|
|
Post by d204mom on Feb 25, 2008 20:20:13 GMT -6
I'm also curious why it's OK for an entire subdivision to be built under main towers running through the suburbs. sushi - Was it you or someone else on the board that was instrumental in gettting Patterson moved away from the power lines? sorry sushi I had you confused with forthekids - from Nov 6 2007: A funny story that a lot of people aren't aware of because most involved have moved away. I was one of a handful of people (Paul Lehman being one of them) who helped convince the school board in 1990 not to build Patterson near the power lines. Due to the extensive research our group had done, the original school site was moved to its current site. The experts we had spoken with all concurred that if you didn't have to build near power lines, you shouldn't. Now, of course, the shoe is on the other foot and Paul Lehman (for strictly financial reasons) is happy to have the district build a school near power lines. They are now, after all, "his" power lines, so it's OK. I haven't researched this topic in years but I bet if someone went out to the site with a gauss meter, they would find the readings are probably pretty high. The questions still remains, are EMF's dangerous to children's health? I don't have the answer and I certainly wouldn't trust ComEd to give it to me. ipsd204.proboards76.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=newhighschool&thread=1193616943&page=22Post #316 |
|
|
|
Post by twhl on Feb 25, 2008 20:32:41 GMT -6
EMF's are everywhere....so I do not believe BB would be a 0. I wonder what the readings are inside our 2 existing HS's? This is why I mentioned the sliding scale as one goes away from 0. Lower being better is the accepted logic. I don't believe BB is 0 either as there are 2-4 lines out by 75th street. That is a fewer number than the ones bordering MWGEN and I believe they are lower voltage lines too, but I will have to dig up my ComEd infrastructure PDF file that has the capacities. Another thing of interest is that the higher readings at MWGEN came from being on top of the 3 pipelines through the property. They supposedly have cathodic protection, which is an electrical current system that charges the pipes and has an 'anode' elsewhere on the property that the current is drawn towards. Those readings varied from 4.2, 6.2 and 7.2 along the pipes. So, there appears to be some correlation between the pipelines running where the athletic fields will be and the higher EMF readings on the property. Interesting, eh? They may in effect be acting as antennas. without properly calibrated test equip, hard to tell. measuring for 60Hz is not easy but can be done. |
|
|
|
Post by d204mom on Feb 25, 2008 20:34:52 GMT -6
Another thing of interest is that the higher readings at MWGEN came from being on top of the 3 pipelines through the property. They supposedly have cathodic protection, which is an electrical current system that charges the pipes and has an 'anode' elsewhere on the property that the current is drawn towards. Those readings varied from 4.2, 6.2 and 7.2 along the pipes. So, there appears to be some correlation between the pipelines running where the athletic fields will be and the higher EMF readings on the property. Interesting, eh? Got it. That's why the higher readings weren't concentrated in the parking lots like ENVIRON expected - they are on the athletic fields. The ENVIRON report mentions that no testing was done past the far north end of the expected school site because they assumed the elevated EMFs would all be due to the power lines. I sure hope they come back out and do some more readings now that they know the pipeline areas are well over 2.4mG. Won't kids be in the athletic fields for extended periods of time? ? |
|
|
|
Post by twhl on Feb 25, 2008 20:37:08 GMT -6
Ask A Scientist© Biology Archive -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dangerous electromagnetic fields?Question: Why are electromagnetic fields supposedly dangerous? Tommy T Joseph Answer: I assume you are asking about power line frequency (60 Hz) fields, since they have been in the news lately. No one knows for sure that they are dangerous. There have been a few studies which seem to show an association between how close homes are to power lines, and the incidence of childhood cancer (mostly leukemia) in children living (or who have lived) in those homes. Other similar studies have not found such an association. In all the studies which have found an association, none has actually measured the fields. Studies which actually have measured the fields find no association. There is no known mechanism for 60 Hz fields to cause cancer. Furthermore, the classic "dose-response relationship," that is, the greater the dose, the greater the response, does not seem to work here. Many laboratory studies have found that 60 Hz fields have an effect on organisms under certain conditions, but none of the observed effects can be convincingly related to a hazard. The bottom line is, no one knows for sure. It