I am away visiting family for a few days. I hope to have time to prepare updates during this time, but should you not get one or if you don’t get a response to your email, please understand.
= = =
Missed link in last night’s update. Sorry. Item with link is #1 below.
1) Long before wireless devices were in use by the general public, a 1966 report by the US Aerospace Technology Division summarizes scientific studies that confirm biological effects and symptoms from RF exposure to very low levels of non-ionizing radiation, the same type emitted by wireless devices like smeters, cell phones, microcells, etc. And see how the industry, from the get go, was allowed exposures 10 times higher than was known to cause these effects.
It should be pointed out that the possibility of the existence of the non-thermal effect of electromagnetic waves is generally accepted today, and because substantial experimental documentation exists, it can be considered proven… Also, actual changes in the shape of the chromosomes have been encountered. These changes are directly connected with the development of the individual and the changes in the properties of the descendants…
It was established that for heating of the body a maximum output density of 10 mW/cm 2 can be endured, and therefore this was accepted as the maximum permissible intensity. Some called this amount the “tolerance value,” and as the maximum permissible intensity 1 mW/cm 2 was proposed. This was accepted by the General Electric Co. and was also used at the Bell Telephone Laboratories. However, a biological effect can be expected at 0.1 mW/cm2 , which is the third value used in the USA. (pg. 8)
2) In Surrey Telus is increasing the height of a cell tower , adding 3 new transmitters. Telus says the total power density will be “only” 26 microwatts per centimeter squared. This is from their calculations only and fails to take into consideration all other wireless devices that are in the area, e.g. smeters, collectors, wifi modems, etc. There are many studies showing serious health effects from exposure to RF at levels far below 26 microwatts/cm2. A member in Surrey asked for information and 3 weeks after the initial request, Telus responded. The letter is below.
3) A member has reminded us that Health Canada has a history of mistreating its scientists and refusing to protect the public. You should consider reading Chopra’s book, “Corrupt to the Core.”
“I thought you might like to learn about Health Canada interfering with their own scientists and fighting in court at taxpayers expense, to protect corporate interest. This is something we should not leave unmentioned.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shiv_Chopra
Since the public is falsely under the impression that HC is a responsible government health organization, I feel that this sordid story has to resurface for all to see. “
Letters:
Good morning Ms. X
Thank you for your inquiry regarding the proposed wireless communications facility extension in Surrey at 7191 128 Street (TELUS Site BC2560).
Please find specific answers to your questions below in green:
- Why is the monopole’s height being increased? To expand what types of services?
The monopole height needs to be increased to accommodate new antennas for providing expanded service for LTE advance. The proposed increase will improve wireless voice services and increase data speeds in response to the growing demand for wireless services. Many households rely on wireless service as their only means of communication to meet their personal, business and emergency needs.
- What RF/MW frequencies have been, are currently and are expected to be transmitted from this monopole?
TELUS is currently using spectrums on 850 MHz, 1900 MHz and 2100 MHz. The new configuration will utilize TELUS’ new spectrums on 700 MHz, 2300 MHz and 2600 MHz.
- What are the levels of RF/MW emissions from the monopole that have been, are currently and are expected to be emitted by this monopole?
Where do the levels of RF/MW emissions fall in regard to what is allowed by Safety Code 6?
The maximum Power Density (Watt/m2) and the percentage of SC6 limits in close proximity of the site (~ <150m, excluding the Telus CO building) are noted in the table below. As you can see, the maximum received Power density in the “After” scenario is reduced due to the fact that the new antennas are placed at higher elevation and also have slightly lower gains.
| Power density (W/M2) | % of SC6 | ||
| Before | After | Before | After |
| 0.261264 | 0.260865 | 6.32% | 6.03% |
We appreciate your feedback. Should you have any further questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Sincerely,
Tawny Verigin
Municipal Affairs Specialist
Cypress Land Services Inc.
Agents for TELUS
________________________________________________________________________
Dear Mr. Glasgow
I liked your story [http://bc.ctvnews.ca/power-struggle-leaves-mission-couple-in-the-dark-1.3137176] on the people in Mission who had their power cut due to the owner refusing BC Hydro to install a smart meter in her kitchen.
I have some good, factual info from the FCC for you, including the formula for calculating the Power density (S) generated by the smart meter BC Hydro wants to install. From the formula in the FCC document, it is clear that the Power density is inversely proportional to the square of the distance (R^2). Meaning if, in her everyday household duties, she gets twice as close to the smart meter the Power Density is FOUR TIMES as strong! Think of that… Each time she cuts her distance in half to the smart meter she is exposed to FOUR TIMES the Power density.
She would accumulate high intensity, close proximity RF exposure from the smart meter for years, just for working in her own kitchen! The link to the FCC document shows that the Power density (S) generated by the Itron smart meter.
https://fccid.io/document.php?id=850984
Despite their friendly, smiling spokespeople, BC Hydro cannot change the laws of physics. It should be incumbent on BC Hydro to relocate the meter to an outside pole at BC Hydro’s expense, as they were content to install, read and maintain over the years the original analogue meter inside the house- which is not standard practice. BC Hydro’s current mantra: “Modernizing our equipment and grid” should include bringing equipment and installations to current standards. That way the smart meter could be installed far enough away from her home and be pointed away from her house, which could be a satisfactory solution for her and show to the public BC Hydro’s willingness to work with their customers. A smart meter with multiple radio transmitters is not appropriate to be installed in a kitchen where people will be in very close proximity to it on a daily basis for years. It is BC Hydro flexing its muscle and monopoly: “It’s our way or the highway.”
The owner, she’s a senior, and if BC Hydro said it would be up to her to pay for the installation of the utility pole and meter base that could easily be around $2000 to $3000, plus the outrageous new $750 BC Hydro “reconnection fee.”
I’ve seen BC Hydro in their bucket truck arrive and make a connection in less than 30 minutes. So that would be $1500/hour, which I’m sure the lineman isn’t getting more than $40/hour or so.
Mr. Glasgow, please pursue this with BC Hydro, and or pass it to your very good investigative reporter Mr. McLaughlin.
I enjoy your stories and would like to see a positive result for the people in the dark and in the cold in Mission.
Thank you.