Frequently Asked Questions

Frequently Asked Questions

Reprinted with permission, with extra italicized parts added by K. Beatty. Arthur Firstenberg, director of the Cellphone Task Force, prepared this Q&A (posted on the site under newsletters) with a focus on cellphones, to invite support for a petition to halt cellphone use at EchoEarth.org.

Wireless technology is any means of sending information or energy through space
without wires. It includes:

    • satellites, radar, radio, television, cell towers, cell phones, cordless phones, microwave ovens, oceanic ‘cell towers’
    • smart meters, WiFi, Bluetooth, fitness trackers, smart watches, baby monitors
    • wireless keyboards, mice, printers, headphones and speakers, wireless security systems, wireless car keys, wireless garage door openers, wireless battery chargers, remote controls, wireless microphones
    • RFID chips in credit cards and driver’s licenses, radio collars and chips in wildlife, cattle and pets, chips in home appliances
    • wireless hearing aids, assistive listening devices, medical alert pendants, chips in medical implants, wireless pacemakers
    • autonomous vehicles, drones, and robots
      numerous other radio-enabled devices that are proliferating in today’s world

Every one of these devices, without exception, emits radiation.

All frequencies of radio waves, microwaves, infrared radiation, visible light, lasers, sound waves, even nuclear radiation. Most home devices use microwaves.

By substituting radiation for wires, we are swimming in an ocean of artificial electromagnetic fields that interfere with life itself. We are in effect electrocuting ourselves, our children, our pets, the insects, birds, animals, microbes, trees and plants around us and all of living creation. We are killing our planet.

Ecosystems are suffering from adverse impacts on soil, microbial life, plant life, insects, and wildlife. Soil nitrogen can fall from either electrical transmission cables or wireless. Plant life struggles to germinate, shows physiological changes, loses medicinal value and storage length.

Survival of honeybees is now only possible through the intervention of beekeepers who use queen bees that would normally be left to die by nature. As explained in a 2007 brochure review by Dr. Warnke, wireless causes bees to disappear. Synergistic effects are possible. A 2021 study combining mobile radiation with pesticides saw survival of only 25% in one year and plummeting bee health,, while a 2018 study noted certain 5G frequencies could also cause dielectric heating of bees.

A 2021 research review on flora and wildlife impacts published in Reviews on Environmental Health, that counts former U.S. Fish and Wildlife senior biologist Albert Manville and local Berkshire-Litchfield Environmental Council director Blake Levitt among authors, cites more than 1,200 scientific references which find at very low intensities adverse impacts on wildlife, such as birds struggling to build nests, mate, and reproduce (Levitt et al., 2021a, Levitt et al., 2021b, Levitt et al., 2021c). Part 2, supplement 3, includes a table of biological effects available through a FCC docket.

Oceans are a new frontier including sonar, optical, laser, and radiofrequency communications to support military, mining, research, and travel, with floating and underwater transmissions to support underwater vehicles, torpedoes, robots, etc. Sonar noise alone is known to impair hunting and orientation of life undersea.

No. The effects are rapid. Heart rate changes immediately. Blood sugar rises in minutes. Having wireless devices on in your house interferes with your sleep and your memory. Using a cell phone destroys brain cells in minutes to hours, and can cause a stroke or a heart attack. Studies show that even cancer can develop within months of first exposure. When a cell tower is turned on, birds leave the area immediately. Insects disappear. Even slugs and snails vanish. Most of this takes no time at all.

Some scientific references to physiological changes can be found here from pages 6 to 38. PowerWatch.org.uk has an extensive library with documents summarizing research on wireless radiofequencies and health risks: https://www.powerwatch.org.uk/library/

First, cancer is not the only problem caused by wireless.

However, cancer can develop slowly and exist in the body for years, unnoticed, for example as lymphomas that may contribute to exhaustion. Lymphomas are strongly associated with electromagnetic exposures.

Former director of the U.S. Environmental Toxicology Program, Dr. Chris Portier, prepared a 176-page report with 443 references for a tumor court case concluding: “to a reasonable degree of scientific certainty, the probability that RF [wireless] exposure causes gliomas and neuromas [tumors] is high.”

Avoiding wireless is wise because tumors can take 10 to 25 years or longer to manifest. However, aggressive cancers like glioblastomas, which are a type of glioma tumor, can also suddenly appear and end life a year, months, or weeks later. Gliomas are on the rise, as admitted in Denmark, although countries appear to have trouble collecting accurate data.

Notably, colorectal and thyroid cancers, areas near cellphones, are also surging. In 2019 the leading cause of death ages 5 to 14 was cancer, and in all ages cancer was the second leading cause of death, following heart disease.

Heart disease is also tied to exposures, such as through blood coagulation and hidden heart tumors. Heart tumors (schwannomas) were found in two important studies, one at the Ramazzini Institute using ambient radiation and the other using strong nonthermal exposures at the U.S. Toxicological Program.

Almost all the radiation we receive from the universe is the light and heat from the sun, not microwave radiation. The microwave radiation a person receives from an average cell tower is millions of times stronger than all the microwave radiation from the sun and stars. The microwave radiation a person’s brain receives from their cell phone is billions of times stronger than the microwave radiation from the sun and stars. And at any particular frequency it is trillions of times stronger than the microwave radiation he or she receives from the sun and stars at that frequency. And the faint microwaves from the sun and stars are not pulsed and modulated. It is the pulsations and modulation that cause much of the harm.

No. That is like saying arsenic is safe because oxygen and arsenic are both elements, or that cyanide is safe because water and cyanide are both chemicals. But oxygen and water are necessary for life, while arsenic and cyanide are deadly poisons. It is the same with electromagnetic radiation. Visible light is necessary for life. Microwave radiation is a deadly poison.

Electromagnetism is more complex and more fundamental than chemistry. Electromagnetism shapes the sun and stars. Electromagnetism animates life. Electromagnetism is behind chemistry. There is no “chemical force” in the universe. Outside of atomic nuclei, there is only gravity and electromagnetism.
Electromagnetism guides everything we see, including ourselves. Chemistry is an effect, not a cause.

That is looking at both wireless technology and life too simplistically.

Most wireless technology has only one goal: to transmit information to computers, information of great complexity and variety. It is not simple, constant radiation of one amplitude and one frequency: such radiation would carry no information. Instead, it is multiple large frequency bands, each divided into hundreds, thousands, and millions of individual frequencies of all different bandwidths, overlapping and interacting, pulsed at an enormous variety of intervals, in an enormous variety of shapes, patterns and durations, all over the world. Even a single signal from a single device has a variety of amplitudes, frequencies and pulsations, and is modulated in complex ways in order to carry all the information needed to be read by a cell phone or computer.

Life has to also carry an enormous, almost infinite complexity of information in its nervous systems and its meridians, and to store and process this information in its cells, organs and chakras, and in its DNA which is shared and circulated among trillions of individuals of 50 million different species, all connected to one another and to the earth, sky and universe in a grand circuit of energy and information.

The artificial cloud of energy and information is interfering with, overpowering and destroying the natural, living circuitry of energy and information. It cannot be otherwise.

Light is a nutrient. We absorb it with our eyes, and into our blood. It is necessary for health. It regulates our biorhythms. Green plants need it for photosynthesis. We absorb more of the pulsations and modulation frequencies when they are carried into our bodies by light than when they are carried into our bodies by microwaves. LiFi is more harmful to life than WiFi.

Some scientific references to physiological changes can be found here from pages 6 to 38. PowerWatch.org.uk has an extensive library with documents summarizing research on wireless radiofequencies and health risks: https://www.powerwatch.org.uk/library/

Cell phones and cell towers emit the same radiation; size has nothing to do with it. The main difference is that a cell tower emits as many signals simultaneously as there are cell phones communicating with it at that time, whereas a cell phone only emits one voice channel and one data channel. A cell tower therefore emits stronger radiation than a cell phone, but by the time it reaches your body, its radiation is
much weaker than the radiation from a cell phone that you hold in your hand, near your body. And a cell phone emits signals that a cell tower does not: Bluetooth, WiFi, GPS and other signals.
The radiation from a cell phone travels just as far as the radiation from a cell tower.

