Friday, May 5, 2023

An Exposé of the FCC: An Agency Captured by the Industries it Regulates

Click on graphic to enlarge. Posted with permission of Einar Flydal.

Environmental Procedures at the FCC: A Case Study in Corporate Capture

Erica Rosenberg (2022). Environmental Procedures at the FCC: A Case Study in Corporate Capture. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development. 64:5-6, 17-27, DOI: 10.1080/00139157.2022.2131190.

No abstract

"With infrastructure including millions of miles of fiber optic cable and lines, thousands of towers, earth stations and satellites, and hundreds of thousands of small cells, 1 the telecommunications industry leaves a significant environmental footprint: wetlands filled, viewsheds marred, cultural resources damaged, and habitat destroyed. As the agency overseeing telecommunications, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regulates radio, TV, satellite, cable, and both wireline and wireless communications—and associated entities like Verizon, AT&T, and broadcast and radio corporations. It also plays a critical role in providing universal broadband and telecommunications access, and authorizing facilities associated with wireline and wireless build-outs. Yet the FCC fails to fulfill its mandatory duties under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in multiple and significant ways. 2 ...."

Applicants and licensees submit no documentation of their determination that their project is categorically excluded, and the agency does not track categorically excluded actions. With the applicant conducting the initial environmental review of whether the project is categorically excluded by assessing the list of extraordinary circumstances (i.e., the NEPA checklist), as well as preparing the environmental assessment, the burden falls on the public to learn of the proposed action and to raise a potential effect.

But categorically excluded actions, including authorization of certain towers, do not receive public notice; only applications for towers that require registration (generally taller than 199 feet) are put on notice, and those may or may not have associated environmental assessments. In addition to towers under 200 feet not posing an air hazard, these stealth projects that the agency has no record of include small wireless facilities associated with 4G and 5G.

That the public has no access to this information is particularly problematic in the radio frequency context, where applicants are required to meet radio frequency emissions standards or submit an environmental assessment. If the applicants do analyze the checklist and radio frequency studies at all, they routinely categorically exclude small wireless facilities, despite growing public concern about radio frequency associated with such technologies. Without access to the documented checklist, the public has little to no basis on which to refute or comment on checklist conclusions on radio frequency. And given the streamlined process, citizens often find out about facilities only after they are built...."

"Conclusion: Prospects for a More Accountable FCC

Clearly, the FCC’s NEPA process falls short of what NEPA and Council on Environmental Quality require.

• It ignores major federal actions requiring environmental review, such as its distribution to industry of billions of dollars that support build-outs for updated wireless service, or improperly deems certain major federal actions non-major federal actions to circumvent NEPA.
• Its NEPA rules create an unsupported and overbroad categorical exclusion so that, for example, satellite licensing and submarine cable licensing are excluded from review.
• With little oversight or tracking, it delegates environmental review of NEPA determinations to industry proponents of the project.
• It fails to vigorously enforce its rules so that industry noncompliance is rampant.
• It fails to provide adequate notice and opportunities for public comment.
• It fails to make environmental documents, including radio frequency emissions studies, publicly available or readily accessible.
• It routinely ignores or dismisses public comments and concerns and places an unfair burden of proof on the public when it raises concerns.

These practices serve to facilitate deployment for carriers while ignoring environmental rules and the public. Besides environmental costs, the FCC’s approach bespeaks a lack of transparency and accountability that undermines good governance and erodes democracy. It also bespeaks an agency completely captured by the entities it is tasked with regulating.

Recent Biden-era NEPA implementing rules 60 require agencies to revisit their NEPA rules and procedures by September 2023. 61 They also require that the agencies have the capacity to comply with NEPA, 62 something the FCC has to date lacked. Perhaps when Council on Environmental Quality reviews the FCC’s procedures this time, it will scrutinize the rules more carefully and hold the agency to a higher standard for NEPA compliance."


The Corporate Takeover of the Trump-FCC Is in Full Attack Mode

Bruce Kushnick, HuffPost, Nov 9, 2017   (Part 1 of 2)

The Trump-FCC-AT&T-Et Al. Plan: The Insidious “Wheel of Mis-Fortune”

Bruce Kushnick, HuffPost, Nov 10, 2017   (Part 2 of 2)

Bruce Kushnick is the Executive Director of New Networks Institute (NNI), which was established in 1992, and a founding member of the IRREGULATORS, and has been a telecommunications analyst and visionary for over 35 years. During his career he has predicted that the addition of new technologies and networks would change the way we used the phone networks and he helped launch numerous interactive information markets and services that have now become commonplace.


June 26, 2015

Captured agency: How the Federal Communications Commission is dominated by the industries it presumably regulates

Alster, Norm. Captured agency: How the Federal Communications Commission is dominated by the industries it presumably regulates. Cambridge, MA:  Edmund J. Safra Center for Ethics, Harvard University.  2015. 

PDF:  (free)
Kindle: ($0.99 -- check out the book reviews)


This exposé provides insight into how the FCC became a victim of regulatory capture by industry and the implications of these corrupting influences for our health and safety, our privacy, and our wallets. 

This book concludes with a series of recommendations by its author, Norm Alster, an investigative journalist, who has written for the New York Times, Forbes, Business Week, and Investor’s Business Daily.  He wrote this book while serving as a journalism fellow with the Investigative Journalism Project at Harvard University.

Following are some excerpts that pertain to the wireless radiation industry and its corrupting influences on the FCC. I encourage you to read Mr. Alster's entire treatise.


A detailed look at FCC actions—and non-actions—shows that over the years the FCC has granted the wireless industry pretty much what it has wanted.

Money—and lots of it—has played a part ... In all, CTIA, Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile USA, and Sprint spent roughly $45 million lobbying in 2013. Overall, the Communications/Electronics sector is one of Washington‘s super heavyweight lobbyists, spending nearly $800 million in 2013-2014, according to CRP data.

As a result, consumer safety, health, and privacy, along with consumer wallets, have all been overlooked, sacrificed, or raided due to unchecked industry influence …. Most insidious of all, the wireless industry has been allowed to grow unchecked and virtually unregulated, with fundamental questions on public health impact routinely ignored. Industry control, in the case of wireless health issues, extends beyond Congress and regulators to basic scientific research. And in an obvious echo of the hardball tactics of the tobacco industry, the wireless industry has backed up its economic and political power by stonewalling on public relations and bullying potential threats into submission with its huge standing army of lawyers. In this way, a coddled wireless industry intimidated and silenced the City of San Francisco, while running roughshod over local opponents of its expansionary infrastructure.

… Currently presiding over the FCC is Tom Wheeler, a man who has led the two most powerful industry lobbying groups: CTIA and NCTA. It is Wheeler who once supervised a $25 million industry-funded research effort on wireless health effects. But when handpicked research leader George Carlo concluded that wireless radiation did raise the risk of brain tumors, Wheeler‘s CTIA allegedly rushed to muffle the message. ”You do the science. I‘ll take care of the politics,” Carlo recalls Wheeler saying.

Graphic: The revolving door between the FCC and industry

Tom Wheeler, former Head of CTIA & NCTA, is now FCC Chair.
Meredith Atwell Baker, former FCC Commissioner, is now head of CTIA.
Michael Powell, former FCC Chair, is now head of NCTA.
Jonathan Adelstein, former FCC Commissioner, is now head of PCIA, the Wireless Infrastructure Association.

Graphics: Top House and Senate recipients of cellular industry campaign contributions 

It all begins with passage of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, legislation once described … as “the most lobbied bill in history.” Late lobbying won the wireless industry enormous concessions from lawmakers, many of them major recipients of industry hard and soft dollar contributions. Congressional staffers who helped lobbyists write the new law did not go unrewarded. Thirteen of fifteen staffers later became lobbyists themselves.

In preempting local zoning authority—along with the public‘s right to guard its own safety and health—Congress unleashed an orgy of infrastructure build-out. Emboldened by the government green light and the vast consumer appetite for wireless technology, industry has had a free hand in installing more than 300,000 sites. Church steeples, schoolyards, school rooftops, even trees can house these facilities.

In a 2010 review of research on the biological effects of exposure to radiation from cell tower base stations, B. Blake Levitt and Henry Lai found that “some research does exist to warrant caution in infrastructure siting” ….

Beyond epidemiological studies, research on a wide range of living things raises further red flags. A 2013 study by the Indian scientists S. Sivani and D. Sudarsanam reports: “Based on current available literature, it is justified to conclude that RF-EMF [electromagnetic fields] radiation exposure can change neurotransmitter functions, blood-brain barrier, morphology, electrophysiology, cellular metabolism, calcium efflux, and gene and protein expression in certain types of cells even at lower intensities.”

… Citing other studies—often industry-funded—that fail to establish health effects, the wireless industry has dismissed such concerns. The FCC has typically echoed that position.

… since the passage of the 1996 law, the very opposite has occurred. Again and again both Congress and the FCC have opted to stiffen—rather than loosen—federal preemption over local zoning authority ….

… would consumers‘ embrace of cell phones and Wi-Fi be quite so ardent if the wireless industry, enabled by its Washington errand boys, hadn‘t so consistently stonewalled on evidence and substituted legal intimidation for honest inquiry?

