Monday, January 24, 2011

How your cell phone came to be / Cell phones as bad as x-rays / Letter to BC Hydro / Wind power case clouds industry's future / How Big Wind Killed a Community

W.E.E.P. News

Wireless Electrical and Electromagnetic Pollution News 

25 January 2011

 
Arizona Daily Star

Cell phone transmitter antennas, many no larger than stereo speakers, can be mounted in church steeples, on trees and flagpoles and on top of tall buildings ...

http://azstarnet.com/news/local/foothills/article_ad67886d-a23f-5525-b492-ab0998ecdff2.html
 
 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
 
 

Cell phones as bad as x-rays

Lit Corner | January 24, 2011

Would you allow 1600 chest x-rays for yourself or your child?

http://dimensionalbliss.com/2011/01/24/cell-phones-as-bad-as-x-rays/

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Letter to British Columbia Hydro

Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 11:53 AM
Subject: Re Smart Meters

To whom it may concern @ BC Hydro
 
I wish to inform the directors of BC Hydro that I am hyper -sensitive to electro magnetic fields ,RF ,
and to place a meter,that emits radio fields, at my home could cause me illness.
I had to move from a home in Harrison Hot Springs back in 1997 due to RF.emissions from a
nearby tower which made me ill and left me hyper -sensitive.
I am hereby requesting that the electric meter remain as is.
Yours Truly Robert Riedlinger
30199 Silverhill Ave
Mission BC V4S1H9 
PS Attached please find a press write-up of my experience back in 1997.
 
 
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
 

Wind power case clouds industry's future

RICHARD BLACKWELL

http://www.ctv.ca/generic/generated/static/business/article1880165.html

A panel of Ontario Divisional Court judges will begin hearing a challenge today that, if successful, could throw a wrench into the province's burgeoning wind power industry.

The case, brought by Ian Hanna, a resident of Prince Edward County, 200 kilometres east of Toronto, argues that regulations in Ontario's Green Energy Act, governing how far turbines must be from houses, are illegal. If the court agrees, new wind development could come to a standstill.

The case will also be an opportunity to air the views of those who feel wind turbines are unhealthy. Mr. Hanna's argument is based on the premise that the minimum setback in Ontario – 550 metres – does not take into account the possible negative impacts to human health that turbines may cause.

Essentially, he argues, there is no medical evidence that the setback is safe, and that by publishing its regulations without sufficient proof, the province has breached the "precautionary principle" in its own environmental bill of rights. That principle says the government has to show an activity is safe before it is approved.

Indeed, Mr. Hanna's court filings say, the government knew there was literature that raises concerns about turbines, and spells out that not enough was known to settle the setback issue.

A court victory, said Mr. Hanna's lawyer Eric Gillespie, would essentially put a moratorium on building any new wind farms in Ontario. That would be a huge victory for wind farm opponents, who say there need to be far more studies done on health impacts. "If the court determines that [Ontario] has insufficient science to support its decision, then governments, the wind industry and communities will have to look very closely to determine in a more scientific way where industrial wind turbines should be located," Mr. Gillespie said.

Increasingly, opponents have been protesting the spread of wind turbines, insisting that they cause health problems and calling for more detailed studies before the devices become even more ubiquitous. Both sides have cranked up the rhetoric recently; last week, one anti-wind group complained that a wind farm developer had called it a "group of terrorists."

To support his client's case in court, Mr. Gillespie will present evidence from three physicians who say turbine noise and vibration can cause high stress, sleep deprivation and headaches among people who live near them.

The government argues, in a document filed with the court, that the doctors' conclusions are suspect, and that it reviewed all the literature available on the issue, and held public consultations before creating the guidelines.

It also says that complaints about possible health effects from turbines come from a small number of people, while the government's role is to try to clean the air for all residents of Ontario by shifting to renewable power.

There is "no conclusive evidence that wind turbine noise has any impact on human health," the government filing states. Available information suggests a 550-metre setback is adequate, it adds, and that that distance is "clearly conservative," given the existing studies. It dismisses the data about health problems as "anecdotal hearsay."

