|
This document concerns
cell service in Mendocino. It is presented for
two audiences - visitors who wonder why they
cannot use their cell phones in most of the
Mendocino area and for local residents who have
an interest in the technology and its potential
hazards.
In December, 2004, Edge Wireless
switched on a GSM antenna located about 40 feet
above sea level below a house across Mendocino
Bay from the town. Service is now available
in Mendocino. Customers of Edge, Cingular, and
companies using similar technologies having
roaming agreements with Edge Wireless can now
use their phones in an area of less than a square
mile. Marginal GSM service is also available
at The Stanford Inn. Additionally, in December,
2006, a CDMA antenna began service at the Stanford
Inn providing Verizon-type signals for the Inn
and the town.
The benefits of cellular
phones are well known - accidents and medical
emergencies can be reported when traveling without
having to find a land-line phone; children can
call their parents and report where they are
or ask for a ride; and families and businesses
can reach traveling parents or principals. There
are some people who feel that these benefits
do not out way the hazards of the technology.
It is these people who have worked to keep cellular
service out of Mendocino. They have not been
totally successful.
Mendocino Cellular
Signals
Edge Wireless' GSM signal and the
CDMA signal from the Inn provide connection
for Edge-Cingular, Verizon, Sprint and US Cellular.
Taken together, these companies provide the
the full range of signals used in the United
States with the exception of those by Nextel.
These signals are CDMA - a technology by Qualcom
- and used by Verizon, Sprint and US Cellular,
and TDMA-GSM used by Edge, ATT, Cingular, T-Mobile.
GSM is the current European standard and CDMA
is prevalent in Africa and China. TDMA is a
technology which overtime will not be supported.
Although Mendocino is a
rural area and preeminent destination for North
Coast travelers, Mendocino remains primarily
cellular free through the activism of a tiny
group.
Health Effects
and Emotional Arguments
A very small group of ardent
anti-cell activists are persuaded that cellular
technology is dangerous. They fervently believe
that "radiation smog" is damaging them and is
the source of a multitude of illnesses. A small
group of local citizens are sympathetic and
are moved by the anti-cell folks' emotional
arguments. One of the activists recently wrote
the Mendocino Beacon from his car 'somewhere
in New Mexico' in an attempt to find an area
free of radiation. There is little validated
science supporting the claims of the anti-cell
activists especially with regard to cellular
base stations. Nevertheless, many of their local
supporters find science to be unemotional and
uninteresting as well as difficult to read and
understand.
A Little Science
Cell phones operate within
a range of frequencies called microwaves, 300
thousand cycles per second (hertz) and higher.
Unlike X-rays, the microwaves are non-ionizing.
In 2000, responding to a review of scientific
studies of the biological effects of non-ionizing
microwave radiation, Britain’s National
Radiological Protection Board in concert with
their Health Protection Agency called for another
review of studies "on the biological effects
of non-ionising radiation relevant to human
health and to advise on research priorities.”
On January 14th, 2004, the Associated
Press reported the results of the study: The
British government determined that "cell phones
pose no cancer risk," but, "long-term research
[is] still needed." The report Health Effects from Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Waves (this
is a link which you may click on)
evaluated peer reviewed, scientific studies.
Generally, the report absolved antenna sites,
or base stations, as health hazards, but suggested
handset use might be problematic.
More
recently a Danish study released in December
2006 suggests that cell phone use does not cause
cancer. Surveying data on 420,095 Danes who
have been using cell phones for 7-20 years,
researchers found 14,249 incidents of cancers,
a lower incidence than would be expected in
the population. However, the disparity could
be caused by the fact that early adopters of
a technology tend to be among the intelligentsia
of a society and a recent British study demonstrates
that individuals choosing to become vegetarian
tend to have higher IQs. Vegetarians tend to
have less disease, including cancer and especially
chronic disease. The Danish study has not eliminated
other lifestyle variations affecting cancer.
Serious Warnings
1. A Problem with
Older Technology
With regard to handset
use, Reuters, on October 15th, 2004 reported
that a Finish study demonstrated that "ten or
more years of mobile phone use increases the
risk of developing acoustic neuroma, a benign
tumor on the auditory nerve." However, Rueters
notes that the study was done after a period
when powerful analog phones had been in use
for more than a decade. The institute, a medical
university and research center which awards
the Nobel Prize in medicine, reported that their
research could not determine if newer GSM digital
technology would produce similar tumors. GSM
is the technology use by Cingular, T-Mobile
and other companies. The Finish study found
that the risk of acoustic neuroma was almost
twice for cellular customers who started using
cell phones at least ten years prior to diagnosis.