The FCC in 1997 sent the message it has implicitly endorsed and conveyed ever since: study health effects all you want. It doesn‘t matter what you find. The build-out of wireless cannot be blocked or slowed by health issues.

… federal preemption is granted to pretty much any wireless outfit on just one simple condition: its installations must comply with FCC radiation emission standards. In view of this generous carte blanche to move radiation equipment into neighborhoods, schoolyards and home rooftops, one would think the FCC would at the very least diligently enforce its own emission standards. But that does not appear to be the case.

Indeed, one RF engineer who has worked on more than 3,000 rooftop sites found vast evidence of non-compliance. Marvin Wessel estimates that “10 to 20% exceed allowed radiation standards.” With 30,000 rooftop antenna sites across the U.S. that would mean that as many as 6,000 are emitting radiation in violation of FCC standards. Often, these emissions can be 600% or more of allowed exposure levels, according to Wessel.

The best ally of industry and the FCC on this (and other) issues may be public ignorance.

An online poll conducted for this project asked 202 respondents to rate the likelihood of a series of statements … there was one statement of indisputable fact: “The U.S. Congress forbids local communities from considering health effects when deciding whether to issue zoning permits for wireless antennae,” the statement said.

Though this is a stone cold fact that the wireless industry, the FCC and the courts have all turned into hard and inescapable reality for local authorities, just 1.5% of all poll respondents replied that it was “definitely true.”

… many respondents claim they would change behavior—reduce wireless use, restore landline service, protect their children—if claims on health dangers of wireless are true.

… in May 2015, more than 200 scientists boasting over 2,000 publications on wireless effects called on global institutions to address the health risks posed by this technology.

Some have suggested that the health situation with wireless is analogous to that of tobacco before court decisions finally forced Big Tobacco to admit guilt and pay up.

It seems significant that the responses of wireless and its captured agency—the FCC—feature the same obtuse refusal to examine the evidence. The wireless industry reaction features stonewalling public relations and hyper aggressive legal action. It can also involve undermining the credibility and cutting off the funding for researchers who do not endorse cellular safety. It is these hardball tactics that look a lot like 20th century Big Tobacco tactics. It is these hardball tactics—along with consistently supportive FCC policies—that heighten suspicion the wireless industry does indeed have something to hide.

So how does the FCC handle a scientific split that seems to suggest bias in industry-sponsored research?

In a posting on its Web site that reads like it was written by wireless lobbyists, the FCC chooses strikingly patronizing language to slight and trivialize the many scientists and health and safety experts who‘ve found cause for concern. In a two page Web post titled “Wireless Devices and Health Concerns,” the FCC four times refers to either “some health and safety interest groups,” “some parties,” or “some consumers” before in each case rebutting their presumably groundless concerns about wireless risk. Additionally, the FCC site references the World Health Organization as among those organizations who‘ve found that “the weight of scientific evidence” has not linked exposure to radiofrequency from mobile devices with ”any known health problems.”

Yes, it‘s true that the World Health organization remains bitterly divided on the subject. But it‘s also true that a 30 member unit of the WHO called the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) was near unanimous in pronouncing cell phones “possibly carcinogenic” in 2011. How can the FCC omit any reference to such a pronouncement? Even if it finds reason to side with pro-industry scientists, shouldn‘t this government agency also mention that cell phones are currently in the same potential carcinogen class as lead paint?

Cell phones are not the only wireless suspects. Asked what he would do if he had policy-making authority, Dr. Hardell swiftly replied that he would “ban wireless use in schools and pre-schools. You don‘t need Wi-Fi,” he noted.

So what is the FCC doing in response to what at the very least is a troubling chain of clues to cellular danger? As it has done with wireless infrastructure, the FCC has to this point largely relied on industry “self-regulation.” Though it set standards for device radiation emissions back in 1996, the agency doesn‘t generally test devices itself. Despite its responsibility for the safety of cell phones, the FCC relies on manufacturers‘ good-faith efforts to test them. Critics contend that this has allowed manufacturers undue latitude in testing their devices.

The EPA, notably, was once a hub of research on RF effects, employing as many as 35 scientists. However, the research program was cut off in the late 80s during the Regan presidency. [Former EPA Scientist, Carl] Blackman says he was personally “forbidden” to study health effects by his “supervisory structure.”

Blackman is cautious in imputing motives to the high government officials who wanted his work at EPA stopped. But he does say that political pressure has been a factor at both the EPA and FCC: “The FCC people were quite responsive to the biological point of view. But there are also pressures on the FCC from industry.” The FCC, he suggests, may not just be looking at the scientific evidence, “The FCC‘s position—like the EPA‘s—is influenced by political considerations as well.”

Still, the FCC has ultimate regulatory responsibility and cannot indefinitely pass the buck on an issue of fundamental public health. Remarkably, it has not changed course despite the IARC classification of cell phones as possibly carcinogenic, despite the recent studies showing triple the glioma risk for heavy users, despite the floodtide of research showing biological effects, and despite even the recent defection of core industry booster Alex Lerchl. It is the refusal of both industry and the FCC to even acknowledge this cascade of warning signs that seems most incriminating.

This is a very rich industry that does not hesitate to outspend and bully challengers into submission. Meanwhile, amidst the legal smoke and medical confusion, the industry has managed to make the entire world dependent on its products. Even tobacco never had so many hooked users.

Such sustained success in the face of medical doubt has required industry to keep a lid on critics and detractors. Many scientists who‘ve found real or potential risk from the sort of microwave radiation emanating from wireless devices have learned there is a price to be paid for standing up to the industry juggernaut. A few prominent examples …

The FCC‘s network of corruption doesn‘t just shield industry from needed scrutiny and regulation on matters of public health and safety. Sometimes it just puts its hand directly into the public pocket and redistributes that cash to industry supplicants …

The General Accounting Office (GAO) has issued several reports citing fraud, waste and mismanagement, along with inadequate FCC oversight of the subsidy program. Bribery, kickbacks and false documentation can perhaps be expected in a handout program mandated by Congress and only indirectly supervised by the FCC.

[The "subsidy program," the Universal Service Fund, subsidizes various technology programs at public cost.]

Fraud—as pervasive and troubling as it has been—is just one of the problems with the programs of universal service. It may not even be the fundamental problem. More fundamental issues concern the very aim, logic and efficiency of programs to extend broadband and wireless technology at public expense. Though the aims of extending service to distant impoverished areas seem worthy on the surface, there are many reasons to think the major beneficiaries of these programs are the technology companies that win the contracts.

… the FCC, prodded by an industry ever on the lookout for incremental growth opportunities, is ignoring the health of youngsters to promote expanded Wi-Fi subsidies in schools across the U.S.

As a captured agency, the FCC is a prime example of institutional corruption. Officials in such institutions do not need to receive envelopes bulging with cash. But even their most well-intentioned efforts are often overwhelmed by a system that favors powerful private influences, typically at the expense of public interest.

… the auctions of electromagnetic spectrum, used by all wireless communications companies to send their signals, have yielded nearly $100 billion in recent years. The most recent auction to wireless providers produced the unexpectedly high total of $43 billion. No matter that the sale of spectrum is contributing to a pea soup of electromagnetic "smog" whose health consequences are largely unknown. The government needs money and Congress shows its appreciation with consistently pro-wireless policies.

Science is often the catalyst for meaningful regulation. But what happens when scientists are dependent on industry for research funding? Under pressure from budget cutters and deregulators, government funding for research on RF health effects has dried up. The EPA, which once had 35 investigators in the area, has long since abandoned its efforts.85 Numerous scientists have told me there‘s simply no independent research funding in the U.S. They are left with a simple choice: work on industry-sponsored research or abandon the field.

… an FCC with public interest commissioners is an idea worth consideration. It would at least require party apologists to defend how they so consistently champion the moneyed interests that have purchased disproportionate access and power in Washington.

Thursday, May 4, 2023

Cellphone Industry Product Liability Lawsuit

On April 25, 2023, Judge Irving disallowed the testimony of all six expert witnesses who testified for the 13 plaintiffs who suffered from brain tumors in this lawsuit filed against the telecom industry: Murray et al. v. Motorola et al.; case no. 2001-CA-008479-B.

See Microwave News for a detailed summary of the case and a discussion of the judicial system's inability to resolve complex scientific issues in a fair manner (

The website for the Superior Court of the District of Columbia contains a case summary, events and orders of the court, and information about the parties in the case and their legal representation at

Sep 22, 2022

Cell phone-brain tumor case finally goes to trial

A major lawsuit originally filed in 2001 by individuals who got brain cancer from their cell phones is being heard in the D.C. Superior Court before Judge Alfred S. Irving (Murray et al. v. Motorola et al.; case no. 2001 CA 008479 B). The evidentiary hearings for this multi-plaintiff case are being held from September 12 to September 30, 2022.
This case has dragged on for 21 years due to delaying tactics and appeals by the defendantsThe defendants constitute much of the telecommunications industry including Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile, Sprint, Motorola, Samsung, Nokia, Qualcomm, the CTIA, the IEEE, the FCC, and many other telecom companies. In the interim many plaintiffs have died. 
The hearings begin weekdays at 9:30 A.M. ET. The public can bear witness to this historic case: 

Option 1: Dial 844-992-4726, meeting ID 129 685 3445#, then press # again if asked for another code. 

