{"id":3172,"date":"2013-06-30T16:23:31","date_gmt":"2013-06-30T20:23:31","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/emfsurveydallas.com\/?p=94"},"modified":"2024-03-06T01:18:40","modified_gmt":"2024-03-06T07:18:40","slug":"smart-meters-health-risks-rf-testing","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/emfsurvey.com\/smart-meters-health-risks-rf-testing\/","title":{"rendered":"Smart Meters: RF Radiation Safety Health Risks with regard to Actual RF Testing"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"Smart

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Model GE I-210 Smart Meter RF Safety
<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

214.912.4691 Commercial Clients ONLY<\/strong><\/p>\n

ScanTech DOES NOT perform residential testing OR consulting for homeowners \/ tenants – all services are<\/strong> COMMERCIAL ONLY<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

HOMEOWNERS & RESIDENTIAL CLIENTS CLICK HERE<\/strong><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

What is a Minimum Safe Distance from Smart Meters?<\/span><\/h1>\n

There is no unsafe distance as the emitted RF levels are far too low to be of concern. Therefore you can stand within a normal viewing distance with no harm from the so called “radiation” from the meter. (it is NOT the same as nuclear radiation at all)<\/p>\n

The controversy of Smart Meters is getting so prevalent that I feel a compulsion to share some of my data with respect to certain claims and fears that the public has about this deployed technology. There are a number of website and organizations dedicated to banning this device for various reasons. Some of them deal with potential privacy invasion issues or the theory that the power company can somehow selectively turn off certain appliances without your permission.<\/p>\n

While I cannot comment on the political or civil liberties aspects of the Smart Meter debate, I have now done enough measurements to get an idea of just how much energy these devices are putting out and probable public exposure.<\/p>\n

The short answer is: not that much.<\/span><\/p>\n

Now before you think that I am on the side of the utility or power companies, I actually have some criticism of at least one power company’s portrayal of how low the levels from Smart Meters are:<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"Smart

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Smart Meter RF Comparison Chart (BTW, I do NOT entirely agree with all of the this)
<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

For one, I cannot believe that a Smart Meter puts out less RF than what emanates from a human body (I have no idea where they are getting that notion from – even brainwaves are severely attenuated outside of the body which is why electrodes are needed for EEGs) or the earth itself – at least not at point blank range. Also, the microwave oven number pertains to the amount of external RF radiation leakage while in operation, not the actual power inside the oven itself. A 1500 W oven is easily stronger than a cell phone or even cell towers because it is designed to thermally heat food and liquids, not transmit information.<\/p>\n

And this brings up another hidden factor – at what distance from the source are these measurements taken? Because radiated power from an ideal isotropic antenna falls of with the square of the distance, if you even move the measurement meter a few feet from an RF source, the power levels drop dramatically. It might be presumed that the smart meter icon on the far left is the “default or reference distance” set at 1 yard. (it should really be in meters or in this case 0.91 meters to be consistent with the RF power density levels given in metric)
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

Also, they are using milliWatts per cm^squared instead of the more typical microWatts\/cm^2 (or uW\/cm^2) which is more routine for measuring low level RF at a moderate distance. I suspect the reason why is because in using the milliWatts convention (in which 1 milliWatt or mW is = 1000 microWatts) you get to put all of those zeros after the decimal place and make the numbers seem even smaller.<\/p>\n

There are specific reasons why I have chosen to point these specific concerns out besides just being picky – they also inform the reader to pay attention to the context in which this data is presented.<\/p>\n

I just got done measuring my Smart Meter and at a distance of 3 feet which is as close as anyone would even causally walk past it, I only get a maximum of 1.5 uW\/cm^2. That only occurs in a very short burst (less than one second) every minute or so, so the actual exposure averaged over time would be far less. (closer to the nanoWatt range) Please note that such an intermittent burst is NOT the same as the pulsed signals that some alarmist EMF consultants consider harmful. Those are frequencies are continuously pulsed in at least the MHz or GHz range – what I am talking about is more like a substantial fraction of Hertz or 0.016 Hz if it is one second out of every 60.<\/p>\n