The radiation from a cell phone will reach all people, animals, birds, insects and plants in line of sight with it, no matter how far away. It will reach a cell tower 90 miles away. It will reach a satellite 22,300 miles away. It will reach Mars 200 million miles away. With 15 billion mobile devices on the Earth, we are polluting not just our homes, our neighborhoods and our planet, but the entire solar system.

Your cell phone is damaging your health whether you are aware of it or not. It is damaging your blood-brain barrier -- the barrier that keeps bacteria, viruses and toxic chemicals out of your brain tissue; the barrier that maintains the inside of your head at a constant pressure, preventing you from having a stroke. Since brain tissue has no pain receptors, plenty of damage can occur without pain. Instead, it will cause memory loss, difficulty concentrating, anxiety, depression, sleep disorders and so forth. In rats, damage to the blood-brain barrier can be detected after just a two-minute exposure to a cell phone. After a two-hour exposure the damage is permanent. There is no reason for it to be different in humans.

The radiation from your cell phone is also slowing your metabolism -- your ability to digest sugars, fats and proteins. This causes either obesity or weight loss, depending on your genetic makeup. It also causes diabetes, heart disease and cancer. Wireless technology is the cause of more obesity, diabetes, heart disease and cancer than any other factor.

The people who are aware of the damage in real time are the people who can feel it in their nervous system or their heart. That is maybe one-third of the population. It feels to them like they are being electrocuted. And they are, but so is everyone else. The few who have heard of such a thing call themselves “electrosensitive.” Those who have not heard of it think they are suffering from anxiety, or that they have a neurological or cardiac disorder.

The first peer-reviewed paper proposing and documenting evidence that pulsed radiofrequency radiation likely was responsible for the so-called “Havana Syndrome” was published by Dr. Beatrice Golomb. She was invited to brief the state department-funded Standing Committee of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, whose report released in December 2020 agreed with her conclusion.

With a solid background in neurobiology, physics, and medicine as well as an impressive research career including work with RAND and the defense department, Dr. Beatrice Golomb is a credible authority who in 2014 testified, based on scientific evidence, that society has a duty to reverse electromagnetic exposures to curtail suffering and prevent increasing cases of sensitivity.

Many studies include wireless warnings like ‘'may cause hazardous effects to the brain’ (2015) and recommend limiting exposures.

‘Dr. Henry Lai, professor emeritus of bioengineering at the UWA, found that of 261 wireless peer-reviewed studies published from 2007-2020, 91% had found significant free radical effects — when an excess of free radicals contributes to aging and disease — and of 336 wireless peer-reviewed studies 73% had found significant neurological effects.

Dr. Lai has transparently published the abstracts of those studies online at the Bioinitiative.org. . . .

. . . Findings in Dr. Lai’s abstracts are difficult to dispute, since many are animal or cell studies showing significant structural or chemical changes that have serious consequences. Findings of astrogliosis, potential gliosis, reduced neurotransmitters, and rising GFAP levels in four studies are, for example, associated with central nervous system damage and diseases such as Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, multiple sclerosis, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, mood disorders, and stroke, all of which have been trending, with earlier onset, sharply upward long before COVID-19.’ Quote from Hampshire Gazette column.

In 2014, a diagnosis of a 29-year-old father with Alzheimer’s coupled with rage and confusion mirrored trends of a 373% increase in ages 30-44 just from 2013 to 2017. This is far from normal in prior decades.

Skyrocketing learning disabilities and behavioral disorder rates among youth are so great the evidence is before all of our eyes. This is far from normal before the intense adoption of cellphones and WiFi circa late 1990s and 2005.

WifiinSchools.org.uk lists studies showing ‘cognition inhibition’ and damage to health.

The WHO Russian National Committee for Radiation Protection in 2008 released a strong statement including these words: ‘For the first time in history, we face a situation when most children and teenagers in the world are continually exposed [to mobile phones] . . . Potential risk for the children’s health is very high . . . health hazards are likely . . . in the nearest future: disruption of memory, decline of attention , diminishing learning and cognitive abilities, increased irritability, sleep problems, increase in sensitivity to stress, increased epileptic readiness.

Expected (possible) remote health risks: brain tumors, tumors of acoustical and vestibular nerves (in
the age of 25-30 years), Alzheimer’s disease, “got dementia”, depressive syndrome, and the other types of degeneration of the nervous structures of the brain (in the age of 50 to 60).’

Both are digital and both emit pulsed, modulated microwave radiation. And despite what many people think, flip phones can emit as much radiation, or more, than smartphones. But safety is not determined by power level. Damage to the blood-brain barrier is greatest at the lowest power level, at least in laboratory rats. The bandwidth is more important than power level. Smartphones use more bandwidth
than flip phones.

The bottom line is that cell phones have been killing people since they were invented. In each city in the United States where 2G “flip phone” service was turned on for the first time in 1996 or 1997, mortality rose immediately, on the day it was turned on in each city. And the overall health of the population was damaged permanently. At least ten thousand Americans died from the radiation within three months after 2G “flip phone” service was turned on in various cities in 1996 and 1997. Whether more people died from their new phones or from the new cell towers is impossible to know: the radiation comes from both.

About 20 years ago someone started promoting the idea of the “near field plume” which was supposed to extend out six inches from a cell phone, and that if you held your phone more than six inches from your head, you were safe. That is a complete fiction. There is no such thing as a near field “plume.” It does not exist.

The region very near to a source of radiation, where the electric field and the magnetic field are separate and complex, is called the near field. The space very far from the source, where the electric and magnetic fields are tied together and diminish with distance, is called the far field. The near and far fields blend into one another. There is no dividing line where one stops and the other begins. And it is
certainly not true that the radiation stops at six inches. If that were true, the radiation would never reach a cell tower and the phone would not work. And if it were true of a cell phone, it would also be true of a cell tower, which emits the same radiation. Then a cell tower would be safe if you stood more than six inches away from one. How absurd!

And your body is a conductor, so if you are holding the phone in your hand, no matter how far away from your head, the microwaves are conducted into your hand and throughout your body, and your arm is an extension of the phone and is part of the radiating antenna.

If you put the phone on a table in front of you and do not hold it, then the microwaves are just irradiating you and not being conducted into you. But since for some types of harm, for example damage to the blood-brain barrier, the damage increases with distance, that does not protect you either.

No. It is the informational content, not power level, that causes the harm. A cell phone exposes the brain to microwave radiation at roughly 10 milliwatts per square centimeter. At power levels one trillion times lower than that, microwave radiation has been shown to affect ovulation, the immune system, plant growth, human brain waves, and the structure of DNA.

No. We already had 10,000 studies by 1980. Today we have at least 30,000 studies. There are more studies showing harm from microwaves and radio frequency radiation than from any other pollutants except tobacco smoke and mercury.

For as long as wireless technology has been around. At Marconi’s first public demonstration of radio in Salisbury Plain in 1896, spectators described various nerve sensations they experienced. When Marconi turned on the first French radio station in Wimereux, one man who lived nearby “burst in with a revolver” because the waves were causing him sharp internal pains. On the evening of January 22, 1901, when Marconi fired up a new, more powerful transmitter on the Isle of Wight, Queen Victoria, in residence on the island, had a stroke and died. Within a few years, 90 percent of the bees on the island had disappeared. Marconi himself suffered from recurring fevers from the time he began experimenting with radio and for the rest of his life. He suffered nine heart attacks, the last one killing him at age 63. Even prior to Marconi, in the early 1890s, Jacques-Arsène d’Arsonval published the results of experiments on humans and animals showing that high frequencies affect blood pressure and profoundly alter metabolism.