Option 2: Open your web browser in Google Chrome and copy and paste the following URL or click: You will be connected to the waiting room or the live WebEx session. If this is your first time connecting to a WebEx session, you may receive a notification requesting that you download the WebEx program to your computer.  When prompted, click “Join Meeting” to enter the session.


D.C. court considers how to screen out ‘bad science’ in local trials

Ann E. Marimow, Washington Post, Nov 24, 2015

The District’s highest court on Tuesday considered whether to change the rules for screening out “bad science” from trials and to adopt the standards used in most states and federal courts.
The case before the appellate court involves the question of whether cellphones can cause brain cancer. Plaintiffs have sued cellphone manufacturers and providers in D.C. Superior Court alleging that long-term exposure to cellphone radiation causes brain tumors.
The appellate court will not rule on that specific issue, but the full court is taking the opportunity to weigh how judges decide which expert witnesses are allowed to testify.
Under the standard used in the District, Illinois and a small number of other states, the judge determines whether a methodology or theory has gained “general acceptance” in the expert’s field. The test is known as Frye, a reference to a 1923 D.C. Circuit case.
After a landmark 1993 Supreme Court case, Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, federal courts — and now the majority of states — adopted a more extensive test, making the judge the “gatekeeper” for ensuring that the scientific evidence is “not only relevant, but reliable.”
On one hand, [Judge] Weisberg said, there is not enough evidence for any scientist to conclude with certainty that cellphones cause brain cancer. On the other, because of the District’s standards for admitting evidence, Weisberg said he would permit the testimony of five experts who would say in effect that cellphones are more likely than not to cause or promote certain brain tumors.
But Weisberg also noted that in a federal courtroom, that testimony was unlikely to be aired.
Attorneys for the 13 plaintiffs and a local organization of trial lawyers had urged the court in its filings to keep the standard, which lawyer Jeffrey B. Morganroth said Tuesday is “working just fine.”
Plaintiffs’ attorneys, representing people who suffer from or have died from brain tumors, said any change would be a “drastic departure” from current practice.

Case on Health Risk From Cellphones Is Back in Court

Ryan Knutson, Wall Street Journal, Nov 22, 2015

Murray v. Motorola faces another test Tuesday when the two sides argue over what legal standard to use
In the years since the lawsuit was filed, other plaintiffs have brought more than two dozen similar cases, the most recent one in October. Defendants include almost all the major cellphone and wireless companies, including AT&T Inc., Verizon Communications Inc., Apple Inc. and Samsung Electronics Co.
Representatives for Motorola and the other defendants referred questions to the CTIA, the wireless industry trade group, which said in a statement that “peer-reviewed scientific evidence has overwhelmingly indicated that wireless devices do not pose a public health risk for adults or children.”
So far, the cases have mostly been a battle over legal procedure, not science ...
... A total of 13 cases have been consolidated into the Murray case, and the plaintiffs are seeking more than $1.9 billion in damages combined. 
In filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, cellphone manufacturers and wireless carriers specifically acknowledge the risk posed by health-related lawsuits. “We may incur significant expenses in defending these lawsuits,” Verizon wrote in its 2015 annual filing. “In addition, we may be required to pay significant awards or settlements.”
... Eight of the plaintiffs in other cases have died while the lawsuits have been pending, he said. A decision in favor of Motorola and the other defendants, which are pushing for the Daubert standard, would send ripples beyond the Murray lawsuit. Seventeen of the other cellphone-health cases are stayed pending a ruling in this case.
If the plaintiffs prevail, discovery will begin on the broad issue of whether cellphones can cause brain tumors, specifically, glioma and acoustic neuroma. In addition, the plaintiffs would need to prove cellphones caused the cancer in their specific cases.

August 8, 2014

My comments:  This superior court ruling enables the discovery phase of the trial to begin.  Perhaps, we will soon learn whether the wireless industry has been covering up knowledge of the health risks of mobile phone use. 

The insurance industry has refused to provide product liability insurance on cell phones primarily due to this concern as they fear that cell phone litigation may turn out like tobacco or asbestos litigation did with huge punitive awards.

My most recent press release, "FCC: 98 Scientific Experts Demand Stronger Regulation of Cellphone Radiation" makes the case that the scientific community has known for many years about the health risks of mobile phone radiation. The wireless industry, however, has confused government officials and the public by co-opting scientists to support the industry's disinformation campaign to buy time.


29 brain tumor lawsuits move toward trial in Washington, DC

Arthur Firstenberg, Cellular Phone Task Force, Aug 11, 2014

Twenty-nine high-profile lawsuits brought by people whose brain tumors were caused by their cell phones are finally moving toward trial. Six of these cases were originally filed in 2001 and 2002. Many of the plaintiffs are no longer alive.

On Friday, Judge Frederick H. Weisberg, in the D.C. Superior Court, admitted the testimony of five expert witness for the plaintiffs, and the 12- and 13-year-old cases will now move into the discovery phase. Each of the plaintiffs is asking for more than $100,000,000. There are 46 defendants including Motorola, Nokia, AT&T, Bell Atlantic, Cellular One, Cingular Wireless, SBC Communications, Verizon, Vodafone, the Telecommunications Industry Association, the IEEE, ANSI, the CTIA, and the FCC. The plaintiffs are represented by Jeffrey B. Morganroth of Morganroth & Morganroth, a law firm in Birmingham, Michigan.

For over a decade the industry and the plaintiffs have played tug-of-war with the oldest cases, sending them back and forth between federal and state courts, and fighting over whether the plaintiff's claims were preempted by the Telecommunications Act of 1996.

In 2009 the D.C. Court of Appeals, in Murray v. Motorola (982 A. 2d 764), ruled that the telecommunications companies could not be sued over brain tumors caused by cell phones manufactured after 1996. But since all of these plaintiffs had used pre-1996 phones, their lawsuits were allowed to go forward. They were also allowed to go forward on their claims that the defendants made false and misleading statements and failed to disclose information about the dangers of cell phones.  These claims were brought under the D.C. Consumer Protection Procedures Act.

In December 2013 and January 2014, testimony was heard from:

DR. SHIRA KRAMER, a Maryland epidemiologist;

DR. MICHAEL KUNDI, professor of epidemiology and occupational health at the Medical University of Vienna;

DR. VINI KHURANA, a neurosurgeon and professor of neurosurgery at the Australian National University in Canberra;

DR. IGOR BELYAEV, head research scientist at the Cancer Research institute at the Slovak Academy of Science in Bratislava, Slovakia;

DR. WILHELM MOSGOELLER, professor and medical doctor at the University of Vienna Medical School’s Institute for Cancer Research;

DR. DIMITRIS PANAGAPOULOUS, founder of the Radiation Biophysics Laboratory at the University of Athens;

DR. ABRAHAM LIBOFF, professor emeritus of physics at Oakland University in Rochester, Michigan; and

DR. LAURA PLUNKETT, pharmacologist and toxicologist in Houston.

On Friday, August 8, 2014, the testimony of Drs. Kramer, Khurana, and Panagopoulos was disallowed. But the testimony of Drs. Kundi, Belyaev, Mosgoeller, Liboff, and Plunkett was admitted. They will testify at trial about "general causation," i.e. that cell phones can cause brain tumors.

The lawsuits now move into the discovery phase, in which each side is compelled to produce documents and answer questions. This is the first time that the industry has had to turn over data. There will then be a fight over the admission of the testimony of witnesses on "specific causation," i.e. doctors and others who will testify that these specific cell phones caused these specific tumors.

Friday's decision by Judge Weisberg allowed 13 of the cases, which have been consolidated in one action, to go forward.  The other 16 cases are being tried separately, but the parties in those cases agreed to be bound by Friday's decision.


Judge Frederick H. Weisberg, Washington D.C. Superior Court: Expert Preemption Order (page 5): 

"Federal law is the supreme law of the land, but there is no constitutional provision that says federal facts are the supreme facts of the land. Federal law can preempt state law, but it cannot preempt scientific fact. The scientific truth, whatever it may be, lies outside of the FCC’s regulations about what is 'safe' or 'unsafe.'  The experts have offered their opinions on the state of the scientific knowledge and general causation. They have testified about the methodology they used to reach those opinions. Their testimony on these points, at this stage of the case, is not subject to preemption."  


Judge Weisberg's ruling on expert witness admissibility

Michael Patrick Murray et al. v. Motorola, Inc. et al.
Superior Court for the District of Columbia


Microsoft Corporation. Form 10-K. United States Securities and Exchange Commission. Washington. July 31, 2015. pp. 87-88.