My cell phone when running at full power puts out over 2 uW\/cm^2 and it is right next to my head when making a call. While the frequencies involved are somewhat different, the RF dosage is roughly comparable except that the cell phone is consistently much closer to my body for more extended periods of time. I doubt I spend more than 10 minutes a week being within 10 feet of my Smart Meter.<\/p>\n

Here is an excellent source on Smart Meters and the RF output (particularly banks of them as found on condos \/ multi-family apartment units):<\/p>\n

The Facts on RF Exposure from Smart Meter Banks<\/a><\/p>\n

https:\/\/www.maine.gov\/dhhs\/mecdc\/environmental-health\/smart-meters.shtml<\/a><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

What non-technical critics also fail to realize is that the metal backing of the case on the Smart Meter which is in between the RF and the occupants inside the home is grounded and right next to the point source – therefore shielding much of what is already fairly low level RF.<\/p>\n

Also what many people seem to forget is that the Smart Meter mounting locations are at the main power feed or drop into the home where the magnetic field tends to be the strongest. Therefore as a very respected EMF consultant pointed out recently, it is not the RF from the Smart Meter that should be such a concern, but the elevated magnetic fields that you get in the vicinity of any major power feed into the home.<\/p>\n

But the bottom line is that if someone is convinced that a Smart Meter installation at their home is a threat to their health or the well-being of their family, then there is no sense in arguing the point.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Why?<\/p>\n

My primary role is not to change someone’s mind, but to help them find peace of mind with a set of feasible solutions. Have you ever had something that seemed small, like a cupboard door that doesn’t hang quite right, or an argument with a coworker that just stuck with you all the rest of the day? We are unsettled because of the feelings of things not being symmetrical or completely in our control and regardless of the actual relevance or meaning, it causes stress and stress is definitely a factor in disease, accidents and our enjoyment of life.<\/p>\n

So for legal Smart Meter mitigation, what I CAN recommend is a particular form of shielding that is currently approved by the local utility here in Dallas, Texas (ONCOR) that can be placed over your meter. By my measurements it reduces the RF by at least 95 % and I know someone who has at this writing has ONCOR’s express permission to install them. (installing one yourself can get you into trouble with the utility company if you remove the locktag to access the backside of the meter)<\/p>\n

BTW, trying to make one yourself such as a solid Faraday cage will probably block the data signal and can also get you into trouble with the electrical company. The price of one installed by this particular gentlemen compares very favorably with other units sold on the Internet. Furthermore, it is rugged and designed to be vandal resistant so even if RF protection is not of interest, it may be a good investment for commercial customers looking to reduce the costs of malicious destruction.<\/p>\n

\n

EMF Testing Questions Answered by an Expert EMF Consultant<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n

WB<\/cite><\/div>\n
January 19, 2023 at 4:24 PM<\/a><\/div>\n

The Itron instruction manual says keep all parts of body 20cm away at all times.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

EMF Consultant Reply from ScanTech<\/a><\/p>\n

ScanTech Technical Consulting – CIH, CSP, BSEE, CHMM, CHP (pending)<\/cite><\/div>\n
May 4, 2023 at 10:01 PM<\/a><\/div>\n

WB,<\/p>\n

\u201cThe Itron instruction manual says keep all parts of body 20cm away at all times.\u201d<\/p>\n

That is simply not true.<\/p>\n

If you read on page 2 of the Itron Facts on RF Exposure from Smart Meter Banks PDF (link posted above) it clearly states that: \u201d independent testing of Itron meters conducted in 2010 by the Electric Power Research Institute in both the lab and in the field in southern California, revealed that 900 MHz RF emissions at about 8 inches away (20 cm) from a bank of meters, which were also specially programmed to transmit continuously (100 percent duty cycle vs. the typical 0.06 percent duty cycle of normal operation), showed peak transmissions that were only 2 to 7 percent of the MPE standard.\u201d<\/p>\n