The government also argues that a new environmental review tribunal set up under its Green Energy Act is the right place to air health issues, not the provincial court.

Dianne Saxe, a Toronto lawyer who specializes in environmental issues, said she would be very surprised if Mr. Hanna wins his case. She said he is stretching the precautionary principle beyond what it actually covers. And the government "should have no trouble at all proving that it considered the health concerns of the anti-wind activists, because they were very vocal," even appearing at legislative committee meetings, she said.

Ms. Saxe thinks it is likely the court will deal only with the narrow legal aspects of the case and not make any substantial ruling on the health effects of wind turbine placement.

 

Note - A similar type of argument could be made against cell phone antennas!

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

"Waubra Death Trip": How Big Wind Killed a Community (Australia ...

Several people we spoke with are concerned their health problems may be ... the wind 'farm', but they did not raise their concerns because they were told by ...

http://www.windturbinesyndrome.com/news/2011/waubra-death-trip-how-big-wind-killed-a-community-australia/

 

To sign up for WEEP News: newssignup@weepinitiative.org  (provide name and e-mail address)

W.E.E.P. – The Canadian initiative to stop Wireless Electrical and Electromagnetic Pollution

Sunday, January 23, 2011

THE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT (1999) / Waking Up To Hazards of CFLs? / Cure for Tinnitus ? / Disconnect to Connect / RadiationPark

W.E.E.P. News

Wireless Electrical and Electromagnetic Pollution News 

24 January 2011

 

THE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT (1999)

Implementing the Precautionary Principle:

http://s.cela.ca/files/uploads/504_CEPA_Review.pdf

CEPA requires the government to apply the precautionary principle such that "… where

there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall

not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental

degradation."

-----------------------------

The Precautionary Principle

Collection of publications on this topic

http://www.cela.ca/collections/pollution/precautionary-principle

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Is Congress Finally Waking Up To Hazards of CFLs?
 
by Bob Unruh, Wordnet Daily
January 9, 2011

Congress apparently is waking up to the concept that Americans are fully capable of making their own choice about the type of light bulbs they use, and the dangers that are presented by the so-called "green" compact fluorescents the Democrat majority mandated for public use a few years back.

A team of some 15 members of the U.S. House has introduced, and is working for support of the Better Use of Light Bulbs Act, H.R. 91, which simply would repeal Subtitle B of Title III of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, "which is a de facto ban on the incandescent light bulb."

That ban on incandescents is scheduled to take effect fully in 2012.

Claiming that incandescents were bigger consumers of energy than compact fluorescent bulbs, Congress banned their existence in favor of the CFLs. There has been, ever since, a wave of opposition because of the government's decision to micromanage light bulb choices, as well as the possible dangers from those CFLs.

Reps. Joe Barton, R-Texas; Michael Burgess, R-Texas; and Marsha Blackburn, R-Tennessee, were among the 15 House members to introduce the plan.

Phyllis Schlafly, founder and president of Eagle Forum, applauded their work.

"When Elena Kagan was asked in her confirmation hearing by Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., if it would be constitutional for the government to order all of us to eat 'three fruits and three vegetables every day,' she evaded answering. She is part of the progressive Obama administration that is committed to the unconstitutional notion that government should tell us how to spend our own money and live our lives, even within our own homes," Schlafly wrote.

"The essence of Obamacare is forcing individual Americans to buy health insurance they don't want. Federal Judge Henry Hudson just ruled it is unconstitutional to force Americans to buy health insurance, and we shouldn't be forced to buy light bulbs we don't want."

Besides, look at the known dangers from CFLs, she wrote.

"CFLs are so toxic because of the mercury in the glass tubing that the cleanup procedure spelled out by the Environmental Protection Agency is downright scary. The EPA warns that if we break a CFL, we must take the pieces to a recycling center and not launder 'clothing or bedding because mercury fragments in the clothing may contaminate the machine and/or pollute sewage,'" she wrote.

"CFLs must be rather dangerous if they will pollute the sewage," she said.