U.S. cell phone litigation
Nokia, along with other handset manufacturers and network operators, is a defendant in 19 lawsuits filed in the Superior Court for the District of Columbia by individual plaintiffs who allege that radio emissions from cellular handsets caused their brain tumors and other adverse health effects. We have assumed responsibility for these claims as part of the NDS acquisition and have been substituted for the Nokia defendants. Nine of these cases were filed in 2002 and are consolidated for certain pre-trial proceedings; the remaining 10 cases are stayed. In a separate 2009 decision, the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia held that adverse health effect claims arising from the use of cellular handsets that operate within the U.S. Federal Communications Commission radio frequency emission guidelines (“FCC Guidelines”) are pre-empted by federal law. The plaintiffs allege that their handsets either operated outside the FCC Guidelines or were manufactured before the FCC Guidelines went into effect. The lawsuits also allege an industry-wide conspiracy to manipulate the science and testing around emission guidelines.
In September 2013, defendants in the consolidated cases moved to exclude plaintiffs’ expert evidence of general causation on the basis of flawed scientific methodologies. In March 2014, defendants filed a separate motion to preclude plaintiffs’ general causation testimony. In August 2014, the court granted in part defendants’ motion to exclude plaintiffs’ general causation experts. The plaintiffs filed an interlocutory appeal. In December 2014, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals agreed to hear en banc defendants’ interlocutory appeal challenging the standard for evaluating expert scientific evidence. Trial court proceedings are stayed pending resolution of the appeal.
Canadian cell phone class action
Nokia, along with other handset manufacturers and network operators, is a defendant in a 2013 class action lawsuit filed in the Supreme Court of British Columbia by a purported class of Canadians who have used cellular phones for at least 1,600 hours, including a subclass of users with brain tumors. Microsoft was served with the complaint in June 2014 and has been substituted for the Nokia defendants. The litigation is not yet active as several defendants remain to be served.


Court Allows Expert Testimony in Litigation Alleging Cell Phone-Linked Tumors According to Consumers' Legal Team

WASHINGTON -- Aug 8, 2014 /PRNewswire/ -- A Washington D.C. superior court ruled that five scientific expert witnesses can testify for consumers suffering from brain tumors allegedly caused or promoted by cell phone use Ashcraft & Gerel LLP Morganroth and Morganroth PLLC Lundy Lundy Soileau & South L.L.P. and co-counsel said today.

Judge Frederick H. Weisberg who is presiding over 13 consolidated lawsuits against the telecom industry ruled that experts met the Dyas/Frye legal standards and can offer testimony related to injury causation and health effects. The court held evidentiary hearings in December 2013 and January 2014 and reviewed hundreds of exhibits.

Judge Weisberg noted that while the court did not decide the issue of whether cell phones cause brain tumors new scientific studies and information have emerged recently. His order referred to a May 2014 French case-control epidemiological study that found support for "a possible association between heavy mobile phone use" and brain tumors.

Each of the plaintiffs in the litigation suffers from a brain tumor or is suing for a family of someone who died of brain cancer.

The plaintiffs are represented by Morganroth and Morganroth PLLC of Birmingham Mich.; Ashcraft & Gerel LLP of Washington D.C. and Lundy Lundy Soileau & South LLP of Lake Charles La.; The Knoll Law Firm LLC of Marksville La.; Pribanic & Pribanic LLC of Pittsburgh; Frasier Frasier & Hickman LLP of Tulsa Okla.; and Bernstein Liebhard LLP of New York.

Hunter Lundy of Lundy Lundy Soileau & South LLP said "The telecom industry argued for years that cell phone consumer litigants could not produce scientists who could relate exposure to cell phone radiation to tumors. The ruling today refutes that contention and our experts' opinions having met the Dyas/Frye test are admissible."

Jeffrey B. Morganroth of Morganroth and Morganroth PLLC said "We now have opinions and testimony from prominent scientific experts that will be admissible and support our clients' claims that cell phone radiation can cause brain tumors in humans. With this landmark ruling the cases are moving forward to fact discovery."

Michelle Parfitt and James F. Green of Ashcraft & Gerel LLP said "The evidence presented at the evidentiary hearings months ago only included publicly available materials and did not include any testing data or information in possession of the defendants. We will seek that information as soon as possible."

The first of the consolidated cases is "Michael Patrick Murray et al. v. Motorola Inc. et al." Case No. 2001 CA 008479 B in the Superior Court for the District of Columbia. The defendants in the cases are Motorola Inc. Qualcomm Inc. Nokia Inc. Audiovox Communications Corp. and Samsung Telecomm American LLC.

Contact: Erin Powers Powers MediaWorks LLC for Ashcraft Gerel LLP

SOURCE Ashcraft & Gerel LLP

Tuesday, May 2, 2023

Hybrid & Electric Cars: Electromagnetic Radiation Risks

Hybrid and electric cars may be cancer-causing as they emit extremely low frequency (ELF) electromagnetic fields (EMF). Recent studies of the EMF emitted by these automobiles have claimed either that they pose a cancer risk for the vehicles' occupants or that they are safe.

Unfortunately, much of the research conducted on this issue has been industry-funded by companies with vested interests on one side of the issue or the other which makes it difficult to know which studies are trustworthy. 

Meanwhile, numerous peer-reviewed laboratory studies conducted over several decades have found biologic effects from limited exposures to ELF EMF. These studies suggest that the EMF guidelines established by the self-appointed, International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) are inadequate to protect our health. Based upon the research, more than 250 EMF experts have signed the International EMF Scientist Appeal which calls on the World Health Organization to establish stronger guidelines for ELF and radio frequency EMF. Thus, even if EMF measurements comply with the ICNIRP guidelines, occupants of hybrid and electric cars may still be at increased risk for cancer and other health problems. 

Given that magnetic fields have been considered "possibly carcinogenic" in humans by the International Agency for Research on Cancer of the World Health Organization since 2001, the precautionary principle dictates that we should design consumer products to minimize consumers’ exposure to ELF EMF. This especially applies to hybrid and electric automobiles as drivers and passengers spend considerable amounts of time in these vehicles, and health risks increase with the duration of exposure.

In January 2014, SINTEF, the largest independent research organization in Scandinavia, proposed manufacturing design guidelines that could reduce the magnetic fields in electric vehicles (see below).  All automobile manufacturers should follow these guidelines to ensure their customers' safety. 

The public should demand that governments adequately fund high-quality research on the health effects of electromagnetic fields that is independent of industry to eliminate any potential conflicts of interest. In the U.S., a major national research and education initiative could be funded with as little as a 5 cents a month fee on mobile phone subscribers.

Following are summaries and links to recent studies and news articles on this topic. 


[Electromagnetic fields (EMF) in electric cars]

Eberhard J, Fröhlich J, Zahner M. [Electromagnetic fields (EMF) in electric cars]  Elektromagnetische Felder (EMF) in Elektrofahrzeugen. Swiss Federal Office of Energy (SFOE). 2023. 

My note: I would be interested in seeing an English translation of this report. The exposures reported in the following English-language summary are alarming since the ICNIRP exposure limits are far too lax and inadequate to protect our health.


More and more battery-powered electric vehicles (e-vehicles) are being put into operation to facilitate the decarbonisation of mobility. Electric, magnetic and electromagnetic fields (EMF) are generated in and around vehicles by the electrical components of the drive, through battery charging and from other diverse electronic systems used in modern vehicles. In principle, it can be stated from a technical point of view that all vehicles generate immissions of electromagnetic fields, regardless of the type of drive. In addition to the electrical parameters of the components, the design and the materials used are significant. A feature of exposure in vehicles is that passengers may be simultaneously exposed to a large number of sources of various frequencies in a very confined space for hours at a time. One is also in a volume that is (partially) shielded by the car body and window panes coated with vapour-deposited metal.

The aim of this project was to assess, through measurements on a selection of e-vehicles, whether the additional EMF immissions from the electric drive and associated components are to be judged critically as a health risk and whether further, more in-depth clarifications are necessary.

For this purpose, extensive measurements of the occurring low-frequency and high-frequency EMFs extant under real operating conditions, including the charging process, were carried out on a small selection of series-production passenger vehicles (5 e-vehicles purely electric and battery-powered, 1 diesel-motorised vehicle for comparison) from the stock vehicle market in order to be able to assess the immissions on passengers and persons staying in the vicinity of the vehicle. Since there are currently no specific regulations for EMF in e-vehicles, the field strengths of the measured EMF were classified against internationally established limit recommendations (ICNIRP). The total exhaustions of the limit values thus determined from all sources were rather low, on average in the range of up to 5% for low-frequency magnetic fields and up to approx. 10% for high-frequency EMF. Occasionally, higher peak readings of low-frequency magnetic fields up to approx. 50% of the limit values were found. In general, as is common with magnetic fields in general, these high values are often very localised. Moreover, due to the dynamic and complex situation in vehicles, they often occur only sporadically and, as far as they could be identified, are hardly directly related to the electric drive. The measurement results of the present study are consistent with other previous studies. Wireless power transfer (charging) was not investigated in this project.

As far as the results of this study can be generalised, the electric drive with energy drawn from a battery appears to be unproblematic with regard to additional EMF.

Regardless of the type of drive, attention must be paid to further technological development, especially with regard to the trend toward increasing networking and digitisation. One outstanding issue remains the insufficient EMF regulation for vehicle interiors.

Open access report in German: 


Exposure to RF Electromagnetic Fields in the Connected Vehicle: Survey of Existing and Forthcoming Scenarios

G. Tognola, M. Bonato, M. Benini, S. Aerts, S. Gallucci, E. Chiaramello, S. Fiocchi, M. Parazzini, B. Masini, W. Joseph, J. Wiart, P. Ravazzani. Exposure to RF Electromagnetic Fields in the Connected Vehicle: Survey of Existing and Forthcoming Scenarios. IEEE Access. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3170035.


