May 30th
2008
Many years
ago, as some of you will remember, the media
were all over the fact that an electric blanket
produced a pretty
hefty electromagnetic
field and these blankets should be turned
off when you went to bed, because it wasn't
a good idea to
bathe in radiation while
you slept. That whole affair seems to have
faded to nothing, possibly because electric blankets
are
a thing of the past. Whether
the bum warmers in your car seats produce
the same effect, is an unknown at this point.
Next up was the kafuffle
over high-tension power lines, which when
strung over farmers' fields caused cows to abort,
or stop
producing milk. The electromagnetic
radiation these lines
produce can be easily detected when you
drive below them as your
radio will momentarily
stop working.
When microwave ovens first
arrived, the standing advice was to stay
away from them while they were working and
not to peer
through the window at your
food as it rotated on its little stand.
In this case, it's microwave radiation that is the
concern, but it's
still a case of the unsuspecting
public being subjected to radiation
without their full knowledge.
Then, of course, the cellular
phone showed up and the jury is still
out on whether your brain is subjected to enough
electromagnetic
radiation to do you any
real harm. Although, The Russian National Committee
on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection says
that use
of the phones by both pregnant
women and children should be "limited".
It concludes that children who talk on the
handsets are
likely to suffer from "disruption
of memory, decline of attention, diminishing
learning and cognitive abilities, increased
irritability"
in the short term, and
that long-term hazards include "depressive
syndrome" and "degeneration of the nervous
structures of
the brain".
I know of one case where
a car owner who parked in a particular
spot, used to come back to find his trunk lid
was open.
The lid was openable from
a distance by remote and at that particular
place, some random, stray radiation was on the
same
wavelength as his remote.
So we are surrounded and unsuspecting
of the electromagnetic
radiation that is ever increasing
every day.
Many scientists and policy
makers agree that hybrid vehicles may
be good for the planet.
To a large and insistent
group of skeptics, however, there is
another, more immediate question:
Are hybrids and eventually
fully electric cars, healthy for drivers?
There is a legitimate
scientific reason for raising the issue.
The flow of electrical current to the motor that
moves a hybrid
vehicle at low speeds
(and assists the gasoline engine on the
highway) produces magnetic fields, which some
studies
have associated with serious
health matters, including a possible risk
of leukaemia among children.
With the batteries and
power cables in hybrids often placed close
to the driver and passengers, some exposure
to
electromagnetic fields
is unavoidable. Moreover, the exposure will
be prolonged — unlike, say, using a hair dryer
or electric shaver — for
drivers who spend hours each day at the
wheel.
Some hybrid owners have
actually tested their cars for electromagnetic
fields using hand-held meters, and some
say
they are alarmed by the
results.
Their concern is not
without merit; agencies including the National
Institutes of Health and the National Cancer
Institute
acknowledge the potential
hazards of long term exposure to a strong
electromagnetic field, or E.M.F., and have
done
studies on the association
of cancer risks with living near high-voltage
utility lines.
While we live with E.M.F.’s
all around — produced by everything
from cellphones to electric blankets — there is
no broad agreement over
what level of exposure constitutes a health
hazard, and there is no federal standard that
sets
allowable exposure levels.
Government safety tests do not measure
the strength of the fields in vehicles — though
Honda
and Toyota, the dominant
hybrid makers, say their internal checks
assure that their cars pose no added risk to
occupants,
as you would expect. But
that's like sending the fox to guard the
hen house.
Researchers with expertise
in hybrid car issues say that while there
may not be cause for alarm, neither should
the potential
health effects be ignored.
Charges that automobiles
expose occupants to strong electromagnetic
fields were made even before hybrids
became
popular. In 2002, a Swedish
magazine claimed its tests found that
three gasoline powered Volvo models produced
high
E.M.F. levels. Volvo countered
that the magazine had compared the
measurements with stringent standards advanced
by
a Swedish labour organization,
not the more widely accepted criteria
established by the International Commission on
Non Ionizing Radiation
Protection, a group of independent
scientific experts based near Munich.
The concern over high E.M.F.
levels in hybrids has come not just
from worrisome instrument readings, but also
from drivers
who say that their hybrids
make them ill.
One lady in New York, bought
a new Honda Civic Hybrid in 2007 for
the 200 miles a week she drove to visit grocery
stores
in her merchandising job
for a supermarket chain. She said that
the car reduced her gasoline use, but there were
problems
— her blood pressure rose
and she fell asleep at the wheel three
times, narrowly averting accidents.
I never had a sleepiness
problem before, she said, adding that
it was her own conclusion, not a doctors,
that the car was
causing the symptoms.
She asked Honda to provide
her with shielding material for protection
from the low frequency fields, but the company
declined
her request last August,
saying that its hybrid cars are “thoroughly
evaluated” for E.M.F.’s before going into
production.
The lady's response was
to have the car tested by a person she
called her wellness consultant, using a TriField
meter.
The TriField meter is
made by AlphaLab in Salt Lake City. The company
defends its use for automotive testing even
though the meter is set
up to test alternating current fields,
whereas the power moving to and from a hybrid
vehicle’s
battery is direct current.
Generally, an A.C. meter is accurate
in detecting large electromagnetic fields or
microwaves.
Testing with a TriField
meter led one Californian to sell his
2001 Honda Insight just six months after he
bought it
— at a loss of $7,000.
He said the driver was receiving “dangerously
high” E.M.F. levels of up to 135 milligauss
at the
hip and up to 100 milligauss
at the upper torso. These figures contrasted
sharply with results from his Volkswagen
van,
which measured one to two
milligauss.
He said he tried to interest
Honda in the problem in 2001, but was
assured that his car was safe. He purchased shielding
made of a nickel-iron
alloy, but because of high installation
costs decided to sell the car instead.
Honda points to the lack
of a federally mandated standard for E.M.F.’s
in cars. Despite this Honda takes the matter
seriously.
“All our tests had results
that were well below the commission’s
standard,” referring to the European guidelines.
Kent Shadwick, controller
of purchasing services for the York Catholic
District School Board in York, Ontario,
evaluated the
Toyota Prius for fleet
use. Mr. Shadwick said it was tested at
various speeds, and under hard braking and
rapid acceleration,
using a professional quality
gauss meter.
“The results that we
saw were quite concerning,” he said. “We
saw high levels in the vehicle for both
the driver and left rear
passenger, which has prompted
us to explore shielding options and
to consider advocating testing of different makes
and
models of hybrid vehicles.”
Donald B. Karner, president
of Electric Transportation Applications
in Phoenix, who tested E.M.F. levels in battery
electric
cars for the Energy Department
in the 1990s, said it was hard to evaluate
readings without knowing how the testing was
done.
He also said it was a problem
to determine a danger level for low frequency
radiation, in part because dosage is determined
not only by proximity
to the source, but by duration of exposure.
“We’re exposed to radio waves from the
time we’re born,
but there’s a general
belief that there’s so little energy in
them that they’re not dangerous,” he said.
Mr. Karner has developed
a procedure for testing hybrids, but
he said that the cost — about $5,000 a vehicle
— had prevented its use.
A consultant with a speciality
in E.M.F.’s and electrical sensitivity,
was one of the electrical engineers who tested
the Insight in 2001.
He agreed that the readings
were high but did not want to speculate
on whether they were harmful. “There are big
blocks of high amp
power being moved around
in a hybrid, the equivalent of horsepower,”
he said. “I get a lot of clients who ask if
they should buy hybrid
electric cars, and I say
the jury is still out.”