is important to realize that it is impossible to prove that anything is completely safe. My personal opinion is that, if there is a risk, it must be very small, or it wouldn't be so hard to prove. I can supply some good unbiased references if you are interested. Gary E Myers -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NEWTON is an electronic community for Science, Math, and Computer Science K-12 Educators. Argonne National Laboratory, Division of Educational Programs, Harold Myron, Ph.D., Division Director. I might suggest that putting your head too close to a microwave is generally not advisable. I can get as many Mrs. Myers to make the same claim but take the opposing position. MRI Lab techs have to wear lead jackets and stand behind lead walls because of the probability of repeated exposures will cause molecular structure damage. MRI operate such that they change the polarity of all your body cells and can be measured by the rate in which they reverse poles back to their normal position. |
|
|
|
Post by JB on Feb 25, 2008 20:38:56 GMT -6
While I agree we need to limit the detrimental effects of EMF's. It seems lacking on what level is considered detrimental. In keeping with our "just the facts" (no FUD) philosophy here, I did a bit of research. I've found several dozen citations this link: www.powerlinefacts.com/EMF.htm This is a clip from one of the sources, the British Medical Journal, that appears to start to define what level is considered detrimental. ============================================= A major new study ( www.powerlinefacts.com/British%20Medical%20Journal%20June%202005.pdf ) found that children whose birth address was within 200 meters of an overhead power line had a 70% increased risk of leukemia. Children living 200 to 600 meters away from power lines had a 20% increased risk. This indicates the danger from power lines is appreciably further from the lines than had been identified in previous studies. The study, which was partially funded by the power-line industry, mapped how far each child lived from a high voltage overhead power line. It compared the children who had cancer with a control group of 29,000 children without cancer, but who lived in comparable districts, Appearing in the June 2005 British Medical Journal, the study concludes there is a statistical link between EMF from power lines and leukemia. ============================================= Granted, this is for kids living in the area vs. going to school there, but there is a body of evidence which suggest powerlines and EMF are an issue. I'm not sure why we're risking our children's health. I also found a complilation of probably 100 older citations ( 1985-2000 ) here: www.feb.se/Bridlewood/index.html |
|
|
|
Post by twhl on Feb 25, 2008 20:39:13 GMT -6
Another thing of interest is that the higher readings at MWGEN came from being on top of the 3 pipelines through the property. They supposedly have cathodic protection, which is an electrical current system that charges the pipes and has an 'anode' elsewhere on the property that the current is drawn towards. Those readings varied from 4.2, 6.2 and 7.2 along the pipes. So, there appears to be some correlation between the pipelines running where the athletic fields will be and the higher EMF readings on the property. Interesting, eh? Got it. That's why the higher readings weren't concentrated in the parking lots like ENVIRON expected - they are on the athletic fields. The ENVIRON report mentions that no testing was done past the far north end of the expected school site because they assumed the elevated EMFs would all be due to the power lines. I sure hope they come back out and do some more readings now that they know the pipeline areas are well over 2.4mG. Won't kids be in the athletic fields for extended periods of time? ? To make the test valid, they need to have the same calibrated equipment in order to minimize the variables, and I can pretty much guess that wont happen. |
|
|
|
Post by d204mom on Feb 25, 2008 20:41:43 GMT -6
Got it. That's why the higher readings weren't concentrated in the parking lots like ENVIRON expected - they are on the athletic fields. The ENVIRON report mentions that no testing was done past the far north end of the expected school site because they assumed the elevated EMFs would all be due to the power lines. I sure hope they come back out and do some more readings now that they know the pipeline areas are well over 2.4mG. Won't kids be in the athletic fields for extended periods of time? ? To make the test valid, they need to have the same calibrated equipment in order to minimize the variables, and I can pretty much guess that wont happen. I guess I don't understand. The pipelines invalidated the test results? Shouldn't ENVIRON know that? |
|
|
|
Post by twhl on Feb 25, 2008 20:44:09 GMT -6
Am I the only mom that won't let her kids in front of the microwave when it's on? My parents wouldn't let any of us stand in front of it either when I was a kid. Thought everyone knew that? But whatever you do, don't put a magnet up to a monitor or TV cuz it will ruin it. Take an old one if you have it, so you can visualize what a small electromagnetic field can do. |