Future vehicles will be increasingly connected to enable new applications and improve safety, traffic efficiency and comfort, through the use of several wireless access technologies, ranging from vehicle-to-everything (V2X) connectivity to automotive radar sensing and Internet of Things (IoT) technologies for intra-car wireless sensor networks. These technologies span the radiofrequency (RF) range, from a few hundred MHz as in intra-car network of sensors to hundreds of GHz as in automotive radars used for in-vehicle occupant detection and advanced driver assistance systems. Vehicle occupants and road users in the vicinity of the connected vehicle are thus daily immersed in a multi-source and multi-band electromagnetic field (EMF) generated by such technologies. This paper is the first comprehensive and specific survey about EMF exposure generated by the whole ensemble of connectivity technologies in cars. For each technology we describe the main characteristics, relevant standards, the application domain, and the typical deployment in modern cars. We then extensively characterize the EMF exposure scenarios resulting from such technologies by resuming and comparing the outcomes from past studies on the exposure in the car. Results from past studies suggested that in no case EMF exposure was above the safe limits for the general population. Finally, open challenges for a more realistic characterization of the EMF exposure scenario in the connected car are discussed.

Open access paper:


Complex Electromagnetic Issues Associated with the Use of Electric Vehicles in Urban Transportation

Krzysztof Gryz, Jolanta Karpowicz, Patryk Zradziński. Complex Electromagnetic Issues Associated with the Use of Electric Vehicles in Urban Transportation. Sensors (Basel). 2022 Feb 22;22(5):1719. doi: 10.3390/s22051719.


The electromagnetic field (EMF) in electric vehicles (EVs) affects not only drivers, but also passengers (using EVs daily) and electronic devices inside. This article summarizes the measurement methods applicable in studies of complex EMF in EVs focused on the evaluation of characteristics of such exposure to EVs users and drivers, together with the results of investigations into the static magnetic field (SMF), the extremely low-frequency magnetic field (ELF) and radiofrequency (RF) EMF related to the use of the EVs in urban transportation. The investigated EMF components comply separately with limits provided by international labor law and guidelines regarding the evaluation of human short-term exposure; however other issues need attention-electromagnetic immunity of electronic devices and long-term human exposure. The strongest EMF was found in the vicinity of direct current (DC) charging installations-SMF up to 0.2 mT and ELF magnetic field up to 100 µT-and inside the EVs-up to 30 µT close to its internal electrical equipment. Exposure to RF EMF inside the EVs (up to a few V/m) was found and recognized to be emitted from outdoor radio communications systems, together with emissions from sources used inside vehicles, such as passenger mobile communication handsets and antennas of Wi-Fi routers.


4.5. Health Aspects of Exposure to EMF in EVs

An EV driver’s long-lasting daily exposure to EMF, even if compliant with the exposure limits, cannot be counted to be negligible when the context of possible adverse health effects due to chronic exposure to EMF is considered. The ELF MF was classified to be a possible carcinogenic to human (2B classification) based on the epidemiologically proven elevated carcinogenic health risks in populations chronically exposed to MF exceeding 0.4 μT (attention level related to yearly averaged exposure) [38,39,40]. The level of ELF MF exposure reported in various studies focused on EMF in EVs and discussed in this article may significantly contribute to the total long-lasting exposure to drivers.

The effects of EMF exposure induced in exposed objects are frequency-dependent, but the significant majority of studies performed so far in the area of EMF safety have referred to the populations exposed to high-voltage power lines (i.e., to chronic exposure to EMF of sinusoidal power frequency), and the outcome of such observations was a base for the abovementioned 2B classification for ELF MF exceeding 0.4 μT. Because of differences in the frequency patterns of the discussed exposures (near power lines and in EVs), there needs to be very careful analysis of how far the studied health and safety outcomes from ELF EMF exposures vary in such cases, and which exposure metrics are relevant to evaluate them. Consistently, the mentioned differences in frequency characteristics of ELF EMF in EVs and EMF near regular electric power installations also need attention with respect to the exposure evaluation protocol, which in practice means that studies of the parameters of EMF exposure associated with the use of EVs require not only measurements of the RMS value (which, in practice, is usually almost equal to the RMS value of the dominant frequency component of exposure), but also attention to the higher harmonics of this exposure, the components of fundamental frequencies other than 50 Hz, the parameters of transient EMF over rapid changes in the mode of EV driving, and combined exposure including the above mentioned components.

Similar to ELF MF, RF EMF was classified by the IARC in the group of 2B carcinogenic environmental factors [41]. This component of driver EMF exposure also needs attention because of its level at least comparable to office exposure, where wireless radio communication facilities are in use and daily long-lasting exposure, potentially significantly contributing to total driver chronic exposure, combines with other components of lower frequencies (covering together exposure to: static, low frequency and radiofrequency fields).

5. Conclusions

In every urban area, there is a daily mass of passengers traveling by public transportation. Ecological and economic reasons, as well as technological development, mean that a significant percentage of the population already use EVs (trams, metro, trolleys, buses) daily, seeing as they are an increasing majority of transportation resources in various large cities. During the journeys, passengers and drivers are exposed to a specific complex EMF, with a dominant ELF component emitted by the driving systems and their supply installations, and an RF component emitted by various wireless communications systems (e.g., Wi-Fi routers located often inside vehicles, handsets of mobile communications used by passengers, and mobile communication BTS located outside vehicles). Depending on the location of the electric equipment inside the EVs, a higher exposure to EMF may affect passengers, or in some cases drivers.

Investigations into SMF, ELF and RF EMF emitted by various electrical equipment associated with the use of EV urban transportation showed that their levels, considered separately, comply with the limits provided by international labor law and guidelines aimed at protecting against the direct effects of short-term influence on humans of EMF of a particular frequency range (set up to prevent thermal load or electrical stimulation in exposed tissue) [12,13,17,20,21,22]. International guidelines and labor law do not provide rules on how to evaluate simultaneous exposure at various frequency ranges (e.g., SMF together with ELF and RF). This needs also specific attention, given that electronic devices and systems used inside EVs need to have sufficient electromagnetic immunity to ensure that their performance is not negatively affected by the impact from EMF emitted by the use of EVs.

Considering the chronic nature of exposure to EMF in EVs (in particular with respect to potential exposure to drivers when various EMF sources are located near their cabins), and the potential specific risks from exposure to EMF of complex composition in time and frequency domains, there is a need to collect research data on the complex characteristics of EMF exposure related to the use of EVs in public transportation and the associated health outcome in chronically exposed workers, as well as decreasing the level of their exposure by applying relevant preventive measures (e.g., locating indoor Wi-Fi routers, and other such electrical equipment, away from the driver’s cabin) [17,23,42,43,44].


Review of Safety and Exposure Limits of Electromagnetic Fields (EMF) in Wireless Electric Vehicle Charging (WEVC) Applications

Erdem Asa, Mostak Mohammad, Omer C. Onar, Jason Pries, Veda Galigekere, Gui-Jia Su. Review of Safety and Exposure Limits of Electromagnetic Fields (EMF) in Wireless Electric Vehicle Charging (WEVC) Applications. 2020 IEEE Transportation Electrification Conference & Expo (ITEC). 23-26 June 2020doi: 10.1109/ITEC48692.2020.9161597.


This study reviews the exposure limits and safety of intermediate frequency (IF) electromagnetic field (EMF) emissions for wireless electric vehicle charging (WEVC) applications. A review of the electromagnetic field exposure limits identified in international guidelines are presented. An overview of the electromagnetic field shielding technologies is provided including recommended geometries, materials, and performances of the methods available in the literature. Available laboratory results of EMF emissions are summarized considering several wireless power transfer studies in different power levels. Possible EMF reduction techniques are discussed with shielding practices and ORNL [Oak Ridge National Laboratory] case studies. Also, living object detection (LOD) and foreign object detection (FOD) methods are reviewed from a safety aspect.


This study reviews and compiles the EMF emission limitations identified in international guidelines and standards including IEEE, ICNIRP, ACGIH, and SAE. EMF emissions can be substantial particularly at high-power transfer levels and misaligned conditions and should be reduced below the limits identified in the ICNIRP 2010 guidelines which are more conservative and thought to be safer. This study also provides a review of the shielding methods and presents two case studies from ORNL experiences and practices on EMF shielding. EMF exposure levels and shielding methodologies for high-power and dynamic wireless power transfer applications should be analyzed in future studies with possible standards development activities.


Electromagnetic Exposure Study on a Human Located inside the Car Using the Method of Auxiliary Sources

Jeladze VB, Nozadze TR, Tabatadze VA, et al. Electromagnetic Exposure Study on a Human Located inside the Car Using the Method of Auxiliary Sources. J Communications Technology Electronics. 65(5): 457-464. May 2020.


The article studies the effect of the electromagnetic field of wireless communications on a human inside a car in the frequency ranges of 450, 900, and 1800 MHz, corresponding to the operational range of police radios and modern mobile phones. A comparative analysis of the influence of the Earth’s surface under the car is presented. The results of numerical calculations using the Method of Auxiliary Sources show the presence of resonance phenomena and a high reactive field inside the car, which leads to an undesirable increase in the level of absorbed energy in human tissues.


The Method of Auxiliary Sources was used to study the exposure of the electromagnetic field of a mobile phone’s antenna on a human inside a car. The calculations took into account the effect of Earth’s reflective surface under the car. The results showed that high-amplitude reactive fields inside the car can lead to a multiple increase in the SAR coefficient in human tissues compared to values obtained in the free space. It is recommended to reduce the duration of mobile phone calls inside a car.


