Research shows that trees, plants, pollinators and wildlife are harmed by wireless radiation
Fact: ICNIRP and FCC limits were not developed to protect our flora or fauna. Wireless radiation “safety” limits for trees, plants, birds and bees simply do not exist. No US agency with expertise in science, biology or safety has ever acted to review research and set safety limits for birds, bees, trees and wildlife.
The Department of Interior wrote a letter in 2014 detailing several published studies showing impacts of wireless radiofrequency radiation (RFR) to birds stated that, “There is a growing level of anecdotal evidence linking effects of non-thermal, non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation from communication towers on nesting and roosting wild birds and other wildlife…. And “However, the electromagnetic radiation standards used by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) continue to be based on thermal heating, a criterion now nearly 30 years out of date and inapplicable today. “ and “third-party peer-reviewed studies need to be conducted in the U.S. to begin examining the effects from radiation on migratory birds and other trust species.”
“Study results have documented nest and site abandonment, plumage deterioration, locomotion problems, reduced survivorship, and death (e.g., Balmori 2005, Balmori and Hallberg 2007, and Everaert and Bauwens 2007). Nesting migratory birds and their offspring have apparently been affected by the radiation from cellular phone towers in the 900 and 1800 MHz frequency ranges- 915 MHz is the standard cellular phone frequency used in the United States.”
“In laboratory studies, T. Litovitz (personal communication) and DiCarloet al. (2002) raised concerns about impacts of low-level, non-thermal electromagnetic radiation from the standard 915 MHz cell phone frequency on domestic chicken embryos- with some lethal results (Manville 2009, 2013a). Radiation at extremely low levels (0.0001 the level emitted by the average digital cellular telephone) caused heart attacks and the deaths of some chicken embryos subjected to hypoxic conditions in the laboratory while controls subjected to hypoxia were unaffected (DiCarlo et al. 2002).” –Department of Interior, 2014
Albert Manville, former senior biologist of the US Fish and Wildlife Service wrote “A BRIEFING MEMORANDUM: What We Know, Can Infer, and Don’t Yet Know about Impacts from Thermal and Non-thermal Non-ionizing Radiation to Birds and Other Wildlife” published in Wildlife and Habitat Conservation Solutions, 2014 on the impacts of RFR to birds and bees. India dropped their RF limits by 1/10th after a research review documented the majority of research studies found adverse effects to wildlife, birds and bees.
Regarding bees and pollinators, the study “Exposure of Insects to Radio-Frequency Electromagnetic Fields from 2 to 120 GHz” published in Scientific Reports found insects (including the Western honeybee) can absorb the higher frequencies that will be used in the 4G/5G rollout with absorbed power increases up to 370%. The researchers warn, “This could lead to changes in insect behaviour, physiology, and morphology over time….” Research also has found impacts to bees from wireless frequencies including inducing artificial worker piping (Favre, 2011), disrupting navigation abilities ( Sainudeen, 2011; Kimmel et al., 2007) reducing colony strength (Harst et al., 2006) impacts to honey bee physiology (2011).
Research on trees has found trees are harmed by RFR. A 9 year field study Waldmann-Selsam, C., et al 2016, found significant impacts to trees near cell antennas and an investigation of 700 trees found damage starts on the side of the tree with highest RF. A review on impacts to plants entitled “Weak radiofrequency radiation exposure from mobile phone radiation on plants” concluded, “a substantial amount of the studies on RF-EMFs from mobile phones show physiological and/or morphological effects.” A study on aspen seedings found ambient RF in a Colorado setting were high enough to cause necrotic lesions on the leaves, decrease leader length and leaf area, and suppress fall anthocyanin production (Haggarty, 2010).
Did you know that the wireless infrastructure consumes three times as much energy as wired technologies?
The build-out of new wireless networks will exacerbate existing energy and safety problems. According to the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), wireless infrastructure consumes three times as much energy as wired technologies. A massive build-out of 5G will significantly increase demand for power, resulting in greater greenhouse gas emissions and pollution.
Climate Fact Sheets to Download and Share
Montgomery County Maryland Sierra Club
The Montgomery County Maryland Sierra Club wrote several letters to the County Council on ZTA- 19-07 (5G Cell Towers) expressing concern about the energy use implications which would allow more wireless antenna installations in the County.
“As stated in the letter we submitted on May 15, 2018, regarding ZTA 18-11, we would like to reiterate that we oppose this ZTA and urge you not to pass it in its current form today. This amendment will enable a huge expansion in the construction and use of cellular communications towers, to facilitate a transition away from wired networks to a wireless network of mobile broadband services called 5G. While this new technology may expand cell service, unfortunately, it also will likely result in dramatically increased energy consumption, and therefore much higher greenhouse gas emissions, increasing the carbon footprint of the county.”