Which means that emissions were well under 10% of the exposure standard and that is with CONTINUAL transmission (they typically emit data pulses every 30 seconds or so which is far from continuous). I don\u2019t know where you got the keep your body 20 cm away except by misinterpreting the technical document, but thank you for bringing this interesting RF safety meter document to my attention!<\/p>\n

JAG of ScanTech<\/p>\n

\n

 <\/p>\n

\n
Stacey<\/cite><\/div>\n
June 24, 2023 at 9:21 AM<\/a><\/div>\n

Are you aware of the RF Meter Shield to prevent Smart Meter Radiation? I Installed one over my Smart Meter several month ago and it blocking all the radiation normally emitted by my Smart Meter. It is inexpensive and was very easy to install (no tools needed-just slip it over the glass dome). The RF Meter Shield is the only product I found which is Laboratory Tested and posts the actual Attenuation Results.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

EMF Consultant Reply from ScanTech<\/a><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
ScanTech Technical Consulting – CIH, CSP, BSEE, CHMM, CHP (Pending)<\/cite><\/div>\n
June 25, 2023 at 2:53 AM<\/a><\/div>\n

Stacey,<\/p>\n

I am aware of a number of products that claim to reduce \/ prevent \/ protect from the allegedly dangerous nature of RF radiation from Smart Meters. However my education, experience and knowledge of actual health risks to the human body rank Smart Meters as a negligible ZERO risk factor for home owners. There is no need to place such a device over a Smart Meter to protect anyone because the metal backing of the meter plus the building material of the home on which it is mounted already shields the majority of any RF (Radio Frequency) energy which is fairly low in the first place. (lower than your cell phones and wireless routers) And BTW, a number of these materials and shields have been tested or shown to attenuate RF energy. It is basic electromagnetic physics that any conductive material or one containing water will absorb \/ reflect \/ reduce RF energy and that doesn\u2019t require testing. You included a URL for marketing purposes which I refuse to post here as I don\u2019t give free advertising to obviously biased shills. But thank you for stopping by! It did prompt me to do a little more research and find that Smart Meters broadcast at the frequencies of 902 MHz and 2.4 GHz which is the same frequency as microwave ovens and many wireless routers. Also, the graph of RF energy agrees with my personal measurements in EMF testing. \u2013 JAG of ScanTech<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n
WHO IS A CERTIFIED EMF CONSULTANT NEAR ME?<\/strong><\/a><\/h5>\n

ScanTech Technical Consulting is owned and operated by Joel-Anthony Gray who has over 22 years of experience as an EMF consultant, EMI troubleshooting expert and nuclear radiation testing consultant for a variety of commercial and industrial customers. While there is currently no such thing as a Certified EMF Consultant as far as the United States industrial and scientific community at large is concerned, what ScanTech offers is extensive education, experience and multiple certifications in non-ionizing radiation, industrial safety and hygiene. (listed here EMF Credentials)<\/a> He holds numerous degrees and certifications which qualify him for this level of expertise. Call 214.912.4691<\/p>\n

WHO DOES ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD TESTING NEAR ME?<\/strong><\/a><\/h5>\n

ScanTech Technical Consulting professional commercial electromagnetic field testing and radio frequency testing in the Dallas – Fort Worth Texas area to detect and measure exposures and health risks (if any) to electromagnetic fields and radiation. Call 214.912.4691<\/p>\n

WHO OR WHAT COMPANY DOES EMF TESTING NEAR ME?<\/strong><\/a><\/h5>\n

ScanTech Technical Consulting professional commercial electromagnetic field testing and radio frequency testing in the Dallas – Fort Worth Texas area to detect and measure exposures and health risks (if any) to electromagnetic fields and radiation. Call 214.912.4691<\/p>\n

