Dr. Ronald Powell: “Smart Meters are a community concern”

Dr. Ronald M Powell, PhD in applied physics from Harvard wrote:  Biological Effects from RF Radiation at Low-Intensity Exposure, based on the BioInitiative 2012 Report, and the Implications for Smart Meters and Smart Appliances

This is an important document to read and to bring to policy makers.

Dr. Powell’s Biological Effects Chart was produced from a review of the medical research literature on the biological effects of electromagnetic fields (BioInitiative.org). He concludes the following five points:

  1.  The current FCC Maximum Permitted Exposure (MPE) limits are so high that they provide no protection for the public from the biological effects found in any of the 67 studies.
  2. New biologically based RF exposure limits proposed in the BioInitiative 2012 Report are 1 million times lower than current FCC limits and would protect against the biological effects found in nearly all of the 67 studies.
  3. A single Smart Meter on a home can produce RF exposure levels that caused the biological effects found in either most or many of the 67 studies, depending on the distance from the Smart Meter.
  4. A single Smart Appliance in the home can produce RF exposure levels that caused the biological effects found in nearly half or fewer of the 67 studies, depending on the distance from the Smart Appliance. Multiple Smart Appliances in a home multiply the total exposure.
  5. A single Smart Meter on a nearest neighbor’s home can produce RF exposure levels that caused the biological effects found in many of the 67 studies. A given home may have one to eight nearest neighbors, each with a Smart Meter, multiplying the total exposure in the given home.

“Smart Meters are a community concern, not just an individual concern.”-Ronald Powell, PhD Applied Physics

The section on neighbors meters, and how smart meters are a community concern is especially relevant as policy makers decide how to proceed with solutions.  Here’s an excerpt of his paper:

A Single Smart Meter on a Neighbor’s Home Can Produce RF Power Density Levels Shown to Cause Biological Effects

For some locations in a given home, the distance to a neighbor’s Smart Meter may be less than the distance to the resident’s own Smart Meter. Thus, a neighbor’s Smart Meter may be the principal source of radiation for some locations in the given home. The Biological Effects Chart shows that a single Smart Meter can produce RF power densities found to cause biological effects even at distances greater than 20 meters, and certainly up to 100 meters. And the number of neighbors within that range can be large. A given single-­‐family home in a residential community may have one to eight nearest neighbors, and even more next nearest neighbors, all within 100 meters (328 feet) of a given home, and each with a Smart Meter.

The problem of exposure from the neighbors’ Smart Meters becomes more serious as the distances between adjacent homes, and thus the distances between adjacent Smart Meters, get smaller. So, generally speaking, residents of townhouses will receive more radiation from their neighbors’ Smart Meters than residents of single-­‐family homes. And residents of apartments will receive even more radiation from their neighbors’ Smart Meters, depending on the location of the Smart Meters in the apartment buildings.

So Smart Meters are a community concern, not just an individual concern. To resolve the problems of RF exposure for a given home, it will be necessary to address all of the Smart Meters near that home. Smart Appliances, too, contribute to this concern. While, individually, they have a lower RF power output than a Smart Meter, the Smart Appliances of neighbors can also increase the RF exposure in the given home.

Fortunately, some states have offered an individual OPT OUT from the installation of a Smart Meter. While such an OPT OUT is very helpful, and is definitely the vital first step, the data on biological effects discussed here suggest the limitations of such an OPT OUT in resolving the problem of excess radiation from Smart Meters. There is no substitute for a roll back of all Smart Meters at the community level, or higher.”

“There is no substitute for a roll back of all Smart Meters at the community level, or higher.”-Ronald Powell, PhD Applied Physics

This entry was posted in children, Commentary, EMF Sensitivity, FCC, Public Health, Resources, RF, Science, smart grid, smart meters, Take Action!, wireless and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Dr. Ronald Powell: “Smart Meters are a community concern”

  1. Ann Erhard says:

    As an electrically sensitive individual Yahoo!!

