Industry Safety Assurances Unwise

Wireless Devices, Wireless Radiation Protection

http://www.emfnews.org/qlinks.html

Qlink Pendant

Home Radiation Protection

Envi Headsets

EM field meter

November 28, 2011

Sage Associates recently published “An Assessment of the EPRI Technical Report An Investigation of Radiofrequency Fields Associated With the Itron Smart Meter – Richard Tell Associates, Inc., December, 2010 by Sage Associates, November 11, 2011″

The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) commissioned a report by Richard Tell Associates Inc. that has assessed radiofrequency (RF) emissions from an Itron ‘smart meter’. The Itron meter is being installed in California by two electric utilities (SCE and SDG&E) and is similar to others being installed by other utilities. EPRI bases its report primarily on field measurements at the Itron meter test farms in southern California and South Carolina, two homes in Downey, CA, a drive-around street test in Downey, CA, and test results from two utilities. http://emfsafetynetwork.org/?p=6455

The EPRI report concludes that no violations of current FCC public safety limits are predicted to occur. However, our analysis shows that this conclusion is unsupported and in error, according to the FCC OET Bulletin 65 rules for predicting public exposures.

The EPRI report does not address compliance of multiple meters, at 100% duty cycle (which is required under FCC OET 65 formulas), and our calculations show violations at 60% reflection factor (the lowest level the FCC regulations specify). Multiple meters will also violate FCC OET 65 public safety limits for calculations using 50% to 100% duty cycle at 100% reflection factor, which are reasonable, worst-case assumptions.

The EPRI report provides a generic, best-case assessment of RF emissions since it focuses on ‘typical’ meters rather than a broad range of conditions of location, installation and operation of Itron meters under real-world conditions. It does not provide a reasonable, worst-case analysis, nor take into account the way in which utilities are actually locating meters in neighborhoods, nor address that the public cannot be excluded from very close proximity to meters on their own homes.

The author says that only approximations of RF exposures for ‘typical’ meters, in ‘common’ installations applying to ‘common’ exposures of individuals, are ‘likely’ to comply with FCC exposure limits. This report ignores meters that are being installed outside these highly limiting parameters, where duty cycles may be far higher, installations within or very close to occupied spaces of a home, and where there may be less shielding and more reflection of building materials that amplify exposures rather than reduce them. Tell discusses many problems with predicting RF emissions and the need for long-term statistical monitoring of matured (read fully deployed and operational) smart meter networks across regions. He says this testing cannot be done today.

Utilities are hoping for the best, and deploying at full speed, regardless of the clear ‘between-the-lines’ warnings, from their own highly regarded expert.

Deploying millions of wireless utility meters on such limited testing and questionable assertions of safety is unwise. Given that RF has recently been classified as a Possible Human Carcinogen, and this wireless utility meter initiative imposes the most extensive RF blanket yet created over every living resident that is electrified, ratepayers and the decision-makers will not know what irretrievable commitments of health and resources have been made until it is too late. Where even the best industry study cannot give more reliable and defensible evidence of compliance with FCC safety limits, public utility commissions should halt the rollout, pending demonstration that RF emissions meet FCC public safety limits under a reasonable worst-case assessment as determined by FCC OET 65 formulas. As a consequence, no positive assertion of safety can be made by the parties involved in this issue, nor are any solid answers provided by this EPRI report.

Iceland, Rekyavik,
Oman, Muscat,
Hervey Bay, Queensland
Tonga, Nuku’alofa,
Mobile Alabama USA
Lichtenstein Vaduz
Greece, Athens,
Sudan, Khartoum,
Wangaratta Victoria Australia
Cote d’Ivoire, Yamoussoukro

Click on any of the pictures below

to learn more

 

Anti-Radiation Air-tube Headset

EMF Harmonization Products

 

York Region Parents Want Wi-Fi Removed

Wireless Devices, Wireless Radiation

http://www.emfnews.org/headset.html

Lifebluetube Headset

Cell Phone Radiation Protection

Trifield Electromagnetic Field Meter

Nov 23, 2011

A group of parents in a school district north of Toronto kept their children out of school Wednesday to protest the use of Wi-Fi in classrooms. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/story/2011/11/23/toronto-york-wifi.html

About 40 people, including a dozen kids from Grades 1 to 5, joined a picket line outside the York Region District School Board offices in Aurora, spokeswoman Christine Marrin said.

Parents are concerned that Wi-Fi could be exposing their children to radiation six hours a day, five days a week, for 40 weeks of the year, she said.

“There have been no studies on children to determine whether that level of exposure for that length of time is safe,” said Marrin. Earlier this year, the World Health Organization warned about a possible link between radiation from wireless devices such as cellphones and cancer.

Some believe wireless access to the Internet could pose similar risks. But while Health Canada cautioned parents to limit the use of cellphones by children, it said that based on scientific evidence, low-level exposure to Wi-Fi is not dangerous.

Marrin says it’s too early to make that determination.
“This is the first generation of children that has been in that particular learning environment, so how Health Canada can say that it’s safe is really quite a mystery to us,” she said.

The Ontario government said in June it would examine the WHO warning but wouldn’t take any immediate action to require warnings on wireless devices. The legislative buildings in Toronto will themselves soon have Wi-Fi.

Ontario Education Minister Laurel Broten says it’s up to school boards in the province to make decisions about whether to use Wi-Fi or not.
“The best available information clearly indicates at this point in time that it is safe,” said Broten.

“I am not a scientist but I can tell you it is important to us that our schools are safe and we believe that school boards each and every day make decisions to make sure that kids are safe in their schools.”
NDP Leader Andrea Horwath says she realizes many parents are concerned about the issue.

“It’s worth keeping an eye on,” she said.
Some Canadian private schools and at least one public school board in British Columbia have removed or strictly limited Wi-Fi due to safety concerns. But York Region and many other public school boards across Canada continue to use it.

“They are very firm in their position, they are standing behind Health Canada’s assertion that Wi-Fi is safe for children. Of course, we disagree,” said Marrin, adding the concerned parents have been asking for a face-to-face meeting with the York board.

Cyprus, Nicosia,
Ukraine Kiev
Iran, Teheran,
Burundi, Bujumbura,
Portugal, Lisbon
Lebanon, Beirut,
Yeme Sana
Bulgaria, Sofia,
Equatorial Guinea, Malabo,
Waterbury Connecticut USA

Click on any of the pictures below

to learn more

 

Anti-Radiation Air-tube Headset

EMF Harmonization Products