Patients with pacemakers or defibrillators do not need to worry about e-Cars: An observational study

Lennerz C, Horlbeck L, Weigand S, Grebmer C, Blazek P, Brkic A, Semmler V, Haller B, Reents T, Hessling G, Deisenhofer I, Lienkamp M, Kolb C, O'Connor M. Technol Health Care. 2019 Nov 8. doi: 10.3233/THC-191891.


BACKGROUND: Electric cars are increasingly used for public and private transportation and represent possible sources of electromagnetic interference (EMI). Potential implications for patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) range from unnecessary driving restrictions to life-threatening device malfunction. This prospective, cross-sectional study was designed to assess the EMI risk of electric cars on CIED function.

METHODS: One hundred and eight consecutive patients with CIED presenting for routine follow-up between May 2014 and January 2015 were enrolled in the study. The participants were exposed to electromagnetic fields generated by the four most common electric cars (Nissan Leaf, Tesla Model S, BMW i3, VW eUp) while roller-bench test-driving at Institute of Automotive Technology, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Technical University, Munich. The primary endpoint was any abnormalities in CIED function (e.g. oversensing with pacing-inhibition, inappropriate therapy or mode-switching) while driving or charging electric cars as assessed by electrocardiographic recordings and device interrogation.

RESULTS: No change in device function or programming was seen in this cohort which is representative of contemporary CIED devices. The largest electromagnetic field detected was along the charging cable during high current charging (116.5 μT). The field strength in the cabin was lower (2.1-3.6 μT).

CONCLUSIONS: Electric cars produce electromagnetic fields; however, they did not affect CIED function or programming in our cohort. Driving and charging of electric cars is likely safe for patients with CIEDs.


Low Frequency Magnetic Fields Inside Cars

Pääkkönen R, Korpinen L. Low Frequency Magnetic Fields Inside Cars. Radiation Protection Dosimetry. 2019. 187(2):268-271. doi: 10.1093/rpd/ncz248.


Magnetic fields were compared inside passenger seats of electric, petrol and hybrid cars. While driving about 5 km in an urban environment, values were recorded and compared between car types. The magnetic flux densities of the cars were less than 2.6 μT. The magnitudes of the magnetic fields of petrol cars and hybrid cars were about the same and slightly lower for electric cars. Based on our measurements, values were less than 3% of the guidelines given for the general population or people using pacemakers.


Long-Term Monitoring of Extremely Low Frequency Magnetic Fields in Electric Vehicles

Yang L, Lu M, Lin J, Li C, Zhang C, Lai Z, Wu T. Long-Term Monitoring of Extremely Low Frequency Magnetic Fields in Electric Vehicles. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019 Oct 7;16(19). pii: E3765. doi: 10.3390/ijerph16193765.


Extremely low frequency (ELF) magnetic field (MF) exposure in electric vehicles (EVs) has raised public concern for human health. There have been many studies evaluating magnetic field values in these vehicles. However, there has been no report on the temporal variation of the magnetic field in the cabin . This is the first study on the long-term monitoring of actual MFs in EVs. In the study, we measured the magnetic flux density (B) in three shared vehicles over a period of two years. The measurements were performed at the front and rear seats during acceleration and constant-speed driving modes. We found that the B amplitudes and the spectral components could be modified by replacing the components and the hubs, while regular checks or maintenance did not influence the B values in the vehicle. This observation highlights the necessity of regularly monitoring ELF MF in EVs, especially after major repairs or accidents, to protect car users from potentially excessive ELF MF exposure. These results should be considered in updates of the measurement standards. The ELF MF effect should also be taken into consideration in relevant epidemiological studies.


Effect of static magnetic field of electric vehicles on driving performance and on neuro-psychological cognitive functions

He Y, Sun W, Leung PS, Chow YT. 
Effect of static magnetic field of electric vehicles on driving performance and on neuro-psychological cognitive functions. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019 Sep 12;16(18). pii: E3382. doi: 10.3390/ijerph16183382.


Human neuropsychological reactions and brain activities when driving electric vehicles (EVs) are considered as an issue for traffic and public safety purposes; this paper examined the effect of the static magnetic field (SMF) derived from EVs. A lane change task was adopted to evaluate the driving performance; and the driving reaction time test and the reaction time test were adopted to evaluate the variation of the neuro-psychological cognitive functions. Both the sham and the real exposure conditions were performed with a 350 μT localized SMF in this study; 17 student subjects were enrolled in this single-blind experiment. Electroencephalographs (EEGs) of the subjects were adopted and recorded during the experiment as an indicator of the brain activity for the variations of the driving performance and of the cognitive functions. Results of this study have indicated that the impact of the given SMF on both the human driving performance and the cognitive functions are not considerable; and that there is a correlation between beta sub-band of the EEGs and the human reaction time in the analysis.

Open access paper:


Possible Health Impacts of Advanced Vehicles Wireless Technologies

Judakova Z, Janousek L. Possible Health Impacts of Advanced Vehicles Wireless Technologies. Transportation Research Procedia. 40:1404-1411. 2019.


Modern vehicles contain various security systems including vehicular networking where vehicles receive relevant traffic information using wireless communications from their peers. This wireless communication is mediated by the radiofrequency electromagnetic field. Exposure to electromagnetic fields caused by the transportation system is a cause of concern for many people. Plenty of dosimetric analysis of electromagnetic field carried out by various research groups found out the highest exposure values in the transport. How long-term effects of these fields affect the human organism and what is the mechanism of action, are questions without known answers. Several studies point to the possible association of different diseases with electromagnetic field exposure. The key to understanding the effect of the electromagnetic field on the human organism is to reveal the mechanism of action of these fields.

Open access paper:


Evaluating extremely low frequency magnetic fields in the rear seats of the electric vehicles

Lin J, Lu M, Wu T, Yang L, Wu TN. Evaluating extremely low frequency magnetic fields in the rear seats of the electric vehicles. Radiation Protection Dosimetry. 182(2):190-199. Dec 2018.


In the electric vehicles (EVs), children can sit on a safety seat installed in the rear seats. Owing to their smaller physical dimensions, their heads, generally, are closer to the underfloor electrical systems where the magnetic field (MF) exposure is the greatest. In this study, the magnetic flux density (B) was measured in the rear seats of 10 different EVs, for different driving sessions. We used the measurement results from different heights corresponding to the locations of the heads of an adult and an infant to calculate the induced electric field (E-field) strength using anatomical human models. The results revealed that measured B fields in the rear seats were far below the reference levels by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection. Although small children may be exposed to higher MF strength, induced E-field strengths were much lower than that of adults due to their particular physical dimensions.


Radiofrequencies in cars: A public health threat

According to Theodore P. Metsis, Ph.D., an electrical, mechanical, and environmental engineer from Athens, Greece, modern conventional gas- and diesel-powered automobiles incorporate many EMF-emitting devices.
"EMFs in a car in motion with brakes applied + ABS activation may well exceed 100 mG. Adding RF radiation from blue tooth, Wi Fi, the cell phones of the passengers, the 4G antennas laid out all along the major roads plus the radars of cars already equipped with, located behind, left or right of a vehicle, the total EMF and EMR fields will exceed any limits humans can tolerate over a long period of time."

PDF of Dr. Metsis' graphics (2 pages):


Mobile Phone Antenna’s EM Exposure Study on a Human Model Inside the Car

Nozadze T, Jeladze V, Tabatadze V, Petoev I, Zaidze R. Mobile phone antenna’s EM exposure study on a homogeneous human model inside the car. 2018 XXIIIrd International Seminar/Workshop on Direct and Inverse Problems of Electromagnetic and Acoustic Wave Theory (DIPED). Tlibisi, Georgia. Sep 24-27, 2019. DOI:  10.1109/DIPED.2018.8543310


Mobile phones’ radiation influence on a homogenous human model located inside a car is studied in this research. One of the novelty of proposed research is earth surface influence consideration under the car on EM field formation inside it. The inner field and its amplification by the car’s walls that in some cases act like a resonator are studied. The problem was solved numerically using the Method of Auxiliary Sources. Numerical simulations were carried out at the 450, 900, 1800 [MHz] standard communication frequencies. Obtained results showed the presence of resonant phenomena inside the car.


On Fig. 9 are presented point SAR peak values at the considered non-resonant and resonant frequencies. As it seen, point SAR peak values for resonant frequencies are approximately 5–8 times higher than non-resonant frequencies.

Based on the analysis of the obtained results we can conclude that at some frequencies car’s walls acts as the resonator and amplifies the field radiated from the mobile phones; which is cause of high point SAR values inside the human body. For the low frequency the EM field energy deeply penetrates into the human body, while for the high frequencies is mostly absorbed in the skin.


The mobile phone’s EM exposure problem for a homogenous human model inside the car is studied using the MAS. MAS were used to simulate earth reflective surface. The obtained results, conducted with the MAS based program package, showed the presence of resonance and reactive fields inside the car, that causes high SAR in human tissues. The reason of this is that at the considered frequencies car’s metallic surface acts as the resonator. So, it isn’t desirable speak on phones for a long time inside the car, that can be hazardous for the cell phone users located in it.


