Published Aug. 31, 2021

By Robert Walton

Dive Brief:

• Electric panels in up to 48 million U.S. single-family homes will need to be upgraded to fully transition away from fossil fuels and use electricity for space and water heating, cooking, vehicle charging and other applications, according to new research from residential electricity research group Pecan Street.
• With an average cost of $2,000 for an upgraded panel, that represents a nearly “$100 billion impediment to residential electrification,” the group said in a report issued Aug. 23.
• It is also an energy transition equity issue, with lower-income customers often unable to make that investment. But utilities can play a role in helping make upgrades possible through rebates or incentives, said Pecan Street CEO Suzanne Russo.

Read the article at: https://www.utilitydive.com/news/residential-electric-panels-represent-a-nearly-100b-roadblock-to-full-el/605829/

The post Residential electric panels are a nearly $100B ‘roadblock’ to full electrification, report finds appeared first on EMFSA.

Note by EMFSA: the doi link above might not be active yet.

Published Ahead of Print / Just Accepted

Abstract

Some historical aspects on late lessons from early warnings on cancer risks with lost time for prevention are discussed. One current example is the cancer-causing effect from radiofrequency (RF) radiation. Studies since decades have shown increased human cancer risk. The fifth generation, 5G, for wireless communication is about to be implemented world-wide despite no comprehensive investigations of potential risks to human health and the environment. This has created debate on this technology among concerned people in many countries. In an appeal to EU in September 2017, currently endorsed by more than 400 scientists and medical doctors, a moratorium on the 5G deployment was required until proper scientific evaluation of negative consequences has been made (www.5Gappeal.eu). That request has not been taken seriously by EU. Lack of proper unbiased risk evaluation of the 5G technology makes adverse effects impossible to be foreseen. This disregard is exemplified by the recent report from the International Commission on non-ionizing radiation protection (ICNIRP) whereby only thermal (heating) effects from RF radiation are acknowledged despite a large number of reported non-thermal effects. Thus, no health effects are acknowledged by ICNIRP for non-thermal RF electromagnetic fields in the range of 100 kHz–300 GHz. Based on results in three case-control studies on use of wireless phones we present preventable fraction for brain tumors. Numbers of brain tumors of not defined type were found to increase in Sweden, especially in the age group 20–39 years in both genders, based on the Swedish Inpatient Register. This may be caused by the high prevalence of wireless phone use among children and in adolescence taking a reasonable latency period and the higher vulnerability to RF radiation among young persons.

Excerpt:

In fact, RF-EMF may now be classified as a human carcinogen, Group 1 [82], [, 83]. However, such classification can only be made by IARC.

In contrast to ICNIRP, some other expert panels such as European Academy of Environmental Medicine [91], the Bioinitiative group [92], and the Russian Commission for Protection from Non-Ionizing Radiation [93], take into account non-thermal RF effects and suggest much lower guidelines for RF exposure.

This review gives insight into missed opportunities for cancer prevention exemplified by asbestos, tobacco, certain pesticides and now RF radiation. No doubt economic considerations are favored instead of cancer prevention. The cancer victim is the loser in terms of suffering, life quality and shorter life expectancy. Also the life for the next-of-kin is affected. A strategy to sow doubt on cancer risks was established decades ago and is now adopted and implemented in more sophisticated way by the telecom industry regarding RF-EMF risks to human beings and the environment. Industry has the economic power, access to politicians and media whereas concerned people are unheard.

The post Lost opportunities for cancer prevention: historical evidence on early warnings with emphasis on radiofrequency radiation appeared first on EMFSA.

Eric van Rongen:

“Contrary to many 5G conspiracy theories, phone radiation heats the human body the equivalent of having a cup of hot tea every two hours.”

“The science is really straightforward — there’s simply no solid evidence that anything other than a small amount of body heating may result from exposure to 5G radiofrequency fields.”

Andrew Goldsworthy (Biologist) responds to ICNIRP’s Eric van Rongen’s post featured above:

There are two main mechanisms by which non-ionising radiation such as that from cell-phones can damage living organisms. One is the heating effect and the other is the effect of low-frequency modulation.