Note: Firstenberg has written The Invisible Rainbow: A History of Electricity and Life, which includes citations for many historical anecdotes.

No. Smart or wireless devices hog energy, resources, and even damage electronics.

State and federal grants conceal the costs of the smart grid with taxpayer money. IT and utility interests lobby for these grants at your expense, often marketing smart utilities as ‘green’. Smart meters allow utilities to change pricing based on any condition, and have been tied to high time-of-use billing harmful to the poor and exorbitant prices or false energy readings. Smart meters also allow utilities to pay less for alternative energy through digital calculations. Massachusetts utility shareholder profits have been rising since the advent of smart meters.

National Grid’s 2021 proposed plans include a private communications network, which few municipalities can afford. Nationally, meter installations alone can range from $300 to over a $1000. Over a 20-year period, National Grid projects customer bills will be 1.63% of current prices. This expected increase does not include all costs, for National Grid expects 727.92 million in savings, resulting in total costs of only 480.67 million for its 1.3 million customers. Cross your fingers.

Wireless is much more energy intensive than wired connections, may even be 69 times more energy intensive, so it is the opposite of green.

The smart grid also increases energy and resource consumption with numerous wireless transmitters, from ‘smart’ meters, to relays, cell towers, field devices, computers, and by supporting connections to home devices from thermometers to coffee machines (IOT).

Utilities may say smart meters allow the energy use to be reduced remotely, but completely ignore that the infrastructure continually uses more energy to remotely track data and control energy use.

Utilities may say smart meters save energy by allowing consumers to track energy use, but studies show people never act on this data.

Marketing smart cities and utilities as green is just that: marketing. Utilities omit that smart meters can cause many issues, like household wiring problems, fires, and damage to electronics. Your data can be sold for a profit – but this has little to do with saving the planet.

An economics professor and former energy advisor, after reviewing a British smart meter plan, has called the project ‘astonishingly expensive’ and said civil servants ‘cooked the books’ to conceal a €4 billion dollar expense with imagined and inadequate energy savings.

They all use cell phones like the rest of the world and are as much in denial about them as everyone else. The denial, which runs deep in society, goes back to the beginning of the development of electricity in the 1700s.

Today, modern electricity is contaminated with extra frequencies that run along the wires and emit. These result when we plug devices into the grid that do not use the same type of frequency as the electrical wiring. Alternative energy, digital devices, and energy-saving devices all add different frequencies to the lines. This contamination is called poor power quality quality and can introduce radio static and shorten the life of electrical devices.

Poor power quality can be eliminated with proper design, such as use of quality filters, but regulations must force the issue.
An easy-to-understand book about this topic is titled Dirty Electricity, by Dr. Samuel Milham. In the 1990’s the Swedish Union of Clerical and Technical Employees in Industry (SiF) also studied electromagnetic and chemical sensitivity, publishing many easy-to-understand reports for 'No Risk' that are saved online at EMFacts.com/NoRisk.

A cell phone leaks radiation from all of its resonant circuitry, even if it is turned off, as long as the battery is in it. So does a modem or router that has WiFi, as long as it is plugged in. I have measured radiation coming out of modems in which the WiFi was disabled. I can always tell when someone is carrying a cell phone because I can feel the radiation, even if it is turned off and hidden in their pocket, even from across a room. I have never been wrong.

For whatever reason you have a cell phone -- any kind of cell phone -- all of the world’s cell towers have to be there in order for it to work when you want it to. No matter how rarely you use the phone, all the cell towers have to be there. If you use it “only in emergencies,” that is even worse, because you are likely to be using it in remote places where there are no cell towers and service is not good. Every call you make from a location where there are no towers is recorded as a request for service, and your provider will eventually put up a cell tower there in response to those calls.

It does not protect you because it is still emitting radiation. It does not protect others because when you are not at home you need all the cell towers to be there and you are irradiating everyone around you simply by carrying the phone around.

Unless people get rid of their cell phones, there will soon be no landlines left anywhere. The existence of landlines depends on demand. The existence of cell phones depends on demand. No one is doing this to us. We are doing it to ourselves.

Note: In some states, like California, residents may demand a corded land line.

Fiber enables 5G. 5G antennas are connected to each other and to the Internet by fiber optic cables. Wireless companies are spending hundreds of billions of dollars laying fiber all over the world for 5G. When a fiber company or a city lays fiber optic cables, wireless companies pay for the right to use it. After the fiber is laid, they stick antennas into it and broadcast 5G.

5G can use much higher frequencies (millimeter waves). But the biggest difference is that 5G towers and 5G mobile devices aim narrowly focused beams at each other instead of sending the radiation in all directions. If you are holding a 5G phone in your hand, the nearest 5G tower is tracking you and aiming a beam of radiation directly at your body. This is called phased array technology and it results in greater penetration of the radiation into your body, even at millimeter wave frequencies, than previous wireless technologies. 5G towers also send radiation in all directions because they are constantly scanning the environment looking for devices to connect with.

No. 5G can use millimeter waves. There are also crowd-control weapons that use millimeter waves. But the weapons are a thousand times more powerful and they are not modulated and carry no information. They are different technologies that were developed by different people for different purposes.

There are many companies today that prey on the gullibility of people who are desperate to protect themselves from an assault that is coming from everywhere. They sell “protective” chips to put on your cell phone or computer, pendants and bracelets that will “neutralize” or “harmonize” the radiation, devices to plug into your wall that will “protect” an area hundreds or thousands of square feet around your house. Some advertise that they are “quantum” devices, or are based on “scalar” technology or “torsion” fields, which are sexy words that sound scientific but mean nothing. You cannot “neutralize” or “harmonize” radiation. These devices, without exception, are ineffective and most will harm you.
Many of these devices emit a 7.83 Hz signal which is supposed to duplicate the first Schumann resonance of the Earth. These are point sources that cannot duplicate a natural frequency that bathes us from all sides. They make some people feel good for a couple of weeks, and they can be addictive, just like the frequencies from a cell phone or computer can be addictive, but they will harm you.

The alternative is wires. Wired phones. Wired computers. There is no need to reinvent the wheel, wires are what we had before wireless and are superior in every way. Wires carry the same voices, but clearer. The same information, but more securely. And the information is contained in the wires, instead of being broadcast all over the earth in a cloud of radiation. Wireless is convenient, but for the sake of convenience we are killing ourselves in real time and destroying our planet. Setting and enforcing power quality regulations for electricity and manufacturing is necessary, too, for safer wiring.

Printable version: FAQ_Firstenberg

For more information, please see the resources page.

Electric Vehicle (EV) Critique

 

 

 

Criticism jointly submitted to the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities dockets 21-90, 21-91, and 21-92 on utility EV proposals on 14 September 2021  — available at MA DPU, but link may change after corrected copy is provided. Ken Gartner also provided a separate letter including more technical criticism.

 

Dear Secretary Marini:

All of the proposals from the above-captioned utility plans sound wonderful if one believes electric vehicles (EV) are the route to preventing climate disaster. However, sound environmental and public health reasons exist to stall these proposals for modification or elimination, in addition for privacy and property protection.

PROPOSED ELECTRIC VEHICLE (EV) INFRASTRUCTURE

The following, with some slight variation, describes utility proposals, which are based upon published directives for electric vehicle infrastructure in D.P.U. 20-69-A, and the rate structure for demand charges regulated by Section 29 of Chapter 383 of the Acts of 2020 (the ‘Transportation Act”):

1. Financial support to provide:

    • In public sites and workplaces, Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE) installations, for Level 2 (L2) chargers;
    • Direct Current Fast Charging (DCFC) in environmental justice communities or in public sites and workplaces;
    •  In properties with 1-4 units and multi-unit dwellings, EVSE and at-home charging enabling;]
    • EVSE installations in light duty fleet, including school buses;

2. Pilots to support electric fleet conversion in ‘environmental justice’ communities;
3. Workforce development and electrician training;
4. Demand charge alternative rate structure with a sliding scale, in accordance with the Transportation Act.