Electric cars and EMI with cardiac implantable electronic devices: A cross-sectional evaluation

Lennerz C, O'Connor M, Horlbeck L, Michel J, Weigand S, Grebmer C, Blazek P, Brkic A, Semmler V, Haller B, Reents T, Hessling G, Deisenhofer I, Whittaker P, Lienkamp M, Kolb C. Letter: Electric cars and electromagnetic interference with cardiac implantable electronic devices: A cross-sectional evaluation. Annals of Internal Medicine. Apr 24, 2018.

No Abstract
Cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) are considered standard care for bradycardia, tachycardia, and heart failure. Electromagnetic interference (EMI) can disrupt normal function … Electric cars represent a potential source of EMI. However, data are insufficient to determine their safety or whether their use should be restricted in patients with CIEDs.
Objective: To assess whether electric cars cause EMI and subsequent CIED dysfunction.
Methods and Findings: We approached 150 consecutive patients with CIEDs seen in our electrophysiology clinic … 40 patients declined to participate, and 2 withdrew consent … Participants were assigned to 1 of 4 electric cars with the largest European market share…we excluded hybrid vehicles.
Participants sat in the front seat while cars ran on a roller test bench … Participants then charged the same car in which they had sat. Finally, investigators drove the cars on public roads.
Field strength was generally highest during charging (30.1 to 116.5 µT) and increased as the charging current increased. Exposure during charging was at least an order of magnitude greater than that measured within 5 cm of the CIED in the front seat (2.0 to 3.6 µT). Field strength did not differ between the front and back seats. Peak field strength measured outside the cars ranged between the values measured during charging and those measured within the cars during testing … Field strength measured inside the cars during road driving was similar to that measured during test bench studies.
We found no evidence of EMI with CIEDs ...The electrocardiographic recorder did observe EMI, but CIED function and programming were unaffected.
Our sample was too small to detect rare events ... Nevertheless, other evidence supports a lack of EMI with CIEDs. Magnetic fields are generated in gasoline-powered vehicles if the vehicles' steel-belted tires are magnetized (3); average fields of approximately 20 µT were reported in the back seat of 12 models, and those as high as 97 µT were reported close to the tires (4). Similar values were reported in electric trains and trams (5). The lack of anecdotal reports of CIED malfunction associated with such transportation is consistent with our findings.
Electric cars seem safe for patients with CIEDs, and restrictions do not appear to be required. However, we recommend vigilance to monitor for rare events, especially those associated with charging and proposed “supercharging” technology.


Evaluating ELF magnetic fields in the rear seats of electric vehicles

Lin J, Lu M, Wu T, Yang L, Wu T. Evaluating extremely low frequency magnetic fields in the rear seats of the electric vehicles. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2018 Mar 23. doi: 10.1093/rpd/ncy048.

In the electric vehicles (EVs), children can sit on a safety seat installed in the rear seats. Owing to their smaller physical dimensions, their heads, generally, are closer to the underfloor electrical systems where the magnetic field (MF) exposure is the greatest. In this study, the magnetic flux density (B) was measured in the rear seats of 10 different EVs, for different driving sessions. We used the measurement results from different heights corresponding to the locations of the heads of an adult and an infant to calculate the induced electric field (E-field) strength using anatomical human models. The results revealed that measured B fields in the rear seats were far below the reference levels by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection. Although small children may be exposed to higher MF strength, induced E-field strengths were much lower than that of adults due to their particular physical dimensions. 
Small children and infants sitting in a safety seat at the rear part of the vehicle is a common occurrence. Children have smaller physical dimensions and, thus, their heads are generally much closer to the car floor, where the MF strength has been reported to be higher due to tire magnetization and the operation of the underfloor electrical systems (6, 7). The matter of children being potentially subject to greater magnetic field exposure may be relevant as leukemia is the most common type of childhood cancer (8). In particular, Ahlbom et al. (9) and Greenland et al. (10) indicated that the exposure to 50 and 60 Hz MF exceeding 0.3–0.4 μT may result in an increased risk for childhood leukemia although a satisfactory causal relationship has not yet been reliably demonstrated. Also, it was reported that a combination of weak, steady and alternating MF could modify the radical concentration, which had the potential to lead to biologically significant changes (11).
... the B field values measured at location #4 (floor in from of rear seat) were the highest, followed by values from location #3 (rear seat cushion), #2 (child’s head position) and #1 (adult’s head position) (p < 0.012, α = 0.05/3 = 0.017). There was a significant difference between the driving scenarios (F(3, 117) = 3.72, p = 0.013). The acceleration and deceleration scenarios generated higher B fields compared with the stationary and the 40 km/h driving scenarios (p < 0.01, α = 0.05/3 = 0.017) while no difference was identified between acceleration and deceleration (p = 0.16).
... The results demonstrate that the induced E-field strength was lower for the infant model compared with that of the adult in terms of both the head and body as a whole.
The infant was reported to have higher electrical conductivity (29) but there was no database dedicated to the infant. Furthermore, below 1 MHz, the database was hard to be measured and the uncertainty was large (30). Therefore, we would not include the issue in the study.

Although several SCs (spectral components) on higher frequencies have been observed (can spread to 1.24 kHz), the spectral analysis revealed that the SCs concentrated on bands below 1000 Hz. The EVs under test used aluminum alloy wheel rims, which have low magnetic permeability. However, the steel wire in the reinforcing belts of radial tires pick up magnetic fields from the terrestrial MF. When the tires spin, the magnetized steel wire in the reinforcing belts generates ELF MF usually below 20 Hz, that can exceed 2.0 μT at seat level in the passenger compartment (6). The measurement did not identify the ELF MF by different sources because the purpose of the study was to investigate the realistic exposure scenario for the occupants. To note, degaussing the tires or using the fiberglass belted tires can eliminate this effect and provide the MF results solely introduced by the operation of the electrified system.

ICNIRP proposed guidelines to evaluate the compliance of the non-sinusoidal signal exposure(3). The measurements rendered the maximal B field at the level of one-tenth to several μT, far below the reference level of the guidelines (e.g. 200 μT for 20–400 Hz). The similar non-sinusoidal MF signal magnitudes can only account for 6–10% of the reference levels according to the previous reports(32). However, as noted in the Introduction, ‘… 50 and 60 Hz MF exceeding 0.3–0.4 μT may result in an increased risk for childhood leukemia’. Therefore, it is necessary to measure the MF in the EVs to limit the exposure and for the purpose of epidemiological studies.
In this study, we measured ELF MF in the rear seats of ten types of EVs. The measurements were performed for four different driving scenarios. The measurement results were analyzed to determine the worst-case scenario and those values were used for simulations. We made numerical simulations to compare the induced E-field strength due to the physical difference between children and adults using detailed anatomical models. The results support the contention that the MF in the EVs that we tested was far below the reference levels of the ICNIRP guidelines. Furthermore, our findings show that children would not be more highly exposed compared to adults when taking into consideration of their physical differences. However, the measurement results indicated that further studies should be performed to elucidate the concerns on the incidence of the childhood leukemia for infant and child occupants.

Evaluation of electromagnetic exposure during 85 kHz wireless power transfer for electric vehicles

SangWook Park. Evaluation of Electromagnetic Exposure During 85 kHz Wireless Power Transfer for Electric Vehicles. IEEE Transactions on Magnetics. Volume: PP, Issue: 99. Sep 1, 2017. doi: 10.1109/TMAG.2017.2748498.

The external fields in the proximity of electric vehicle (EV) wireless power transfer (WPT) systems requiring high power may exceed the limits of international safety guidelines. This study presents dosimetric results of an 85 kHz WPT system for electric vehicles. A WPT system for charging EVs is designed and dosimetry for the system is evaluated for various exposure scenarios: a human body in front of the WPT system without shielding, with shielding, with alignment and misalignment between transmitter and receiver, and with a metal plate on the system for vehicle mimic floor pan. The minimum accessible distances in compliance are investigated for various transmitting powers. The maximum allowable transmitting power are also investigated with the limits of international safety guidelines and the dosimetric results.

Electric and magnetic fields <100 KHz in electric and gasoline-powered vehicles

Tell RA, Kavet R. Electric and magnetic fields <100 KHz in electric and gasoline-powered vehicles. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2016 Dec;172(4):541-546.
Measurements were conducted to investigate electric and magnetic fields (EMFs) from 120 Hz to 10 kHz and 1.2 to 100 kHz in 9 electric or hybrid vehicles and 4 gasoline vehicles, all while being driven. The range of fields in the electric vehicles enclosed the range observed in the gasoline vehicles. Mean magnetic fields ranged from nominally 0.6 to 3.5 µT for electric/hybrids depending on the measurement band compared with nominally 0.4 to 0.6 µT for gasoline vehicles. Mean values of electric fields ranged from nominally 2 to 3 V m-1 for electric/hybrid vehicles depending on the band, compared with 0.9 to 3 V m-1 for gasoline vehicles. In all cases, the fields were well within published exposure limits for the general population. The measurements were performed with Narda model EHP-50C/EHP-50D EMF analysers that revealed the presence of spurious signals in the EHP-50C unit, which were resolved with the EHP-50D model.