|
|
|
Post by d204mom on Feb 25, 2008 20:46:48 GMT -6
Am I the only mom that won't let her kids in front of the microwave when it's on? My parents wouldn't let any of us stand in front of it either when I was a kid. Thought everyone knew that? But whatever you do, don't put a magnet up to a monitor or TV cuz it will ruin it. Take an old one if you have it, so you can visualize what a small electromagnetic field can do. They have that experiment at SciTech!  |
|
|
|
Post by JB on Feb 25, 2008 20:47:50 GMT -6
sushi - Was it you or someone else on the board that was instrumental in gettting Patterson moved away from the power lines? sorry sushi I had you confused with forthekids - from Nov 6 2007: A funny story that a lot of people aren't aware of because most involved have moved away. I was one of a handful of people (Paul Lehman being one of them) who helped convince the school board in 1990 not to build Patterson near the power lines. Due to the extensive research our group had done, the original school site was moved to its current site. The experts we had spoken with all concurred that if you didn't have to build near power lines, you shouldn't. Now, of course, the shoe is on the other foot and Paul Lehman (for strictly financial reasons) is happy to have the district build a school near power lines. They are now, after all, "his" power lines, so it's OK. I haven't researched this topic in years but I bet if someone went out to the site with a gauss meter, they would find the readings are probably pretty high. The questions still remains, are EMF's dangerous to children's health? I don't have the answer and I certainly wouldn't trust ComEd to give it to me. ipsd204.proboards76.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=newhighschool&thread=1193616943&page=22Post #316 That group was in the Brindlewood compilation I just posted. Illinois - Aurora (1991) In Aurora, Illinois, in 1991, members of a group called Parents Against High Voltage Education persuaded school district officials to move the site of a new school away from the vicinity of high-voltage transmission lines. ==================== Couldn't find any more info on them, but nice snag of that old posting! |
|
|
|
Post by JB on Feb 25, 2008 20:59:10 GMT -6
This is why I mentioned the sliding scale as one goes away from 0. Lower being better is the accepted logic. I don't believe BB is 0 either as there are 2-4 lines out by 75th street. That is a fewer number than the ones bordering MWGEN and I believe they are lower voltage lines too, but I will have to dig up my ComEd infrastructure PDF file that has the capacities. Another thing of interest is that the higher readings at MWGEN came from being on top of the 3 pipelines through the property. They supposedly have cathodic protection, which is an electrical current system that charges the pipes and has an 'anode' elsewhere on the property that the current is drawn towards. Those readings varied from 4.2, 6.2 and 7.2 along the pipes. So, there appears to be some correlation between the pipelines running where the athletic fields will be and the higher EMF readings on the property. Interesting, eh? They may in effect be acting as antennas. without properly calibrated test equip, hard to tell. measuring for 60Hz is not easy but can be done. Basically, they are acting as antennas. I ran across this paper - I'm posting the partial abstract below, full pdf here: www.who.int/peh-emf/meetings/archive/en/paper02shwehdi.pdfProceedings of the International Conference on Non-Ionizing Radiation at UNITEN (ICNIR 2003) Electromagnetic Fields and Our Health 20th – 22nd October 2003 1 Transmission Line EMF Interference with Buried Pipeline: Essential & Cautions M. H. Shwehdi and U. M. Johar Electrical Engineering Department at King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia ABSTRACT Transmission lines are considered one of the major sources of magnetic field. In recent years electromagnetic field (EMF) interference with buried pipelines has been of great interest in the literature. The EMF interference on pipelines located in utility corridors is a real and serious problem which can place both operator safety and pipeline integrity at risk. Installing pipelines in energy utility corridors containing high-voltage AC transmission lines subjects the pipelines to induced AC voltages. This can be caused by an imbalance in the transmission system, and by high voltages near transmission tower grounding systems resulting from lightning strikes and phase faults. When a long-term induced AC voltage exists on a pipeline, it can be dangerous and potentially life-threatening for operations personnel to touch the pipeline or appurtenances. In addition, pipe corrosion also can result from AC discharge. |
|
|
|
Post by sleeplessinnpvl on Feb 25, 2008 21:04:57 GMT -6
Interesting info on the pipelines.