RADIOFREQUENCY GUIDELINES LACK AUTHORITY

Of great import, in Environmental Health Trust v. Federal Communications Commission, No. 20-1025 (D.C, Cir. 2021) the court held that the FCC failed to provide a reasoned explanation for deciding its radiofrequency guidelines are safe. This decision, unusual in chastising the FCC’s inquiry decision, upends any claim of safety and reliance upon FCC guidelines, and now the FCC must again review and reconsider its guidelines.

Given this court decision, the Commonwealth, department, and utilities should stall investments into EV and EV infrastructure, in addition to the smart grid, in order to limit radiofrequencies.

EVALUATE & LIMIT RADIOFREQUENCY EXPOSURES

Secondly, the scientific evidence that these exposures are harmful should be seriously evaluated, and appropriate action taken to limit exposures from existing infrastructure.

Relevant health studies can be found on the Aachen University EMF Portal or at PubMed, and in addition experts independent of industry can assist with review and considerations such as safer options.[1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10] The International EMF Scientist Appeal is a good starting point for identifying and contacting credible scientists and public health doctors independent of industry, while the Institute of Building Biology is another for identifying engineers and building biology consultants who have studied remediation.

While utilities and the department can adopt the ALARA principle, ‘As Low As Reasonably Achievable’, radiofrequency exposures from EV infrastructure and EVs, including electric fleets, require time and study for remediation and appropriate investment.[11 12] Hence, EV infrastructure should be delayed.

If utilities and the department proceed with electric cars and corresponding infrastructure, then powering these cars must be planned carefully. Utilities and the department can take steps to limit transients, harmonics, etc., on the power lines from EV, in addition to heavy loads that create strong fields, as well as wireless signals. Technical problems, such as ground current, ground faults, and fire hazards, which also need to be addressed, are discussed by Ken Gartner in his testimony to these dockets – he also suggests a permitting process for all EV chargers.

As a matter of transparency and accountability, utilities should provide public information on existing radiofrequency exposures, including power quality, as well as utility remediation efforts and potential hazards.

HEALTH IMPACTS OF EV INFRASTRUCTURE

Poor power quality results when electrical lines carry extra frequencies ranging from less than 5 kHz to more than 500 kHz. Poor power quality may cause calcium to be deposited in the heart, thereby damaging the heart, or may cause other health issues.[17 18 19] EVs and EV infrastructure will compromise the power quality of electrical lines in areas serviced, including in targeted environmental justice communities, workplaces, and multi-unit dwellings.

A recent study discusses how Direct Current Fast Chargers will cause enormous power quality problems, but recommends a solution.[20] How much of a solution is this and is this tenable?

Another recent study found that magnetic fields are often dangerously high near Direct Current Fast Chargers.[21] If installed in environmental justice communities as planned, how is this an environmental justice? If these are installed near parks, where children rest and play, or adjacent to a bedroom how will the hazards be eliminated?

Future EV infrastructure may even include wireless charging, which will simultaneously lead to strong magnetic field exposures capable of disrupting medical devices.[22 23] EVs already have
wireless emissions embedded, requiring calculations of multiple sources of exposure in concert with utility equipment.[24]

Dr. Ron Kostoff, with a Ph.D. in Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering from Princeton University and who has worked for Bell Laboratories, Mitre Corporation, and the Department of Energy, has noted that he cannot find measurement devices to measure the ~24 GHz and ~77 GHz frequencies emitted as part of ‘safety’ sensors in modern vehicles, but he can find indications levels are directed at passengers and likely exceed thermal levels.[25]

Researchers at the University of Mainz measured brain activity of a driver who step-by-step turned on the car, the air conditioning, the cellphone connection, and the WLAN with alarming disruption evidenced.[26] Research repositories are ripe with evidence that these exposures are harmful, so why build infrastructure rife with these exposures?

Assumptions need to be challenged. For example, as part of ‘Equity pilots’ in environmental justice communities, Eversource proposes a car-sharing program that may cost more or less than $2,000,000 and also proposes to establish electric fleets such as for buses and community transport that may cost more or less that $3,000,000. [27] Establishing these programs in environmental justice communities ironically causes harm, misleading consumers, while simultaneously charging for the opportunity.

Many questions exist, and the department and utilities need to find answers and share these with the public. For example, what are the measurements of power quality, power frequency fields, and radio-frequencies from Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment and other types of installations? Are there wireless components within the infrastructure and, if so, can these be proven safe or eliminated? Are there hazard zones?[28] Can hazard zones be fenced? Is wildlife at risk? What is the cost of remediation? Are there differences between public, corporate, and occupational exposures?

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF EV INFRASTRUCTURE

Wireless, electromagnetic noise, and strong fields from electricity are known to disturb flora and fauna, such as by sickening trees, disorienting birds, and interfering with hunting and nesting.[29 30 31 32] Fostering wireless also threatens climate by contributing to global warming, because radiofrequencies contribute to heat.[33] Dielectric heating from wireless also harms insects like bees.[34 35]

The entire purpose of moving towards EVs is protecting our environment by reducing carbon emissions, but needs to be assured rather than assumed. EVs can have greater carbon emissions than gas-powered vehicles when relying fossil fuels.[36] The biomass industry is also agitating hard to be allowed into the federal renewable energy standard, yet consumes mature trees at a pace faster than regeneration, contributing to carbon emissions through hauling, fuel burning, and loss of carbon sinks.[37 38]

Modern EV infrastructure resource demands have not been factored into energy-use calculations.[39 40] For Level 2 chargers along streets alone, as expressed by Unitil, requirements include replacement of street pole, installation of underground electricity service, 3 pole-mounted transformers, a weather resistant cabinet, excavation, concrete footing, grading, utility meters, distribution panels, conduits, and breakers.[41 42] Loss of energy and equipment damage is a known effect of poor power quality, which results from EV infrastructure – this also needs to be factored into energy calculations. [43 44 45 46 47] Katie Singer has also referenced reports that EVs will require more energy consumption than gas-powered automobiles, while adding to E-waste and contaminating water – these reports deserve investigation.[48]

A cradle-to-grave environmental evaluation of electric vehicles and infrastructure is needed that is fully funded, independent of industry influence, and which evaluates energy footprint, resource consumption, service life, end-of-life removal costs, and environmental toxicity in addition to alternatives.

Independent evaluation is needed to compare electric cars to other investments, such as alternative fuels like hydrogen, different transportation systems, energy saving strategies, infrastructure efficiency, life-style adjustments, and urban planning impacts.[49 50 51 52] For example, quarantine led to significant carbon emission reductions in China. [53] Climate quarantines can cause disparate economic harm, but investments in alternative economies and urban planning can respectfully reduce automobile reliance.

PROPERTY DAMAGE FROM EV INFRASTRUCTURE

EV infrastructure presents significant potential for property loss, and this needs to be factored into budget projections and comparisons to alternative solutions.

Poor power quality can damage property, causing equipment deterioration, shutdowns, and misoperation at home and work.[54 55 56 57] A 2008 in-depth European Power Quality study found industrial loss to be 4% of turnover rate, even exempting data centers, and in excess of 135 billion Euro within Europe.[58] A 2001 study found a 2-second power quality interuption cost industry $37.03/kW.[59]

Cyberattack on EV chargers could damage home or community power distribution, service, and hardware; hacks may disable or command a single vehicle or a fleet; access home WiFi or a mobile App, and steal data for identify theft. [60 61 62 63]

Who bears liability for dangerous and poor investments? Filings in the above-captioned and other D.P.U. dockets by numerous parties are warnings based upon peer-reviewed science, likelihood of lawsuit, and potential for a court ruling that makes smart grid investments obsolete.[64 65 66 67 68] Liability may exist for infringements on constitutional privacy, property rights, and health.

