overview of potential health effects of radiofrequency fields ...esafetyline.com/eei/conference...

Ximena P. Vergara, PhD, MPH Senior Project Scientist

Program 60: Electric and Magnetic Fields & Radiofrequency Health Assessment and Safety

Spring EEI Occupational Health & Safety Committee Conference Indianapolis, IN

April 23, 2013

Overview of Potential Health Effects of

Radiofrequency Fields and Smart Meters

2 © 2013 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.

• Introduction

• RF emissions from smart meters

• RF health research and risk evaluations

• Conclusions

• Ongoing

• Occupational RF safety work

• RF health research

Outline


Air Quality

Global Climate Change

Land and Groundwater

Occupational Health and Safety

(OH&S)

T&D Environmental Issues

Water and Ecosystems

Renewables

Sustainability

Environment

Transmission Lines and

Substations

Grid Operations and Planning

Distribution

Energy Utilization

Cross Cutting Technologies

Power Delivery & Utilization

Advanced Nuclear Technology

Chemistry, Low-Level Waste

and Radiation Management

Equipment Reliability

Fuel Reliability

Instrumentation and Control

Material Degradation/Aging

Nondestructive Evaluation and

Material Characterization

Risk and Safety Management

Used Fuel and High-Level

Waste Management

Nuclear Power

Advanced Coal Plants, Carbon

Capture and Storage

Combustion Turbines

Environmental Controls

Generation Planning

Major Component Reliability

Operations and Maintenance

Generation

Research Portfolio Spans the Entire Electricity

Sector


EMF & RF Health Assessment & Safety

Research Program

Housed with T & D Environment, research includes:

• Laboratory studies

• Epidemiologic studies

• Instrumentation and modeling

• Exposure assessment

• Occupational health studies

• Communications of latest research


Electromagnetic Spectrum


In the News…

“While some environmentalists say the devices will help make the grid greener and more

efficient, and give customers the data they need to control their energy use, critics see them

as a healthy and safety hazard. They say smart meters risk our privacy and emit radio-

frequency radiation that could lead to serious health problems.”


Smart Meter RF Exposure Emission Measurements


Laboratory and Field Measurements


One Foot in Front of Antenna – Peak Field

EPRI Itron Study

1 ft

8.1

% FCC

Dist

EPRI Technical Report – December 2010 (PID 1021126)

Peer Publication - Radiation Protection and Dosimetry (2012)


Peak Instantaneous Fields (Power Density) in

Front of Meters (CA Residences)

1 foot

14.7% of Maximum

Permissible Exposure


Duty Cycles in EPRI Itron Study

EPRI 2010

• Duty cycle – fraction of time when antenna actually transmits


Duty Cycle – EPRI Silver Spring Networks Study

0.22%

0.02%

13.9%

5%

JESEE 2012


RF Dosimetry

• Specific Absorption

Rate (SAR) calculations

using finite-difference

time domain (FDTD)

method

• “Beyond worst case

scenarios”

• SAR values do not

exceed published limits,

unless subject in

extreme proximity (face

touching meter) and

only when duty cycles

ignored


RF Survey in Urban Environments

• A Survey of the Urban Radio-

Frequency (RF) Environment,

November 2012 (PID 1025393)

– Preliminary survey in NC, TX, WA

Narda SRM-3006 (26 MHz – 3 GHz) (+ monopole antenna AM, 0.5-1.7 MHz)


RF Survey in Urban Environments

Main Findings

• Like in 1980, FM broadcasting is a

major contributor to RF environment

• AM radio signals represent small

fractions of MPE

• VHF TV bands are now “dead” with

transition to DTV (UHF)

• Wireless smart meters can be

detected but the RF fields are weak

compared to other sources

• Indoor measurements will likely find

lower levels compared to outdoors


• In vitro mechanistic studies

• In vivo laboratory animal & human provocation

studies

• Epidemiologic studies

• Environmental and personal exposure assessment

RF Health Research


In Vivo Animal Carcinogenicity Studies

Overall, 41 studies were evaluated

• 34 studies were negative

• 3 studies were positive, but were not confirmed

• 4 positive studies in new models or models that have not

been used in other laboratories

Conclusion

• The animal data supporting the possible carcinogenicity of

RF is weak, but is non-zero


Epidemiologic Studies

Pre-INTERPHONE

• Inconsistent results for environmental and occupational exposures

• With the exception Hardell studies, most cell phone studies negative

INTERPHONE

• Case-control study of cell phone use and brain cancer 13 countries

• Glioma

• Odds Ratio 0.81 (0.70-0.94)

• Meningioma

• Odds Ratio 0.79 (0.68-0.91)

Cumulative call time

INTERPHONE Study

IJE 2010

INTERPHONE

Odds Ratio 1.4


Are reported risks of brain cancer consistent

with population statistics?

