It’s interesting that the director of the Office of Environmental Policy is chastising the Department of the Interior for not doing enough to protect migratory and other birds from harm from cell towers and “non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation emitted by them (cell towers and phones.)”
In a letter sent to Secretary of the Interior Eli Veenendaal, it states: “The second significant issue associated with communication towers involves impacts from non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation emitted by these structures. Radiation studies at cellular communication towers were began circa 2000 in Europe and continue today on wild nesting birds. Study results have documented nest and site abandonment, plumage deterioration, locomotion problems, reduces survivorship, and death.”
Well go figure. It seems that the fight against smart meters and the smart grids have to involve government regulations on birds and animals to capture anyone’s attention. But what is harmful to birds is harmful to every living thing.
Smart meters emit non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation and still the electric industry says they cause no harm. Not even when placed on your house and not a cell tower. If some departments of the government can say that these devices are harmful, why can’t the rest of the government and the communications and electric industries do the same?
“Nesting migratory birds and their offspring have apparently been affected by the radiation from cellular phone towers in the 900 and 1800 MHz frequency ranges — 915 MHz is the standard cellular phone frequency used in the U.S. However, the electromagnetic radiation standards used by the Federal Communications Commission continue to be based on thermal heating, a criterion now nearly 30 years out of date and inapplicable today.”
Pay close attention to that last sentence. It is the same argument smart meter opponents have used that was denied by everyone.
Even if someone were to say that birds nest near or on the towers, is that any different than smart meters on bedroom walls where small children sleep? The birds cited in this letter include eagles. Babies are smaller than eagles and can be affected as much if not more from the radiation.
“This is primarily due to the lower levels of radiation output from microwave-powered communication devices such as cellular telephones and other sources of point-to-point communications.”
I believe the point-to-point communications would include smart meters, as that is what they do.
“Radiation at extremely low levels (0.0001 the level emitted by the average digital cellular telephone) caused heart attacks and the deaths of some chicken embryos subjected to hypoxic conditions in the laboratory while controls subjected to hypoxia were unaffected.”
The letter also states that there have been no independent, third-party field studies conducted in North American on impacts of tower electromagnetic radiation on migratory birds. What about humans?
Doesn’t it seem like simple common sense that if ill effects and death have been found in some studies and now every home in America is destined to emit this non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation that studies should be done on all living things?
“There is a growing level of anecdotal evidence linking effects of non-thermal, non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation from communication towers on nesting and roosting wild birds and other wildlife in the U.S.”
There is all kinds of evidence out there that radiation is harmful. Why is it taking so long to admit that? Why are we being subjected to more radiation from countless sources and not studying the effects?
Could it be that those companies heavily invested in all this technology already know the answers, but don’t want to lose their money?
The next time someone says that cell phones and smart meters are perfectly safe; tell them that if they’re not safe for birds, then they aren’t safe for the rest of us living beings.
Reach the writer at firstname.lastname@example.org