Does anyone know if any EMF studies were done on older kids, say 14-18 years? Obviously this is a concern, but younger kids have a lower tolerance threshold than an adult so I assume a high schooler would be in between.
|
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Feb 25, 2008 21:14:52 GMT -6
I have also heard that often a low electrical charge is induced in piplines to prevent corrosion.
|
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Feb 25, 2008 21:21:26 GMT -6
While I agree we need to limit the detrimental effects of EMF's. It seems lacking on what level is considered detrimental. In keeping with our "just the facts" (no FUD) philosophy here, I did a bit of research. I've found several dozen citations this link: www.powerlinefacts.com/EMF.htm This is a clip from one of the sources, the British Medical Journal, that appears to start to define what level is considered detrimental. ============================================= A major new study ( www.powerlinefacts.com/British%20Medical%20Journal%20June%202005.pdf ) found that children whose birth address was within 200 meters of an overhead power line had a 70% increased risk of leukemia. Children living 200 to 600 meters away from power lines had a 20% increased risk. This indicates the danger from power lines is appreciably further from the lines than had been identified in previous studies. The study, which was partially funded by the power-line industry, mapped how far each child lived from a high voltage overhead power line. It compared the children who had cancer with a control group of 29,000 children without cancer, but who lived in comparable districts, Appearing in the June 2005 British Medical Journal, the study concludes there is a statistical link between EMF from power lines and leukemia. ============================================= Granted, this is for kids living in the area vs. going to school there, but there is a body of evidence which suggest powerlines and EMF are an issue. I'm not sure why we're risking our children's health. I also found a complilation of probably 100 older citations ( 1985-2000 ) here: www.feb.se/Bridlewood/index.html Very interesting reading, however only distances were given, no EMF values cited. find me a report that says x EMF reading is bad and the confirming repeated test. I will consider jumping on your EMF bandwagon. |
|
|
|
Post by d204mom on Feb 25, 2008 21:25:53 GMT -6
sorry sushi I had you confused with forthekids - from Nov 6 2007: A funny story that a lot of people aren't aware of because most involved have moved away. I was one of a handful of people (Paul Lehman being one of them) who helped convince the school board in 1990 not to build Patterson near the power lines. Due to the extensive research our group had done, the original school site was moved to its current site. The experts we had spoken with all concurred that if you didn't have to build near power lines, you shouldn't. Now, of course, the shoe is on the other foot and Paul Lehman (for strictly financial reasons) is happy to have the district build a school near power lines. They are now, after all, "his" power lines, so it's OK. I haven't researched this topic in years but I bet if someone went out to the site with a gauss meter, they would find the readings are probably pretty high. The questions still remains, are EMF's dangerous to children's health? I don't have the answer and I certainly wouldn't trust ComEd to give it to me. ipsd204.proboards76.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=newhighschool&thread=1193616943&page=22Post #316 That group was in the Brindlewood compilation I just posted. Illinois - Aurora (1991) In Aurora, Illinois, in 1991, members of a group called Parents Against High Voltage Education persuaded school district officials to move the site of a new school away from the vicinity of high-voltage transmission lines. ==================== Couldn't find any more info on them, but nice snag of that old posting! Ah, politics in ol' d204. Wonder if an anti-group was formed "Parents for electromagnetic radiation" - PFER, you know, like "we'd p'fer the school in our neighborhood first" Parents Against High Voltage Education "PAHVE" - not so catchy. However, the groups with catchier names never convince the district to change anything, so maybe having a non-catchy name is the key. |
|