7,0

8,0

9,0

10,0

11,0

12,0

13,0

14,0

15,0

16,0

1979 1984 1989 1994 1999 2004

Predicted if RR=2

Predicted if RR=1.5

Predicted if RR=1.2

Observed

All users at increased risk after 15 yrs

7,0

8,0

9,0

10,0

11,0

12,0

13,0

14,0

15,0

16,0

1979 1984 1989 1994 1999 2004

Predicted if RR=2

Predicted if RR=1.5

Predicted if RR=1.2

Observed

Risk only for heavy users

Deltour et al., Epidemiology, 2012


IARC Group 2B – RF “Possibly Carcinogenic”

The Lancet Oncoly 2011, 12: 624-626


Evaluation of Evidence by IARC

Sufficient Causal relationship established

Chance, bias, confounding ruled out

Limited Positive associations observed

Credible causality, but

Chance, bias, confounding not ruled out

Inadequate Studies found insufficient quality, consistency or statistical power

Absence of data

ESLC Evidence Suggesting Lack of Carcinogenicity

Sufficient Causal relationship established, positive in:

• Two or more species

• Two or more studies in one species

• Both sexes of single species

Limited Suggestive data, but

• Only seen in one experiment (replication)

• Issues regarding adequacy of the design, conduct or interpretation

• Benign tumors or restricted tissues

Inadequate Studies cannot be interpreted that the exposure is carcinogenic

Absence of data

ESLC Evidence Suggesting Lack of Carcinogenicity

Exp

eri

men

tal A

nim

als

H

um

an

Stu

die

s


UK Health Protection Agency (RF) (2012)

• “…the evidence considered overall has not

demonstrated any adverse health effects of

RF field exposure below internationally

accepted guideline levels. “

• “…does not cause symptoms and cannot be

detected by people, even by those who

consider themselves sensitive to RF fields.”

• “…evidence on cancer…is not definitive, but

overall is increasingly in the direction of no

material effect…”


Swedish Council for Working Life and Social

Research (2012)

• Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity: “…no association between radiofrequency fields and wellbeing has been established…[RF] not been shown to trigger symptoms in subjects who perceive themselves as hypersensitive…”

• Brain Tumors: “The majority of epidemiological studies have found no evidence that mobile phone use is associated with an increased risk…” “…reported risk increases [if real]…would definitely have resulted in a detectable increase in the brain tumor incidence rates...”


Review of Reviews

• “…the vast majority of the [33] reports do not consider that

radiofrequency fields at current exposure levels…pose a

serious health risk to humans.”

• “All reports, except the Bioinitiative report, conclude that

there is so far no clear indication of adverse health effects

from RF-exposure…”

• “They usually remain prudent with regard to long-term bio-

effects, not because of strong indications that such effects

might occur, but only because there are so far not enough

data available to draw a sound conclusion.”


Recent Reviews of Smart Meter RF Issues

• California Council on

Science and Technology

• Public Utility Commission

of Texas

• Michigan Public Service

Commission

• Vermont Department of

Public Service


California Council on Science and Technology


EPRI Comments on BioInitiative 2012 Report

• Issues with BioInitiative 2012

Report

– Rely on selective literature

– Inconsistent with all other

expert panel conclusions

• Electric fields barely mentioned

– Large literature of in vivo

studies

– No exposure recommendation

(inconsistent with B-field

recommendation)

• ELF and RF rodent bioassays

overlooked

Published March 2013

Product ID: 3002000701


• RF exposure is ubiquitous in modern societies

• RF emissions from smart meters are well below

public safety limits and low compared to other

sources

• Health risk evaluations using the “weight of

evidence” approach tend to conclude that there is no

clear indication of adverse health effects due to RF

exposure

• Scientific uncertainties may warrant further research

Conclusions


Issues

• Co-location of mobile phone antennae

on transmission towers

• Unanticipated RF burn hazards due to

re-radiation of RF voltages from

nearby AM broadcast stations onto

power lines

EPRI 2012 Research Deliverables

• RF Estimator Software provides

• Interaction Between AM Radio

Broadcast Antennas and Overhead

Power Lines (Technical Brief)

Occupational RF Safety Research


Technology Innovation RF Health Research

October 2012

Product ID: 1025644

December 2012

Product ID: 1025388

November 2012

Product ID: 1025387

Focus on evaluation of instrumentation

both research and consumer grade

Summary of RF human

laboratory research


Together…Shaping the Future of Electricity

overview of potential health effects of radiofrequency fields ...esafetyline.com/eei/conference...

Documents