• Save
Case for regulating cell  towers
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

Case for regulating cell towers

on

  • 3,570 views

Overview of the need for cell tower regulation in Portland Oregon from Mt. Tabor Families Against Cell Towers near Schools.

Overview of the need for cell tower regulation in Portland Oregon from Mt. Tabor Families Against Cell Towers near Schools.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
3,570
Views on SlideShare
3,018
Embed Views
552

Actions

Likes
1
Downloads
0
Comments
0

3 Embeds 552

http://notabortower.com 469
http://pgtelcotowers.blogspot.com 81
http://pgtelcotowers.blogspot.hk 2

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

CC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike LicenseCC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike LicenseCC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • 3khz- 300Ghz- cell phones, cell towers
  • Note: there are effects of non-ionizing radiation that don't involve heating at levels well below existing guidelines
  • http://www.city-data.com/towers/cell-Portland-Oregon.html
  • “ This new law gives residents real power in the decision making process on cell tower placement,” Town Supervisor Kate Murray said.
  • Congress/FCC: Local governments CAN evaluate RF safety to determine compliance with the federal standards in FCC OET Bulletin 65. There are two federal standards in the FCC OET Bulletin 65 rules (sometimes misapplied by carriers): The Controlled/Occupational standards and Uncontrolled/General Population standard.

Case for regulating cell towers Presentation Transcript

  • 1. Mt. Tabor F.A.C.T.S (Families Against Cell Towers near School) The Case for Regulating Cell Towers Understanding the risk of cell and microwave radiation: Protecting Portland’s Citizens Against Electro-smog Ver 1.3 updated Oct 15 h 2010
  • 2. Next Clearwire target
  • 3. Agenda
    • Situation- Why No Tabor Tower?
    • Science- Old vs new thinking
    • Case studies- Why can’t we?
    • Legislation Required
  • 4. Broader issue Cell Towers : 1900 MHz Cell Phones : 800; 900; 1800 MHz 3G smart phones: 1900-2200 MHz Wi-Fi systems and cordless phones over 900 MHz: 2.5GHz = same as microwave oven Wi-Max and 4G: 3.4-3.6 GHz
  • 5. “ Studies on ionizing radiation have shown that children are most sensitive among all members of populations…” President Obama’s cancer panel 9/09- Martha Linet of the National Cancer Institute Radiation absorption from cell phones showing NON-IONIZING radiation Children are most vulnerable
  • 6. You’re exposed to 100 million times more Electromagnetic radiation than your grandparents were Approx: 2GHz; 2GHz; 2.5GHz; 3.5GHz iPhone; Cell Tower; Wi-Fi; 4G device
  • 7. Safest country in the world?
    • Austria
    • USA
    • UK
    • China
    .1 580 5800 6 Microwatts/ sq. centimeter for 800-900 mhz (Standards vary with frequency)
  • 8. Two different views in the US
    • “ We’re fine”: We are within FCC and US guidelines; the science is not conclusive; studies show no correlation to cancer etc.
    • “ We need to be careful”: We are behind in world standards (EU, China); many independent studies show negative health effects including cancer; industry funded studies are controversial.
  • 9. Old Thinking
    • Only 25% of studies influenced by industry show health or ‘bio-effects’.
      • Am. Cancer Society - “low level RF limits are below the recommended level…and are unlikely to cause cancer”
      • FCC - “ground-level power…thousands of times less than the FCC's limits for safe exposure…”
    • Only ionizing (heating) radiation viewed as harmful
  • 10. New Thinking
    • 75% of research free of industry influence show health or ‘bio-effects’.
      • American Academy of Pediatrics : Consistent epidemiologic evidence of an association between childhood leukemia and exposure to extremely low frequency (ELF) magnetic fields has led to their classification by the International Agency for Research on Cancer as a “possible human carcinogen.”
      • ECOLOG : Experiments on cell cultures yielded clear evidence for geno-toxic effects of these fields, like DNA breaks and damage to chromosomes, so that even a cancer-initiating effect cannot be excluded any longer...
    • Non-ionizing (non-heating) also viewed as harmful
  • 11. 971 studies* to date, 652 found a significant health effect, only 138 did not http://www.powerwatch.org.uk/science/studies.asp *Cell tower specific studies
  • 12. 800 more cell towers to blanket Portland with electro-smog 2010-2014 Portland = Clearwire testbed for Wi-Max
  • 13. Case Study 1: Hempstead, NY
    • Sept 2010
    • Cell towers banned within 1,500 feet of a home, a house of worship, a daycare center or a school.
    • Compare to PDX:
    • Private land protected, public land NOT!
    • Schools okay to target in public right of way.
    “ This new law gives residents real power in the decision making process on cell tower placement,” Town Supervisor Kate Murray said.
  • 14. Case Study 2: Bend, OR
    • Sept 2010
    • Restrictions on highly visible towers in neighborhoods.
    • Stricter guidelines
    • Protects scenic beauty and quality of life.
    • Compare to PDX:
    • Historic neighborhoods NOT protected!
    • No restrictions on sitings that impact property value (up to 15% studies show) or quality of life.
  • 15. Case Study 3: Glendale, CA
    • April 2010
    • Cell towers banned 1000 ft from residential zones.
    • Strict regulations for tower siting.
    • Public notice by certified mail.
    • Independent RF technical review required.
    • Compare to PDX:
    • No protection for residential zones!
    • Telecoms decide and are approved (citizen input factored but not requirement).
    • Neighborhood Assoc consultation required (and 400 ft zone- not enforced).
    • No RF analysis being conducted.
  • 16. Cell Tower Regulation
    • Federal level change required:
      • Surgeon General warning
      • FCC revisit and amend 1996 guidelines
      • EPA review research on low level RF
      • National Radiation Protection Board update guidelines to reflect no low RF research
      • Enact research and progressive legislation in line with Europe, Asia
  • 17. Cell Tower Regulation
    • Local level change required:
      • City of Portland assert public land use authority.
      • City follow San Diego vs. Sprint legal precedent .
      • 2000 feet Ordinance to protect SCA’s (sensitive community areas) eg. schools, places of worship and nursing homes.
      • Mandate accountability and transparency (notify by mail; map sitings online).
    See our12 cell Tower Regulation Amendment document for the City of Portland Email [email_address] for a copy
  • 18. Next Steps
    • City and Cable & Franchise Mgmt deny Clearwire permit at Mt. Tabor
    • Emergency legislation to suspend all new cell tower applications near schools, day care centers, places of worship and nursing homes.
    • Cell tower regulation for Portland & Oregon
    BioInitiative Report Follow up legislation ideas: The Children’s Wireless Protection Act Contact: Frank Spillers 503 702 3608 or frank@notabortower.com