The primary effect of cellular
radiation is thermal. Microwaves are absorbed
by water molecules, essentially heating them
as in a microwave oven. The heat spreads into
the tissues and can lead to a breakdown of the
blood-brain barrier. Of course, one may easily
avoid the thermal effect by using an earphone
and by staying out of the sun and avoiding a
heat stroke when on a long call.
2.
Indeterminate Results - Power is not all there
is.
Digital
signals, although generally weaker, may not
be safer than analog signals. Louis Slesin,
editor of Microwave News notes that
research demonstrates that digital pulsed signals
are more "biologically active" and
may react in the body more strongly.
One
of the reports we reviewed in our continuing
exploration of potential health effects of cellular
technology was Henry Lai and Narendra Singh's studies of the effects
of "safe" microwave radiation on rats' brains,
reviewed in the University of Washington Alumni
Magazine.
Lai and Singh found that two hours'
exposure to FCC "safe" levels of microwave
radiation caused the destruction of DNA in rats'
brain cells. They compared rats exposed to a
low dose of microwave radiation for two hours
to a control group of rats that spent the same
amount of time in the exposure device, but didn't
receive any radiation. The exposed rats showed
30 percent increase in breaks in DNA compared
to the control group. It is not clear if the
damaged DNA would lead to any other than cell
death or cell repair. Other experiments did
not find an exact correlation between duration,
power and damage. In fact, this indeterminacy
is common in biological systems: "It happens
with chemicals. One dose can do one thing, while
a higher or lower dose does the opposite,"
according to Jerry Phillips who reviewed the
studies for Motorola and suggests that research
be undertaken into repair methods.
3. Warnings from a Technical
Writer - The Handset
Molly Wood, senior editor
of CNET.com compares the cell phone industry to big tobacco
in The Buzz Report - The Cell Phone Industry: Big Tobacco 2.0?.
She notes that recent studies
suggest that the cell phones can be harmful
to users, citing some of the work we studied
while exploring the safety of cell phone technology,
for example, Lai and Singh's studies of rats'
brains. Wood lists additional "bad news"
for the cellular industry.
Research must be funded
and encouraged, however, as Wood points out,
cell manufacturers are attempting to discredit
research such as Lai and Singh's and uses economic
muscle to discourage research in universities.
These and other studies suggest that cell
phones might be harmful - "even cancer causing."This
is one of the first high profile articles written
about the safety of the industry. Molly Wood's
article in a major on-line technology journal
is a harpoon, unfortunately, this harpoon is
more like a neutron passing through the earth
than even a mosquito bite. Cell phone users
are unphased, if even aware of the potential
dangers.
4.
Handsets: Cellular and Home Remote Phones
In addition, a comparative
analysis of cell and other wireless technologies
such as walkie talkies and remote phones used
in the home, reports that the standard 2.4 gHz
remote telephone used in the home operates at
20% of the FCC's maximum public exposure - MPE.
The average Motorola cell phone operates at
5% MPE.
The
research we undertook such as that noted above
suggests that cell phones and remote handsets
for home phones should be used with caution.
British health officials urge children 8 or
younger not use them. For adults, whenever possible,
headsets,wired preferably, or the phone's speakerphone
should be used during a call.
5.
Manners, Health and a Warning from a Cellular
Manufacturer
LG Cellular Phones writes
in its User Guides that base stations
operate at higher wattage than handsets, but
are so designed that "the RF exposures
that people get from these base stations are
typically thousands of times lower than those
they can get from wireless phones."
LG then goes on to suggest the use of a headset.
The anti-cellular people
are fighting base stations, but for many the
real issue is manners: they are upset by ringing
phones in restaurants, movie theatres and other
public places. Many users, hearing static on
their phones, yell into to phone and disturb
others. And an often heard silly complaint comes
from those who eavesdrop - they don't like the
inane conversations they hear.