1 The heating effect.

We cannot assume that the heating effect is uniformly distributed through living cells. The cells themselves are highly conductive, whereas the cell membranes have a very high resistance. Therefore, for any given current flowing through a tissue, nearly all of the heat will be generated in the cell membranes. Since these membranes constitute only about one thousandth of the total diameter of a typical cell and virtually all of the heat is being generated in them, the ICNIRP Guidelines, which are based on the assumption that cells and tissues are uniformly conductive, are approximately one thousand times too high.

2 The effect of modulation.

Living cell membranes are electrically non-linear and have a voltage across them of approximately 70mV. They are pierced by countless ion channels that behave like electrically biased Schottky diodes capable of rectifying and so demodulating any alternating signal (including microwave frequencies) with the demodulated low frequency components appearing between the inside and outside of the cell. This is what does most of the damage and here is why:

The cell membrane is mainly made of a lipid bilayer only about 10nM thick, with proteins such as ion channels “floating” in it. The membrane itself is negatively charged because it has outwardly directed negatively charged phosphate groups and is normally stabilised by divalent positive calcium and magnesium ions that cross-link them. But the demodulated cell-phone signal makes the negative membrane and its protective divalent ions move in opposite directions. This destabilizes the membrane and makes it more likely to perforate and collapse the voltage gradient across it. This, in turn, opens voltage-gated calcium ion channels in the membrane that let huge numbers of calcium ions into the cell down a massive 10,000:1 electrochemical gradient.

In nature, this increase in the internal calcium concentration is taken as an indicator to the cell that its membrane (and by implication, the whole cell) has been damaged and sets in train a series of repair mechanisms, which uses a great deal of metabolic energy. If it succeeds, the cell is repaired, if not, the cell dies, but either way a great deal of energy is used. This may in large part explain the chronic fatigue syndrome that was found in early mobile phone users (Yuppie flu) and is now much more widespread in the community due to our constant exposure to cordless phones, their base stations, WiFi and all the other wireless devices that current ICNIRP guidelines regard as safe.

Lastly, the relationship between 5G and COVID-19.

We cannot assume that because the 5G radiation is mainly absorbed by the skin that it cannot damage the rest of our bodies. If the energy of the radiation is disproportionately absorbed by the skin, then the damage to the skin and the blood and lymph circulating through it will also be disproportionately large. The effects of 5G on lymphocytes could be particularly damaging. They too will have their energy drained by the calcium influx caused by the radiation, have less to spare to generate their protective antibodies and so make the immune system less efficient. So, I guess you could say that 5G can promote the spread of COVID-19. That said, most other forms of information carrying (i.e.modulated) frequencies may be even more dangerous, particularly WiFi with its extremely low frequency (10Hz) beacon signal being possibly the most dangerous.

Dr Andrew Goldsworthy, Lecturer and Biological Safety Officer (retired) Imperial College London.

The post Andrew Goldsworthy (Biologist) responds to Eric van Rongen’s (ICNIRP) statements about 5G appeared first on EMFSA.

Abstract

The aim of this study was to highlight the existence of a correlation between Maillard reaction and protein aggregation in bovine meat as a function of power level and exposure time used by microwave heating. The obtained results are compared with those of convective heating. For this, Fourier Transform-Infrared Spectroscopy was used to analyze the effects of microwave heating on different samples of bovine meat cooked in microwave ovens at three power levels of 700, 900 and 1100 W, and in conventional electric oven at the temperature of 170°C. An increase in intensity of methylene vibration bands after microwave cooking at 700 W for 3 min was more than that which occurred after microwave cooking at 900 and 1100 W for 2 min, showing that Maillard reaction depends on exposure time to microwaves. Also, the β-sheet contents at 1695 and 1635 cm⁻¹ in meat samples heated for 2 min by microwave oven increased with increase in power level from 700 to 1100 W, showing that protein aggregation is strictly related to the power level of microwave heating. This result showed that an extended exposure time to microwave heating can significantly alter gastrointestinal digestive processes.

The post Modulation of Maillard reaction and protein aggregation in bovine meat following exposure to microwave heating and possible impact on digestive processes: An FTIR spectroscopy study appeared first on EMFSA.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29775391/

The post Understanding physical mechanism of low-level microwave radiation effect appeared first on EMFSA.