    PS I’m an electrical engineer who wouldn’t be caught dead with a
    wireless router, cell phone, getting a mammogram, etc etc

    I’m wired and staying that way!
    Please don’t come over with your cell phone.

    Wifi is like caffeine, It feels good at first but then you crash and get the jitters.
    ENJOY!!

  2. Pingback: Dr. Ronald M. Powell, PhD on the dangers of Smart Meters | No Mass. Smart Meters

  3. Pingback: ‘Stop Smart Meter’ Announcement « Food, Health, Nutrition & Politic

  4. Pingback: 10 Questions for Your Utility | Smart Meters

  5. Vicki says:

    Hi. I have chosen to opt out of my own SDGE smart meter, and it has now been replaced by an analog meter. My next door neighbor has a smart meter which faces one wall of our home. This wall is part of our living room, where we sit on our couches and watch TV and movies for about 5-6 hours daily. Their smart meter, I have measured, is exactly 10 feet from our wall. We live in a stucco home, but we have a window on our wall that is exactly 180 degrees across from their meter! So my questions are:

    1) Do I have to shield my entire wall, or just the window that faces the neighbor’s smart meter directly?

    2) A wood fence higher than the level of their smart meter divides our wall (not including our window directly opposite their meter on that wall) from the neighbor’s wall (on which their smart meter sits). Can I nail aluminum mesh on the entire length of that wood fence since it would shield our couch area (albeit not the window)?

    3) Do I need to shield my ceiling or floor in my living room? Where will the EMF go, if I shield just portions of that wall (i.e., just my window)? Will it amp up the ceilings or the floors? I have wood floors. It would be unrealistic to shield the floors or the ceiling, or even the entire wall between me or my neighboor. I cannot tear up my drywall and install metal plates inside of it, either.

    4) If all I do is install aluminum mesh in my window, and also line our side of the dividing wood fence with aluminum mesh, then would this be adequate? Does this mesh need to be grounded, like in all the articles about EMF safety I keep on reading about? And how would I ground aluminum mesh in my window if it’s just to protect me from my neighbor’s smart meter 10 feet away? Same question goes with the whole aluminum mesh I plan to tack onto my dividing fence?

  6. admin says:

    Hi,

    Have you considered asking your neighbor to opt out? Or if they’d be willing to use a meter guard: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmS5pVEZHzg

    I ask this first because shielding can be tricky and expensive, depending on materials used.
    If the neighbor is unwilling to opt out or shield, here’s some information on smart meter shielding: http://www.lessemf.com/smart.html
    http://www.emfcenter.com/artsmart.htm

    You can also contact EMF electrician Michael Neuert at 707-578-1645 or 1-800-638-3781 to make an appointment to talk about your specific questions. Telephone consultations with Michael Neuert are $120 per hour, prorated for time actually used. For example: 15 minutes would cost $30.

  7. Marty says:

    Uhoh. I’ll get straight to the point – that ‘paper’ is a complete lie. What started alarm bells ringing was what sort of doctor would reference their name? Or use Wikipedia? And base their work on multiple other studies which are not referenced? The answer: no Harvard graduate would, and in fact none have done so as this Ronald Powell doesn’t actually exist – there was no graduate from Harvard with that name in 1975 and in fact had never been a Harvard graduate with that name. Spreading such misinformation on EMF helps no one.

  8. David C says:

    Marty – where are you getting your claim that Powell never attended Harvard from so we can all take a look at it? You’re going to need to show us that it is a 100% comprehensive list of 1975 grads or go home because it’s an extremely far-fetching claim and you must have solid proof, right?

    Also – Powell’s paper acts as a consolidated reference for aspects of the BioInitiative Report data – it is totally asinine to say it’s “a lie” because the BioInitiative is a lengthy meta-analysis in itself which was co-authered by dozens of scientists who are very well-known and who have talked about their findings at length on video.

    Finally, your point about citing his own work? LOTS of scientists quote themselves but I can’t see where Powell has done so.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


4 × = twenty four

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>