Burgess told WND the ban on incandescents, signed into law by President Bush, "was one of those areas Congress clearly overstepped its authority."

He said he fought the ban back in 2007 in subcommittee, in committee and on the U.S. House floor, unsuccessfully. But he said the measure actually would be counterproductive.

He cited a home construction project he was involved with where dimmer switches were installed through the structure to save electricity. However, CFLs don't work with dimmer switches.

"We were making a responsible decision about how much energy to purchase," he said, "and then the government says that 'we're going to tell you how much you can use.'"

"This is about more than just energy consumption, it is about personal freedom. Voters sent us a message in November that it is time for politicians and activists in Washington to stop interfering in their lives and manipulating the free market. The light bulb ban is the perfect symbol of that frustration. People don't want Congress dictating what light fixtures they can use," said Barton.

"Traditional incandescent bulbs are cheap and reliable. Alternatives, including the most common replacement Compact Fluorescent Lights or CFLs, are more expensive and health hazards – so why force them on the American people? From the health insurance you're allowed to have, to the car you can drive, to the light bulbs you can buy, Washington is making too many decisions that are better left to you and your family," Barton said.

"These are the kinds of regulations that make the American people roll their eyes. It is typical of a 'big Washington' solution to a non-existent problem. In this case it manifests itself as an overreach into every American home, one that ships good jobs overseas and infuriates the American consumer," added Blackburn.

Other co-sponsors include: Reps. Todd Akin, R-Mo.; Rob Bishop, R-Utah; Paul Broun, R-Ga.; Ann Marie Buerkle, R-New York; Dan Burton, R-Ind.; Howard Coble, R-N.C.; Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo.; Tom McClintock, R-Calif.; Ron Paul, R-Texas; Steve Scalise, R-La.; Cliff Stearns, R-Fla.; and Don Young, R-Alaska.

The members of Congress noted the CFL drawbacks:

  • Most CFLs are not manufactured in the United States. A recent Washington Post story reported that GE is shuttering a plant in Winchester, Va., killing 200 jobs in the process.
  • CFLs contain mercury and have to be disposed of carefully. The amount of mercury in one bulb is enough to contaminate up to 6,000 gallons of water beyond safe drinking levels. The EPA recommends an elaborate cleanup ritual, including throwing away any clothes or bedding that has come in direct contact with the mercury from the bulb.
  • CFLs are not designed to be turned off and on frequently; the lifespan of a CFL may be reduced by up to 85 percent if you switch it off and on a lot.
  • People with certain health conditions can be harmed by CFLs. Reactions range from disabling eczema-like reactions, to light sensitivities that can lead to skin cancer.
  • And the Energy Star program warns that CFLs can overheat and smoke.

The course reversal being considered now in Congress already has been endorsed by talk radio icon Rush Limbaugh.

"One of the first things the Democrat Congress did when they were sworn in and took the oath in 2007 was this light bulb ban," Limbaugh said recently. "So I think symbolically one of the first things we ought to do is repeal it. ...

"The government ought to have not a damn thing to say about the light bulb I buy.  It's none of their business, especially when this is based on a total, freaking hoax [climate change]."

"It insults my intelligence that so many people can be made to believe that light bulbs could destroy or irreparably harm something as complex and out of our control as the climate!" he shouted. "I don't care if there are billions of light bulbs on at the same time. I don't care. It's not a factor."

Lavone

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Cure for Tinnitus ?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1346532/Tinnitus-cure-How-high-pitched-music-ring-changes.html

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Disconnect to Connect - (dtac Thailand TVC)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17ZrK2NryuQ

Bob

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

RadiationPark

Another crime against humanity, and what a insult to natives (monument to Native Americans).

Every year, more than 1,000 schoolchildren make field trips to the park as part of their environmental education programs

http://www.nctimes.com/news/local/oceanside/article_4a2857da-3137-53f8-8df3-3000632bd74f.html

 

To sign up for WEEP News: newssignup@weepinitiative.org  (provide name and e-mail address)

W.E.E.P. – The Canadian initiative to stop Wireless Electrical and Electromagnetic Pollution