RECONSIDER EV INVESTMENTS

In light of the foregoing, EV costs and investments need to be reconsidered. Total EV infrastructure spending forecast is estimated as $469.7 million in total from National Grid and Eversource, while Unitil lists $1.01 million.[69] These investments should be set aside and remediated or reconsidered. Why not instead invest in a car-free future, like Barcelona?

Utilities have a conflict of interest which may explain their drive even when new technologies fail to live up to marketing expectations. Investor-owned utilities can earn a profit, a Return On Equity invested (ROE) into distribution infrastructure:

Utilities profit primarily by buying new equipment (“smart” meters, power lines, transformers), charging ratepayers interest on this investment and paying less taxes as the equipment depreciates over time. The higher the investment risk, the higher the rate of return. The rate of return decreases each year. Once the rate of return reaches zero, the utility operates and maintains the equipment with no profit.[70]

Eversource reported an increase of 34% in profits for 2021 – this is an enormous profit.[71]

The utility profit model needs to be redesigned to encourage saving money, energy, health, nature, and existing investments.

In sum, here are the final recommendations for the department and utilities:

• Stall EV infrastructure plans;
• Adopt the ALARA principle;
• Establish policies to regularly monitor and share with the public electromagnetic measurements from the grid, including before and after corrective measures.
• Based upon a full accounting, examine whether EV infrastructure and EVs saves or costs resources and energy;
• Examine how EV infrastructure can be modified to respect privacy and protect reliability and security;
• Identify if liability remains, for whom liability exists;
• If EV infrastructure is a net environmental positive and health can be protected, prepare an adjusted budget and timeline to reflect new expenditures to fix problems;
• If remediation is not possible or problematic, lobby the legislature to halt EVs and attendant infrastructure.

Signed 14 September 2021 by:

Kirstin Beatty
Director, Last Tree Laws
149 Central Pk Dr
Holyoke, MA 01040

Patricia Burke
Stop Smart Meters MA
Halt MA Smart Meters
Scientific Alliance for Education
8 Eden Street
Mills, MA

Leslie Saffer
Worcester Info Team for Health (WITH)
392 Mill Street
Worcester, MA 01602

Laura Josephs
7 Conway Dr. #2
Greenfield MA 01301

Virginia Bradley Hines, PA, LMHC
Director, The EMR Network
Member, Concord Safe Technology [MA]

Liberty Goodwin, Director
Toxics Information Project (TIP)
P.O. Box 40572, Providence, RI 02940

Alexia McKnight, DVM, DACVR
258 Heyburn Rd.
Chadds Ford, PA 19317

Nikki Florio
Founder/Director of Bee Heroic
7823 W 38th Ave.
Wheat Ridge Colorado 80033

Eugene J. Bazan, Ph.D.
Secretary, PA Smart Meter Work Group
PO Box 24
Lemont, PA 16851
Lisa Lovelady
Stop 5GJax
4249 Ortega Place,
Jacksonville, Florida 32210

Cynthia Franklin, Director
Consumers for Safe Cell Phones
829 Briar Rd.
Bellingham, WA 98225

Endnotes:

1 Ozen S (2008 Jan) Low-Frequency Transient Electric and Magnetic Fields Coupling to Child Body. Radiation
Protection Dosimetry. Oxford University Press. 128(1):62-63
2 Milham S. Evidence that dirty electricity is causing the worldwide epidemics of obesity and diabetes. Electromagn Biol
Med. 2014 Jan;33(1):75-8. doi: 10.3109/15368378.2013.783853. Epub 2013 Jun 19. PMID: 23781992.
3 Neudorfer C, Chow CT, Boutet A, Loh A, Germann J, Elias GJ, Hutchison WD, Lozano AM. Kilohertz-frequency
stimulation of the nervous system: A review of underlying mechanisms. Brain Stimul. 2021 May-Jun;14(3):513-530.
doi: 10.1016/j.brs.2021.03.008. Epub 2021 Mar
4 Elferchichi M, Mercier J, Ammari M, Belguith H, Abdelmelek H, Sakly M, Lambert K. Subacute static magnetic field
exposure in rat induces a pseudoanemia status with increase in MCT4 and Glut4 proteins in glycolytic muscle. Environ
Sci Pollut Res Int. 2016 Jan;23(2):1265-73. doi: 10.1007/s11356-015-5336-3. Epub 2015 Sep 10. PMID: 26358208
5 Tenforde TS. Biological interactions and potential health effects of extremely-low-frequency magnetic fields from
power lines and other common sources. Annu Rev Public Health. 1992;13:173-96. doi:
10.1146/annurev.pu.13.050192.001133. PMID: 1599584.
6 Drzewiecka EM, Kozlowska W, Zmijewska A, Wydorski PJ, Franczak A. Electromagnetic Field (EMF) Radiation Alters
Estrogen Release from the Pig Myometrium during the Peri-Implantation Period. Int J Mol Sci. 2021 Mar
13;22(6):2920. doi: 10.3390/ijms22062920. PMID: 33805726; PMCID: PMC7999543.
7 Kiray A, Tayefi H, Kiray M, Bagriyanik HA, Pekcetin C, Ergur BU, Ozogul C. The effects of exposure to
electromagnetic field on rat myocardium. Toxicol Ind Health. 2013 Jun;29(5):418-25. doi: 10.1177/0748233711434957.
Epub 2012 Feb 9. PMID: 22323476.
8 Chung YH, Lee YJ, Lee HS, Chung SJ, Lim CH, Oh KW, Sohn UD, Park ES, Jeong JH. Extremely low frequency
magnetic field modulates the level of neurotransmitters. Korean J Physiol Pharmacol. 2015 Jan;19(1):15-20. doi:
10.4196/kjpp.2015.19.1.15. Epub 2014 Dec 31. PMID: 25605992; PMCID: PMC4297757
9 Huss A, Peters S, Vermeulen R. Occupational exposure to extremely low-frequency magnetic fields and the risk of ALS:
A systematic review and meta-analysis. Bioelectromagnetics. 2018 Feb;39(2):156-163. doi: 10.1002/bem.22104. Epub
2018 Jan 19. PMID: 29350413.
10 Belyaev I, Dean A, Eger H, Hubmann G, Jandrisovits R, Kern M, Kundi M, Moshammer H, Lercher P, Müller K,
Oberfeld G, Ohnsorge P, Pelzmann P, Scheingraber C, Thill R. EUROPAEM EMF Guideline 2016 for the prevention,
diagnosis and treatment of EMF-related health problems and illnesses. Rev Environ Health. 2016 Sep 1;31(3):363-97.
doi: 10.1515/reveh-2016-0011. PMID: 27454111.
11 Yang L, Lu M, Lin J, Li C, Zhang C, Lai Z, Wu T. Long-Term Monitoring of Extremely Low Frequency Magnetic
Fields in Electric Vehicles. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019 Oct 7;16(19):3765. doi: 10.3390/ijerph16193765.
PMID: 31591344; PMCID: PMC6801816.
12 Niu D, Zhu F, Qiu R, Niu Q. Exposure to electromagnetic fields aboard high-speed electric multiple unit trains. J Biol
Regul Homeost Agents. 2016 Jul-Sep;30(3):727-731. PMID: 27655489
13 Markovskaya IV. The effect of low frequency electromagnetic radiation on the morphology of dental and periodontal
tissues (experimental investigation). Wiad Lek. 2019;72(5 cz 1):773-778. PMID: 31175771.
14 Kumari K, Koivisto H, Viluksela M, Paldanius KMA, Marttinen M, Hiltunen M, Naarala J, Tanila H, Juutilainen J.
Behavioral testing of mice exposed to intermediate frequency magnetic fields indicates mild memory impairment. PLoS
One. 2017 Dec 4;12(12):e0188880. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0188880. PMID: 29206232; PMCID: PMC5714647.
15 Samuel Milham (2012 Dec 6) Dirty Electricity: Electrification and the Diseases of Civilization. Second Edition.
iUniverse; 11.6.2012 edition
16 Brech A, Kubinyi G, Németh Z, Bakos J, Fiocchi S, Thuróczy G. Genotoxic effects of intermediate frequency magnetic
fields on blood leukocytes in vitro. Mutat Res. 2019 Sep;845:403060. doi: 10.1016/j.mrgentox.2019.05.016. Epub 2019
May 30. PMID: 31561904.
17 Shuvy M, Abedat S, Beeri R, Valitzki M, Stein Y, Meir K, Lotan C. Electromagnetic fields promote severe and unique
vascular calcification in an animal model of ectopic calcification. Exp Toxicol Pathol. 2014 Sep;66(7):345-50. doi:
10.1016/j.etp.2014.05.001. Epub 2014 May 29. PMID: 24882371.
18 Plaintiff opening brief for Environmental Health Trust v. Federal Communications Commission, No. 20-1025 (D.C, Cir.
2021) discuss how modulation, pulsation, and peak exposures appear most important to bioactivity, which relates to
power quality – the brief also neatly summarizes health effects noted from RF and EMF science that had been submitted
to the dockets in question.
19 Yadegari-Dehkordi S, Sadeghi HR, Attaran-Kakhki N, Shokouhi M, Sazgarnia A. Silver nanoparticles increase
cytotoxicity induced by intermediate frequency low voltages. Electromagn Biol Med. 2015;34(4):317-21. doi:
10.3109/15368378.2014.919590. Epub 2014 Jun 5. PMID: 24901460.
20 Milanés-Montero MI, Gallardo-Lozano J, Romero-Cadaval E, González-Romera E. Hall-effect based semi-fast AC on-
board charging equipment for electric vehicles. Sensors (Basel). 2011;11(10):9313-26. doi: 10.3390/s111009313. Epub
2011 Sep 28. PMID: 22163697; PMCID: PMC3231284.
21 Trentadue G, Pinto R, Salvetti M, Zanni M, Pliakostathis K, Scholz H, Martini G. Assessment of Low-Frequency
Magnetic Fields Emitted by DC Fast Charging Columns. Bioelectromagnetics. 2020 May;41(4):308-317. doi:
10.1002/bem.22254. Epub 2020 Feb 11. PMID: 32043629; PMCID: PMC7217217.
22 Tell RA, Kavet R, Bailey JR, Halliwell J. Very-low-frequency and low-frequency electric and magnetic fields associated
with electric shuttle bus wireless charging. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2014 Jan;158(2):123-34. doi: 10.1093/rpd/nct208.
Epub 2013 Sep 15. PMID: 24043876
23 M. Clemens, M. Zang, M. Alsayegh and B. Schmuelling, “High Resolution Modeling of Magnetic Field Exposure
Scenarios in the Vicinity of Inductive Wireless Power Transfer Systems.,” 2018 IEEE International Magnetics
Conference (INTERMAG), 2018, pp. 1-1, doi: 10.1109/INTMAG.2018.8508403.
24 Z. Psenakova, D. Gombárska and M. Smetana, “Electromagnetic Field Measurement inside the Car with Modern
Embedded Wireless Technologies,” 2020 IEEE 21st International Conference on Computational Problems of Electrical
Engineering (CPEE), 2020, pp. 1-4, doi: 10.1109/CPEE50798.2020.9238731.
25 Kostoff, Ron (2018 Sep 16) Dr. Ronald N. Kostoff on Automotive Radar and Electromagnetic Field Exposure in Cars.
Environmental Health Trust. Available 4 September 2021 at https://ehtrust.org/dr-ronald-n-kostoff-on-automotive-radar-
and-electromagnetic-field-exposure-in-cars/
26 Jürgen Kupferschmid Unter Strom: Autoelektronik versetzt Gehirn in Stress und Muskulatur unter Spannung.
SalusMed. Available 3 September 2021 at https://salusmed.ch/unter-strom-autoelektronik-versetzt-gehirn-in-stress-und-
muskulatur-unter-spannung/ ~ note a version of this in English can be found at the Environmental Health Trust
27 14 July 2021. Direct Pre-filed testimony of Kevin Boughan D.P.U. 21-90 on behalf of NSTAR Electric Company d/b/a
Eversource EXHIBIT ES-KB-1 https://fileservice.eea.comacloud.net/FileService.Api/file/FileRoom/13758159
28 Hosseini M, Monazzam MR, Farhang Matin L, Khosroabadi H. Hazard zoning around electric substations of
petrochemical industries by stimulation of extremely low-frequency magnetic fields. Environ Monit Assess. 2015
May;187(5):258. doi: 10.1007/s10661-015-4449-y. Epub 2015 Apr 16. PMID: 25877640.
29 Shepherd et al., Extremely Low Frequency Electromagnetic Fields impair the Cognitive and Motor Abilities of Honey
Bees, Scientific Reports volume 8, Article number: 7932 (2018)
30 Waldmann-Selsam, C., et al. “Radiofrequency radiation injures trees around mobile phone base stations.” Science of the
Total Environment 572 (2016): 554-69.
31 Červený Jaroslav, Begall Sabine, Koubek Petr, Nováková Petra and Burda Hynek . (2011) Directional preference may
enhance hunting accuracy in foraging foxes. Biol. Lett.7355–357 http://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2010.1145
32 Levitt BB, Lai HC, Manville AM. Effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields on flora and fauna, part 1. Rising
ambient EMF levels in the environment. Rev Environ Health. 2021 May 27. doi: 10.1515/reveh-2021-0026. Epub ahead
of print. PMID: 34047144.
33 According to Dr. Livio Guiliani, PhD, Director of Research for the Italian Health National Service and spokesperson for
ICEMS (dot edu), in a 6 April 2020 CHE-EMF email discussion to prevent heating of climate “we need interim
exposure limits based on PP – 0,1 W/sqm as in some Countries of Europe and in Russia, or less – and interim
quality standards based on ALARA – 1 mW/sqm, as in the Resolution of Salzburg (2000), or less- and interim limits
for occasional exposures (not valid for earth cover from sky) deduced from the thermal threshold, having applied a
safety factor equal to 100 (as in IRPA Guidelines 1989, instead 50 as in IEEE, 1992, or ICNIRP, 1998, standards),
