Technical document feedback

This entry might be a little technical, but I need some feedback on the English of this article. I thought my writing was OK until a recently received critique. Thanks advanced for the help ! And please give me a *cruel* honest feedback.

Power management is crucial to wireless sensor networks due to limited battery capacity. While there are many models for the performance of generic wireless sensor networks in the literature, a few realistic models exist that are based on specific existing wireless sensor nodes within realistic operating conditions in which it is important to accurately model radio propagation. For example, waves in a wireless sensor network operating in the 2.4GHz ISM band behaves differently from a network operating in the 60GHz mm-wave band which suffers much more attenuation. Waves propagate in different manners, attenuation is more apparent at higher frequencies, and for that reason, power levels are different. While it may seem that lower frequencies are better in terms of power consumption, higher frequencies allow for higher data rates which in turn reduces the transmission and reception times and that leads to low power consumption. Apparently there is a trad-off here. To the best of my knowledge, there are no models for wireless sensor networks operating at mm-wave frequencies. It would be interesting to tackle this area.

I think this text is written scientifically and I my opinion it is OK. I just made one corrections at the start. To me it is limited (battery) capacitiy. So when you extend "battery capacity" with limited it should be placed in front of the term and not in between. I am not an native english but having studied dentistry with lots of english scientific literature I have the feeling of wrong word order when I read your article. If it would be "battery's limited capacity" I would be fine, too. 

From a scientific point of view I wonder where the text is being used? Perhaps the way of writing seems to colloquial for its purpose?

I think the text is well understandable, since I am not a native english, I can just compare to medical articles, which also have the same form of "speech". Since medical papers are also mostly produced by non-native spakers it will of course allways sound a little different from native language.