WHO OR WHAT COMPANY DOES RADIO FREQUENCY (RF) & CELLULAR RADIATION (5G) TESTING NEAR ME?<\/strong><\/a><\/h5>\n

ScanTech Technical Consulting provides commercial radio frequency (RF) testing in the Dallas – Fort Worth Texas area to detect and measure exposures to all forms and frequencies of radio frequency radiation.\u00a0 Call 214.912.4691<\/p>\n

WHO OR WHAT COMPANY DOES PACEMAKER EMI TESTING AND ELECTRICAL INTERFERENCE SURVEYS FOR IMPLANTED BIOMEDICAL DEVICES NEAR ME?<\/strong><\/a><\/h5>\n

ScanTech Technical Consulting provides professional EMI testing for pacemakers and other biomedical implants throughout the United States to detect and measure exposures to all forms of interference from electromagnetic radiation.\u00a0 Call 214.912.4691<\/p>\n

WHO OR WHAT COMPANY DOES RF RADIO FREQUENCY CELL TOWER TESTING NEAR ME?<\/strong><\/a><\/h5>\n

ScanTech Technical Consulting provides commercial cellular testing in the Dallas – Fort Worth Texas area to detect and measure exposures to all forms of RF.\u00a0 Call 214.912.4691<\/p>\n

WHO OR WHAT COMPANY DOES ELECTROMAGNETIC RADIATION TESTING NEAR ME?<\/strong><\/a><\/h5>\n

ScanTech Technical Consulting provides commercial radio frequency (RF) testing in the Dallas – Fort Worth Texas area to detect and measure exposures to all forms of electromagnetic radiation.\u00a0 Call 214.912.4691<\/p>\n

WHO OR WHAT COMPANY DOES ELECTRICAL INTERFERENCE TESTING NEAR ME?<\/strong><\/a><\/h5>\n

ScanTech Technical Consulting provides professional radio frequency (RF) testing in the Dallas – Fort Worth Texas area to detect and measure exposures to all forms of electromagnetic radiation.\u00a0 Call 214.912.4691<\/p>\n

WHO OR WHAT COMPANY DOES NUCLEAR RADIOACTIVITY AND RADIATION TESTING NEAR ME?<\/strong><\/a><\/h5>\n

ScanTech Technical Consulting provides professional radioactivity testing in the Dallas – Fort Worth, Houston, Austin and San Antonio areas of Texas to detect and measure exposure to ionizing, nuclear or atomic radiation. Call 214.912.4691<\/p>\n

WHO OR WHAT COMPANY DOES DALLAS AREA PHOTOMETRIC LIGHTING SURVEYS OR EXTERIOR LIGHTING STUDIES NEAR ME?<\/strong><\/a><\/h5>\n

ScanTech Technical Consulting provides professional photometric testing in the Dallas Texas area for commercial clients to help pass lighting ordinances for their Certificate of Occupancy.\u00a0 Call 214.912.4691<\/p>\n

WHO OR WHAT COMPANY DOES ESD \/ ELECTROSTATIC DISCHARGE TESTING NEAR ME?<\/strong><\/a><\/h5>\n

ScanTech Technical Consulting provides ESD testing in the Dallas – Fort Worth, Austin, San Antonio and Houston Texas area to evaluate, measure and perform Electrostatic Discharge testing and consulting for sensitive environments.\u00a0 Call 214.912.4691<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n