The fight against base
stations whether for unsupported health concerns
or because of manners has diverted attention,
at least in the coastal area of Mendocino County,
from the need to properly use cellular handsets
where they can be used. The antennas within
or on the phones require that the phone be held
at a correct angle, that the phone not be held
by the antenna and that it never be used if
the antenna is damaged. Proper use is critical
to maintain the antenna's distance from the
brain. For longer calls, headsets or speakerphone
options should be used. And as stated above,
children should not be allowed to use the phones
at least until more definitive research is completed,
assuming that it has even begun.
These
issues regard handsets. This article has to
do with base stations, or the lack of them along
the Mendocino Coast.
Base Stations in
Mendocino: Manipulation of the Planning Process
The lack of cell service
is in part due to the difficult route taken
to get approval for cell sites in Mendocino
County. Almost all cell sites require separate
use permits. After a site is found and an agreement
reached with the owner for the siting of antennas,
a plan is created, engineered and submitted
to the County's planning department with a request
for a use permit. The use permit is subject
to a public hearing before the Planning Commission at which time a variety
of issues can be addressed by the public and
the Commission.
Co-location of
antennas - the confusion between a tower and
an antenna
Co-location is a huge issue.
The Mendocino County planning commission issued
guidelines for the placement of antennas. One
such guideline is that where there is one tower,
there should be several antennas mounted, in
effect directing that there be less sites, with
each site carrying the signals of all the providers
in the area. Towers are not particularly an
option in the Coastal Zone. Special rules exist
to protect the scenic beauty. These rules have
caused cellular companies to develop stealth
sites hiding the antennas in water towers, chimneys
or other building sofits, man-made trees, etc.
The stealth site immediately eliminates the
basis of ganging antennas on towers - that is,
protection of scenic values by limiting towers.
Planning meetings are often
consumed by issues such as co-location. In 1996,
the Federal Government passed the Telecommunications
Act that authorized the Federal Communications
Commission to be the primary agency responsible
for determining safe levels of electromagnetic
radiation. Those who believe that "radiation
smog" is dangerous have had to find other grounds
on which to fight the installation of cellular
antennas. One of these is co-location.
How it has worked is that
a stealth site is found, a permit applied for
and a condition of the permit is that the site
owners allow the siting of other cell services.
Most of the sites are small and can only serve
a single company and because only one company
can be served, opponents claim that the owners
are in breach of the use permit.
What We Are Doing
We entered into an agreement
to lease chimney space to a cellular company
on the condition they provide a public relations
effort to proactively inform the public regarding
the efficacy, safety as well as proper use of
the technology.
Principals at the company
did not believe that such an effort was necessary
and we were exposed to protests and other assorted
hysterics.
In the meantime, we fully
understand the need for cellular phones. In
fact we can only leave the inn because the staff
can reach us in case of emergencies through
this technology and we have all three major
services, CDMA, TDMA and GSM. The only system
we are not signed up with is Nextel which is
not in many rural areas.
If guests have a cellular
phone which is neither Edge or Cincular, we
suggest they try driving out onto the ridges.
To accommodate communications at the inn we
have voice mail and offer free local calls and
long distance calls throughout the United States
cost only $0.30 a minute, about the same as
within a cellular plan.
Cellular Technology
and Our Vision of an Organic Lifestyle
Cellular technology is
not antithetical to organic farming.
We embraced natural lifestyles,
low impact recreation, organics many years ago,
in fact long before terms such as "green hotels,"
"eco-tourism" were in the popular lexicon. When
we embraced cellular technology, we stunned
local activists who understand the difficulties
they have encountered in their lives as the
result of modern lifestyles, in particular cellular
radiation.
We chose to partner with
a cellular telephone company understanding that
we would help to bring an important technology
to Mendocino. We intended to supply our staff
with cell phones rather than walkie talkies
which, by the way, peaked radiation meters when
activated while cell phones were hardly measurable.
With ten acres, nine major structures, and very
few phone lines, we embraced cell phones as
a better way to communicate.
Opponents of the technology
wrote and called us telling us to "stick with
organic farming; something you know about!"
We also know about cell phones and in our intended
use of the technology we planned to supply headsets
and a rule sheet regarding the proper technical
and cultural uses of the phones.
We use a backhoe to turn
our compost, which is used throughout the property
for fertilizer, and diesel powered trucks fueled
with biodiesel made with deep fat frying oil,
rather than spend hundreds of grueling man hours
in the compost piles and horses and carriages
for transportation. In other words, we have
chosen modern methods but have mitigated some
of their harmful effects.
Cell phones have a similar place
on an organic farm. |