recognizing the thermal threshold at 2 W/Kg.”
34 Thielens et al., “Exposure of Insects to Radio-Frequency Electromagnetic Fields from 2 to 120 GHz” Scientific Reports
volume 8, Article number: 3924 (2018)
35 Thielens, A., Greco, M.K., Verloock, L. et al. Radio-Frequency Electromagnetic Field Exposure of Western Honey
Bees. Sci Rep 10, 461 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-56948-0
36 Holzman DC. When it comes to electric vehicle emissions, location matters. Environ Health Perspect.
2012;120(6):A230-A231. doi:10.1289/ehp.120-a230a
37 Depro, Brooks M. Brian C. Murray, Ralph J. Alig, Alyssa Shanks. 2008. Public Land, Timber Harvests, and Climate
Mitigation: Quantifying Carbon Sequestration Potential on U.S. Public Timberlands. Forest Ecology and Management
255 (2008) 1122–1134 http://naldc.nal.usda.gov/download/21039/PDF
38 Hudiburg, Tara W., Beverly E. Law, William R Moomaw, Mark E. Harmon, and Jeffrey E. Stenzel. 2019. Meeting
GHG Reduction Targets Requires Accounting for All Forest Sector Emissions. Environ. Res. Lett. 14 (2019) 095005.
https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab28bb
39 Elgowainy A, Han J, Ward J, Joseck F, Gohlke D, Lindauer A, Ramsden T, Biddy M, Alexander M, Barnhart S,
Sutherland I, Verduzco L, Wallington TJ. Current and Future United States Light-Duty Vehicle Pathways: Cradle-to-
Grave Lifecycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Economic Assessment. Environ Sci Technol. 2018 Feb 20;52(4):2392-
2399. doi: 10.1021/acs.est.7b06006. Epub 2018 Feb 8. PMID: 29298387.
40 Zhu L, Chen M. Research on Spent LiFePO4 Electric Vehicle Battery Disposal and Its Life Cycle Inventory Collection
in China. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Nov 27;17(23):8828. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17238828. PMID: 33261047;
PMCID: PMC7730360.
41 Unitil DPU 21-92 Exhibit CSVG-5 https://fileservice.eea.comacloud.net/FileService.Api/file/FileRoom/13758181
42 To support complex metering including for electric vehicle chargers, National Grid has even sought to build its own
personal communications network, including fiberoptic cable and wireless.
43 Ding Zejun, Zhu Yongqiang and Xu Yu, “Economic loss evaluation and selective treatment of power quality,” 2010 5th
International Conference on Critical Infrastructure (CRIS), 2010, pp. 1-4, doi: 10.1109/CRIS.2010.5617490.
44 IEC 61921 (2003). Power capacitors – Low voltage power factor correction banks.
45 A. Sharma, B.S. Rajpurohit, S.N. Singh, A review on economics of power quality: Impact, assessment and mitigation,
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Volume 88, 2018, Pages 363-372, ISSN 1364-0321,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.02.011.
46 M. Al-dabbagh , H Askarian , Rana Abdul , Jabbar Khan. (2001 Jan) Power quality and energy loss reduction in power
systems. Available 7 September 2021 at
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/254582980_POWER_QUALITY_AND_ENERGY_LOSS_REDUCTION_IN
_POWER_SYSTEMS
47 Kola Sampangi Sambaiah, Thangavelu Jayabarathi (2020 Feb) Loss minimization techniques for optimal operation and
planning of distribution systems: A review of different methodologies. International Transactions on Electrical Energy
Systems. Volume30, Issue2. E12230 https://doi.org/10.1002/2050-7038.12230
48 Singer, Katie. (3 November 2020) Proposing Cradle-to-Grave Evaluations for All Vehicles. Wall St. International
Magazine. https://wsimag.com/science-and-technology/63818-proposing-cradle-to-grave-evaluations-for-all-vehicles
49 Stephens-Romero S, Carreras-Sospedra M, Brouwer J, Dabdub D, Samuelsen S. Determining air quality and
greenhouse gas impacts of hydrogen infrastructure and fuel cell vehicles. Environ Sci Technol. 2009 Dec
1;43(23):9022-9. doi: 10.1021/es901515y. PMID: 19943683
50 Frey HC, Zhai H, Rouphail NM. Regional on-road vehicle running emissions modeling and evaluation for conventional
and alternative vehicle technologies. Environ Sci Technol. 2009 Nov 1;43(21):8449-55. doi: 10.1021/es900535s. PMID:
19924983.
51 Zhou C, Li S, Wang S. Examining the Impacts of Urban Form on Air Pollution in Developing Countries: A Case Study
of China’s Megacities. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018 Jul 24;15(8):1565. doi: 10.3390/ijerph15081565. PMID:
30042324; PMCID: PMC6121357
52 Jones SJ. If electric cars are the answer, what was the question? Br Med Bull. 2019 Mar 1;129(1):13-23. doi:
10.1093/bmb/ldy044. PMID: 30615073.
53 Wang Q, Su M. A preliminary assessment of the impact of COVID-19 on environment – A case study of China. Sci Total
Environ. 2020 Aug 1;728:138915. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138915. Epub 2020 Apr 22. PMID: 32348946; PMCID:
PMC7195154.
54 A. Sharma, B.S. Rajpurohit, S.N. Singh, A review on economics of power quality: Impact, assessment and mitigation,
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Volume 88, 2018, Pages 363-372, ISSN 1364-0321,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.02.011.
55 Shih-An Yin, Chun-Lien Su and Rung-Fang Chang, “Assessment of power quality cost for high-tech industry,” 2006
IEEE Power India Conference, 2006, pp. 6 pp.-, doi: 10.1109/POWERI.2006.1632616
56 Ding Zejun, Zhu Yongqiang and Xu Yu, “Economic loss evaluation and selective treatment of power quality,” 2010 5th
International Conference on Critical Infrastructure (CRIS), 2010, pp. 1-4, doi: 10.1109/CRIS.2010.5617490.
57 J. G. Dougherty and W. L. Stebbins, “Power quality: a utility and industry perspective,” 1997 IEEE Annual Textile,
Fiber and Film Industry Technical Conference, 1997, pp. 5. 10 pp.-, doi: 10.1109/TEXCON.1997.598528.
58 Targosz, Roman, Jonathan Manson. European Power Quality Survey Report. LPQI, 2008.
https://idoc.pub/documents/european-power-quality-survey-report-zpnxke9qwy4v
59 Y. Shih-An, S. Chun-Lien, C. Rung-Fang. Assessment of PQ cost for high-tech industry. Power India Conference, 2006
IEEE, 2006.
60 S. Acharya, Y. Dvorkin, H. Pandžić and R. Karri, “Cybersecurity of Smart Electric Vehicle Charging: A Power Grid
Perspective,” in IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 214434-214453, 2020, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3041074
61 Cyber Security Issues of Internet with Electric Vehicles. Pouted. Available 14 September 2021 at
https://www.pouted.com/cyber-security-issues-of-internet-with-electric-vehicles/
62 Barney Carlson & Ken Rhode (2018 Sept 12) Cybersecurity of DC Fast Charging: Potential Impacts to the Electric
Grid. Idaho National Laboratory. INL/MIS-18-5128. Available 7 September 2021 at
https://avt.inl.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/presentations/INLCyberSecurityDCFC.pdf
63 Kim M, Park K, Yu S, Lee J, Park Y, Lee SW, Chung B. A Secure Charging System for Electric Vehicles Based on
Blockchain. Sensors (Basel). 2019 Jul 9;19(13):3028. doi: 10.3390/s19133028. PMID: 31324058; PMCID:
PMC6651179.
64 Ed Friedman v. Central Main Power Company. ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS. No. 2:20-cv-
00237-JDL (1 st Cir. 2021) Available at https://ehtrust.org/wp-content/uploads/R.-Doc.-26-Friedman-ADA-Order-
Denying-CMP-MTD-3-31-21.pdf
65 Emily Cohen (2020 Nov 11) Court ruling throws Pennsylvania smart-meter plan into turmoil. The Philadelphia Inquirer.
Available 7 September 2021 at https://www.inquirer.com/business/peco-puc-pennsylvania-commonwealth-court-smart-
meter-decision-20201111.html
66 Consolidated brain cancer from cellphone cases currently winding through courts including Michael Patrick Murray, et
al., v. Motorola, Inc., et al.,” Case No. 2001 CA 008479 B in the Superior Court for the District of Columbia
67 See dockets 13-83, 20-69, 16-28, 17-53, 21-80, 21-81,18-28, 21-82, 21-90, 12-76 ALL critical submissions and
attachments including but not limited to that of Dr. Lisa Nagy, joint comments, Ken Gartner, Einar Olsen, Helen
Walker, Kirstin Beatty, MACI , Dr. William Maykel and Patricia Burke , Dr. Beatrice Golomb, Reply comments by
Patricia Burke, Kirstin Beatty, Kirstin Beatty, Jean Lemiux, Dr. William Bruno, Sandra Chianfoni and Laura Catullo,
Exhibit 3 by Kirstin Beatty, Thea Fornier Wireless Technology Health Effects, Dr. Robert Gilmore Pontius Jr, PhD,
EMR Policy Institute, Dr. William Rea, Dr. Carpenter, EMR Policy Institute, and many more in all the dockets far too
numerous to list here.
68 Ken Gartner observes, in his 21-90 to 92 testimony that the utilities offer to sell EV charging installations to
municipalities and that municipalities not only are poorly suited to manage such installations but will will be left liable.
What also is the cost of removing and recycling such installations? Reference: Massachusetts Electric Company and
Nantucket Electric Company each d/b/a National Grid D.P.U. 21-91 Exhibit NG-EVPP-1 (July 14, 2021) pp. 50-51
69 See Notice of Public Hearing filed in each respective docket for the utilities.
70 Singer, Katie. (3 Feb 2020) Basic needs, electrified: What we expect from electricity. Wall St. International Magazine.
https://wsimag.com/economy-and-politics/64758-what-we-expect-from-electricity
71 Crowley, B (21 Feb 2021) Strong Revenues in Connecticut Boost $1.2 Billion Profit for Eversource, CT Examiner.