We often serve clients in Texas, Michigan and Iowa. Cities for onsite commercial testing and inspection services include: Plano, Highland Park, University Park, Park Cities, Las Colinas, Arlington, Fort Worth, Houston, Austin, San Antonio, Shreveport, Grapevine, Frisco, Denton, McKinney, Allen, Lewisville, Irving, Mesquite, Bedford, Euless, Richardson, Coppell, Grand Prairie, Garland, Addison, Farmers Branch, Rockwall, Carrollton, Parker, Rowlett, Lucas, Fairview, Park Cities, Keller, Roanoke, The Colony, Highland Village, Lake Dallas, Corinth, Prosper, Duncanville, Lancaster, Rowlett, Royse City, Princeton, Trophy Club, Southlake, Hurst, Round Rock, Georgetown, San Marcos, Cedar Park, The Woodlands and Spring. Counties served include Dallas, Collin, Denton, Tarrant, Rockwall, Harris and Travis County.<\/p>\n

LARGER COMMERCIAL PROJECT SERVICE RANGE \u2013 NATIONAL & INTERNATIONAL<\/strong><\/h2>\n

Alabama | Alaska | Arizona | Arkansas | California | Colorado | Connecticut | Delaware | Florida | Georgia | Hawaii | Idaho | Illinois | Indiana | Iowa | Kansas | Kentucky | Louisiana | Maine | Maryland | Massachusetts | Michigan | Minnesota | Mississippi | Missouri | Montana | Nebraska | Nevada | New\u00a0Hampshire | New\u00a0Jersey | New\u00a0Mexico | New\u00a0York | North\u00a0Carolina | North\u00a0Dakota | Ohio | Oklahoma | Oregon | Pennsylvania | Rhode\u00a0Island | South\u00a0Carolina | South\u00a0Dakota | Tennessee | Texas | Utah | Vermont | Virginia | Washington | West\u00a0Virginia | Wisconsin | Wyoming | Washington D.C. (District of Columbia)<\/p>\n

Major US Cities: Chicago, Detroit, Phoenix, Denver, Salt Lake City, Miami, Grand Rapids, Lansing, Nashville, Memphis, Atlanta, Charleston, Raleigh-Durham, Charlotte, Des Moines, Milwaukee<\/p>\n

Countries served include the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand the UK \/ United Kingdom (England, Scotland, Wales, Ireland) and Western Europe.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

*LEGAL NOTICE*<\/strong><\/p>\n

All information on this website either written or implied is the express opinion of ScanTech Technical Consulting. ScanTech Technical Consulting and it’s owners are not responsible or liable for any damages arising from the misuse, misinterpretation or other consequences of the content of this website either in part or in whole. This includes all external weblinks, PDF documents, photos or other references (informational or otherwise) to 3rd parties including government agencies, health organizations, etc.<\/p>\n

15770 Dallas Pkwy Suite # 900<\/span> \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 Dallas, TX 75248 \u00a0<\/strong> (Not Accepting Visitors due to C19)<\/strong><\/p>\n

Phone: (214).912.4691<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 https:\/\/emfsurvey.com<\/a><\/p>\n

ScanTech Technical Consulting: Professional Electromagnetic EMF Consulting \/ EMI Testing for Biomedical Implant & Equipment, Indoor Air Quality (IAQ) Testing & Environmental Studies and Inspections
\n<\/strong><\/p>\n

COPYRIGHT 2002 – 2024<\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

214.912.4691 Commercial Clients ONLY ScanTech DOES NOT perform residential testing OR consulting for homeowners \/ tenants – all services are COMMERCIAL ONLY HOMEOWNERS & RESIDENTIAL CLIENTS CLICK HERE What is a Minimum Safe Distance...<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":539,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[25,55,58],"tags":[42,22,479,77,50,36,27,128,54,446,463,527,56,199,464,487,486,478,57,84],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/emfsurvey.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3172"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/emfsurvey.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/emfsurvey.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/emfsurvey.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/emfsurvey.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3172"}],"version-history":[{"count":25,"href":"https:\/\/emfsurvey.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3172\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":7089,"href":"https:\/\/emfsurvey.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3172\/revisions\/7089"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/emfsurvey.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/539"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/emfsurvey.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3172"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/emfsurvey.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3172"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/emfsurvey.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3172"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}