temperature of surrounding environment is equal Cons to human temperature • Requires cable power source at remote locations Relative Cost Medium ‐ High • Ability to distinguish false alarms vs valid security breaches Pros • Record historical events for forensics Video Surveillance with • Recorded events can be used for conviction Motion Detection/Video • More complex to integrate into security systems Analytics Cons • Typically requires cable power source at remote locations* Relative Cost Low ‐ High * Except for advanced new technologies using solar Table 1 – Detection Technologies Matrix As evident from the matrix, a common theme to most access control solutions is the large number of potential false alarms associated with each technology option. In outdoor settings, environmental factors such as heavy wind conditions, debris, ice, water and animals can create havoc for any perimeter security solution. A comprehensive solution to address false alarms is as important as the actual detection system itself, as false alarms impact the effectiveness and credibility of the security system. In addition, false alarms can be costly, as numerous law enforcement agencies now charge for responding to false alarms. © MicroPower Technologies, Inc. ‐ June 2011 5 Remote Camera Video Surveillance Options Any reliable verification system for perimeter security has to include a video surveillance system. Not only do video surveillance systems provide the ability for immediate verification based on a triggered event, they provide the ability to quantify the seriousness should a valid security breach occur and determine the best response. The proper security response will vary depending on whether the intruder is an unsuspecting person who has inadvertently crossed the intrusion detection zone, or a team of terrorists who are attacking a facility. In addition, video surveillance systems address three of the major categories of detection, prevention and conviction. Unfortunately, integrating remote camera locations into video surveillance systems for perimeter security have been limited in scope, making it difficult to develop a comprehensive perimeter security strategy. The typical compromise is to locate security cameras near the building or nearby power sources and point the cameras outward to the perimeter covering the sterile regions and perhaps portions outside the perimeter. This is not an optimal perimeter security strategy, and does not cover an important aspect of security breach prevention. An ideal prevention strategy is to analyze events outside the sterile region whereby potential security events can be monitored in advance of a valid security breach. The largest limitation on the location of remote cameras where they are desired or required is due to lack of access to a power source. Typical IP video security cameras require about 4 – 5 watts of power, thus normally requiring a cabled power source. Until recently, there were two traditional video surveillance options that would be considered when overcoming the lack of a cabled power source for remote location cameras; wireless solar powered security cameras or trenching the ground to bring power to the desired location. Wireless solar security cameras provide the maximum flexibility in location strategies for remote security cameras. Typical wireless solar security cameras use 160‐400 square inches of solar panels that reside at least 15’ above the ground while connected to either a small trailer base or a pole. Wireless communications to the video recording system can occur point‐to‐point, point‐to‐multipoint, through mesh networks or even cellular, providing a range of three to 20 miles for a line‐of‐sight configuration. A typical system will have five days of battery backup, providing adequate energy storage for most applications. Pole‐mounted solutions range from $5,000 ‐ $10,000 per camera including labor costs. Unfortunately, due to size and transportation of the mobile trailer solution, costs can be prohibitive for many applications, since they range from $30,000 to $40,000 for each camera. © MicroPower Technologies, Inc. ‐ June 2011 6 Another alternative, trenching, is typically what is explored as the most viable option for placing security cameras in optimal remote locations. The trench is typically a minimum of six inches deep which allows placement of a Power over Ethernet (PoE) or power source in the trench without any possibility of disturbance. The cost for trenching will vary dramatically depending on the terrain. For instance, in a request for proposal (RFP), it was estimated the costs for digging a 120’ trench mostly through soft dirt with 15’ of asphalt was approximately $14,000 for material and labor for a single camera placement. This equated to a rule of thumb of about $100 per linear foot for trenching costs. In this case, the cost was prohibitive and the client decided not to pursue the recommendation of the remote camera location. In other cases, particularly in urban environments, the cost is considerably higher, sometimes up to $1000 per linear foot, due to the difficult construction. Thus, trenching costs can range in the $30,000 ‐ $40,000. Fortunately, a new generation of IP video security cameras have recently become available, providing a third alternative to remote camera location for optimal perimeter security strategies. With power requirements that are 1/10th that of a typical IP video security camera, there is a new form factor for wireless solar IP video security cameras, whereby the solar panels requirements are considerably smaller. In this new generation, 72 square inches of solar panels are attached directly on the external camera enclosure. The battery life is five days, providing for adequate power in most environment scenarios. Being a wireless solution, this new generation has a range of up to one mile for a line‐of‐sight environment. Hence, with no wires needed for data communication or power, this new generation of wireless solar IP video security camera is a fully self‐contained unit that allows for placement virtually at any remote location. Because it is a self‐contained unit, installation costs are quite low, even compared to an installation of wired security solutions. The advantage of these new‐generation security cameras is that individual camera costs range from $2,500 ‐ $3,500, a 50 – 90% reduction in costs over alternative solutions. While the primary attraction of these new‐generation IP video security cameras are for perimeter security, the portability of this solution also provides opportunities for applications not previously considered. For instance, public events such as stadium concerts or government official speeches can wreak havoc for security teams since the protection zone is so small and intruder access is quite simple. Since these types of security cameras can easily be installed, temporary security cameras can be implemented with the re‐use capability making this an attractive financial option. © MicroPower Technologies, Inc. ‐ June 2011 7 Protecting the Perimeter Vulnerability begins at a facility’s perimeter. Active perimeter strategies that are focused beyond the perimeter provide the best chance of preventing a security breach by detecting and deterring activity before loss or damage occurs. While the technology choices for access control and intruder detection have grown rapidly, such choices are limited in scope and commonly have the potential for numerous false alarms. An optimal perimeter security strategy requires the inclusion of remote camera locations within the video surveillance system to verify intrusions, record events for investigations and potentially convict intruders. Summary With the most recent innovations in solar wireless IP video security camera options, the inclusion of remote cameras around the perimeter is a viable cost‐effective option not previously available. Now, the system integrator has a new set of tools to present and provide cost‐effective solutions for optimal perimeter security strategies. Allyn Pon is director of product management at MicroPower Technologies, Inc., providers of the world’s most power‐efficient, totally wireless solar video surveillance camera solutions. Allyn can be reached at email@example.com © MicroPower Technologies, Inc. ‐ June 2011 8