Strong Revenues in Connecticut Boost $1.2 Billion Profit for Eversource

Smart Grid Issues

Smart Grid Investigation

By Kirstin Beatty

 

Some filings which provide information on harm can be found here.

Update September 2021:

The Department of Utilities is working on expanding the smart grid, despite allowing opt outs of smart meters. This will increase electromagnetic exposures and so I’m working on preparing joint testimony for docket 21-90 through 92 in addition expanding on what I’ve already submitted for 21-80 through 82. I’ve filed a last-minute, imperfect petition to intervene which was ignored — live and learn.

The Attorney General is likely only to examine financial aspects of the grid, and little else, due to that being the office’s primary legal role, and so cannot be relied upon to do more in examining this docket.

However, you can file a civil rights complaint on this issue with the Attorney General’s office. Highlight that this is a civil rights complaint, to avoid sending it to the lawyer in the Attorney General’s office who is hired by the DPU.

Update June 2021:

The Department of Utilities has not recommended a full stop to the smart grid, but has recommended that ALL Massachusetts utilities now allow opting out of smart meters for a fee. This decision is likely because of the submissions to the docket, including my own submission, a version of which is posted here.

Update 6 November 2020:

November 17 & 20, the DPU is holding virtual technical conferences on the smart grid, which advocates can present regarding opt-out provisions on November 20th at the very end, within a one hour slot, with the request being that repetition of prior testimony be avoided and a joint presentation occur synthesizing ideas.

The topic of the technical conferences is essentially to discuss technical workings & needs of smart grid, appearing to acccept smart grid expansion and continuation as a done deal. I initially thought was meant to discuss the uneven burden of ratepayer costs upon those without EV – but that doesn’t seem to be considered. The only recognition of the health issue appears to be the possibility of an opt-out provision.

If you have facts or suggestions for topics to include in a synthesized presentation, please email using addresses in the footer.

________________________

Deadline: Friday, 4 September, 5 PM Eastern.

Background

The Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities is accepting public “reply” comments on whether to expand the smart meter program, possibly to serve electric vehicles (EV). As a result of existing comments on the docket by various organizations and individuals as described here, the Massachusetts Attorney General is initiating a public investigation into the matters discussed in the docket, which included counter-arguments to the grid for reasons of health, environment, economic justice and civil rights.

See an excerpt of the statement, where the Attorney General states she is engaging consultants to investigate the claims and suggest (propound) discovery, a pre-trial procedure: “better insure an outcome in this proceeding that is in the best interests of ratepayers, the Attorney General’s Office must engage consultants with the expertise to review and analyze the material filed in response to the Department’s Vote and Order, and to assist the Attorney General’s Office in preparing itw own filings and in propounding discovery . . . “

 

Reply comments could help guide the Attorney General, with domino effects on smart grids in Massachusetts and others states, as well as upon 5G and other wireless technologies.

Reply comments are meant to reply to existing comments in the docket. The Attorney General’s initial comment was in support of smart meters in order to advance green technology and to save energy.

Filing comments may mean that you can be included in any court case filed against the DPU or the state. You would need to say in the docket and be able to prove you are being or would be harmed by grid expansion.

Do say if the smart grid harms you & how.

If expounding on a topic, pick one or two and just do those well  – the AG may have to read all comments. The best reply comments would probably include or be as follows:

      • Information on why smart meters are not green
      • Personal suffering and disability caused by the smart grid and/or wireless
      • Scientific and medical references
      • References from proven sources
      • Submissions from scientific and medical experts
      • Submissions by legislators, such as Senator Moore submitted
      • To thank Last Tree Laws, please link to the website in your submission!

A template and instructions are provided below.

Much thanks to Patricia Burke, who initially was very active with Halt Smart Meters Massachusetts and is likely the state smart meter expert, for sending a mass email encouraging comments on the DPU docket and for suggesting the topics of economic and environmental justice as well as health. Patricia Burke’s detailed comments can be found online here.

Submission Requirements:

Draft your statement and save as a .pdf file. The DPU requires a .pdf file to be posted to their website.

  1. Observe deadline – fillings are required by Friday, September 4, 5 PM Eastern
  2. Address email to:
    • Peter.Ray@mass.gov
    • Tina.Chin@mass.gov
    • Sarah.Spruce@mass.gov
  3. CC line: Please add Patricia’s gmail account, as she is confirming the DPU receives and posts emails – please cc Last Tree Laws as well:
    • gmail via stopsmartmetersmass@
    • lasttreelaws.com via action@
  4. Subject line for email:
    • Reply Comment MA DPU 20-69 Modernization of Electric Grid Phase Two
  5. Place in text of email:
    • See attached reply comment of ___________ (your name) in Opposition to MA DPU 20-69 Modernization of Electric Grid Phase Two
    • Your name or company, title, credentials
    • Email address
    • Telephone number
    • Note: File size may not exceed 20 MB, so larger files must be split. If you send additional attachments or articles other than your comment, please list them in the email.
  6. Craft your testimony in a separate document (not in the body of the email)
    • See template below.
    • Include your name and credentials at top
    • For all links and references, state at the end: “All references, including links, are incorporated into this testimony by reference.”
    • Do not include personal contact information, which will be posted online as part of the PDF.
  7. Save your document as a PDF. If you’re not sure how to create a .pdf file, reach out to Patricia’s gmail account and she’ll help: stopsmartmetersmass@
  8. Attach the PDF to your email and send.
  9. Check that your PDF is posted a few days later by typing 20-69 into this search box.

Template

DATE:___________

FROM:____[Name, credentials]_____

TO: Mark D. Marini, Secretary, Department of Public Utilities, One South Station, 5th Floor, Boston, MA 02110

RE: Reply Comment MA DPU 20-69 Modernization of Electric Grid Phase Two

Please halt any smart grid expansion and roll back existing installations. Right now, the question of safe wireless infrastructure is a subject of federal and state court cases. Proceeding is foolish. Smart meters threaten health, safety, resources, energy, and economic justice.

Expanding the smart grid in Massachusetts impacts me because _______.

I am going to discuss: _________.

[Discuss topic – for resources, see SmartMeterHarm dot org (reports); StopSmartMeters dot org (problem page); StopSmartMetersBC dot com (tabs of many issues); MichiganStopSmartMeters dot com (legal and other points); and ElectronicSilentSpring dot com (eco-focus) – EHTrust dot org and MDSafeTech dot org are also helpful]

Please take these concerns into consideration.

 

Last Tree Laws Massachusetts