Passenger exposure to magnetic fields due to the batteries of an electric vehicle

Pablo Moreno-Torres Concha; Pablo Velez; Marcos Lafoz; Jaime R. Arribas. Passenger Exposure to Magnetic Fields due to the Batteries of an Electric Vehicle. IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology. 65(6):4564-4571. Jun 2016.
In electric vehicles, passengers sit very close to an electric system of significant power. The high currents achieved in these vehicles mean that the passengers could be exposed to significant magnetic fields (MFs). One of the electric devices present in the power train are the batteries. In this paper, a methodology to evaluate the MF created by these batteries is presented. First, the MF generated by a single battery is analyzed using finite-elements simulations. Results are compared with laboratory measurements, which are taken from a real battery, to validate the model. After this, the MF created by a complete battery pack is estimated, and results are discussed.
Passengers inside an EV could be exposed to MFs of considerable strength when compared with conventional vehicles or to other daily exposures (at home, in the office, in the street, etc.). In this paper, the MF created by the batteries of a particular electric car is evaluated from the human health point of view by means of finite-elements simulations, measurements, and a simple analytical approximation, obtaining an upper bound for the estimated MF generated by a given battery pack. These results have been compared with ICNIRP's recommendations concerning exposure limitation to low-frequency MFs, finding that the field generated by this particular battery pack should be below ICNIRP's field reference levels, and conclusions concerning the influence of the switching frequency have been drawn. Finally, some discussion regarding other field sources within the vehicle and different vehicles designs has been presented. Due to the wide variety of both available EVs and battery stacks configurations, it is recommended that each vehicle model should be individually assessed regarding MF exposure.


Magnetic field exposure assessment in electric vehicles

Vassilev A et al. Magnetic Field Exposure Assessment in Electric Vehicles. IEEE Transactions on Electromagnetic Compatibility. 57(1):35-43. Feb 2015.
This article describes a study of magnetic field exposure in electric vehicles (EVs). The magnetic field inside eight different EVs (including battery, hybrid, plug-in hybrid, and fuel cell types) with different motor technologies (brushed direct current, permanent magnet synchronous, and induction) were measured at frequencies up to 10 MHz. Three vehicles with conventional powertrains were also investigated for comparison. The measurement protocol and the results of the measurement campaign are described, and various magnetic field sources are identified. As the measurements show a complex broadband frequency spectrum, an exposure calculation was performed using the ICNIRP “weighted peak” approach. Results for the measured EVs showed that the exposure reached 20% of the ICNIRP 2010 reference levels for general public exposure near to the battery and in the vicinity of the feet during vehicle start-up, but was less than 2% at head height for the front passenger position. Maximum exposures of the order of 10% of the ICNIRP 2010 reference levels were obtained for the cars with conventional powertrains.

Characterization of ELF magnetic fields from diesel, gasoline and hybrid cars under controlled conditions

Hareuveny R, Sudan M, Halgamuge MN, Yaffe Y, Tzabari Y, Namir D, Kheifets L. Characterization of Extremely Low Frequency Magnetic Fields from Diesel, Gasoline and Hybrid Cars under Controlled Conditions. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2015 Jan 30;12(2):1651-1666.

This study characterizes extremely low frequency (ELF) magnetic field (MF) levels in 10 car models.
Extensive measurements were conducted in three diesel, four gasoline, and three hybrid cars, under similar controlled conditions and negligible background fields.

Averaged over all four seats under various driving scenarios the fields were lowest in diesel cars (0.02 μT), higher for gasoline (0.04-0.05 μT) and highest in hybrids (0.06-0.09 μT), but all were in-line with daily exposures from other sources. Hybrid cars had the highest mean and 95th percentile MF levels, and an especially large percentage of measurements above 0.2 μT. These parameters were also higher for moving conditions compared to standing while idling or revving at 2500 RPM and higher still at 80 km/h compared to 40 km/h. Fields in non-hybrid cars were higher at the front seats, while in hybrid cars they were higher at the back seats, particularly the back right seat where 16%-69% of measurements were greater than 0.2 μT.

As our results do not include low frequency fields (below 30 Hz) that might be generated by tire rotation, we suggest that net currents flowing through the cars' metallic chassis may be a possible source of MF. Larger surveys in standardized and well-described settings should be conducted with different types of vehicles and with spectral analysis of fields including lower frequencies due to magnetization of tires.
Previous work suggests that major sources of MF in cars include the tires and electric currents [4,5]. The level of MF exposure depends on the position within the vehicle (e.g., proximity to the MF sources) and can vary with different operating conditions, as changes to engine load can induce MFs through changes in electric currents. Scientific investigations of the levels of MF in cars are sparse: only one study evaluated fields only in non-hybrid cars [6], two studies of hybrid cars have been carried out [4,7], and few studies have systematically compared exposures in both hybrid and non-hybrid cars [8,9,10,11,12], some based on a very small number of cars 
In hybrid cars, the battery is generally located in the rear of the car and the engine is located in the front. Electric current flows between these two points through cables that run underneath the passenger cabin of the car. This cable is located on the left for right-hand driving cars and on the right for left-hand driving cars. Although in principle the system uses direct current (DC), current from the alternator that is not fully rectified as well as changes to the engine load, and therefore the current level, can produce MFs which are most likely in the ELF range. While most non-hybrid cars have batteries that are located in the front, batteries in some of them are located in the rear of the car, with cables running to the front of the car for the electrical appliances on the dashboard. In this study, all gasoline and diesel cars had batteries located in the front of the car.
...the percent of time above 0.2 µT was the most sensitive parameter of the exposure. Overall, the diesel cars measured in this study had the lowest MF readings (geometric mean less than 0.02 μT), while the hybrid cars had the highest MF readings (geometric mean 0.05 μT). Hybrid cars had also the most unstable results, even after excluding outliers beyond the 5th and 95th percentiles. With regard to seat position, after adjusting for the specific car model, gasoline and diesel cars produced higher average MF readings in the front seats, while hybrid cars produced the highest MF readings in the back right seat (presumably due to the location of the battery). Comparing the different operating conditions, the highest average fields were found at 80 km/h, and the differences between operating conditions were most pronounced in the back right seat in hybrid cars. Whether during typical city or highway driving, we found lowest average fields for diesel cars and highest fields for hybrid cars.
Previous works suggest that the magnetization of rotating tires is the primary source of ELF MFs in non-hybrid cars [5,15]. However, the relatively strong fields (on the order of a few μT within the car) originating from the rotating tires are typically at 5–15 Hz frequencies, which are filtered by the EMDEX II meters. ....
Overall, the average MF levels measured in the cars’ seats were in the range of 0.04–0.09 μT (AM) and 0.02–0.05 μT (GM). These fields are well below the ICNIRP [17] guidelines for maximum general public exposure (which range from 200 μT for 40 Hz to 100 μT for 800 Hz), but given the complex environments in the cars, simultaneous exposure to non-sinusoidal fields at multiple frequencies must be carefully taken into account. Nevertheless, exposures in the cars are in the range of every day exposure from other sources. Moreover, given the short amount of time that most adults and children spend in cars (about 30 minutes per day based on a survey of children in Israel (unpublished data), the relative contribution of this source to the ELF exposure of the general public is small. However, these fields are in addition to other exposure sources. Our results might explain trends seen in other daily exposures: slightly higher average fields observed while travelling (GM = 0.096 μT) relative to in bed (GM = 0.052 μT) and home not in bed (GM = 0.080 μT) [1]. Similarly, the survey of children in Israel found higher exposure from transportation (GM = 0.092 µT) compared to mean daily exposures (GM = 0.059 µT). Occupationally, the GM of time-weighted average for motor vehicle drivers is 0.12 μT [18].
Open access paper:

Design guidelines to reduce the magnetic field in electric vehicles

SINTEF, Jan 6, 2014

Based on the measurements and on extensive simulation work the project arrived on the following design guidelines to, if necessary, minimize the magnetic field in electric vehicles.

  • For any DC cable carrying significant amount of current, it should be made in the form of a twisted pair so that the currents in the pair always flow in the opposite directions. This will minimise its EMF emission.
  • For three-phase AC cables, three wires should be twisted and made as close as possible so as to minimise its EMF emission.
  • All power cables should be positioned as far away as possible from the passenger seat area, and their layout should not form a loop. If cable distance is less than 200mm away from the passenger seats, some forms of shielding should be adopted.
  • A thin layer of ferromagnetic shield is recommended as this is cost-effective solution for the reduction of EMF emission as well EMI emission.
  • Where possible, power cables should be laid such a way that they are separated from the passenger seat area by a steel sheet, e.g., under a steel metallic chassis, or inside a steel trunk.
  • Where possible, the motor should be installed farther away from the passenger seat area, and its rotation axis should not point to the seat region.
  • If weight permits, the motor housing should be made of steel, rather than aluminium, as the former has a much better shielding effect.
  • If the distance of the motor and passenger seat area is less than 500mm, some forms of shielding should be employed. For example, a steel plate could be placed between the motor and the passenger seat region
  • Motor housing should be electrically well connected to the vehicle metallic chassis to minimise any electrical potential.
  • Inverter and motor should be mounted as close as possible to each other to minimise the cable length between the two.
  • Since batteries are distributed, the currents in the batteries and in the interconnectors may become a significant source for EMF emission, they should be place as far away as possible from the passenger seat areas. If the distance between the battery and passenger seat area is less than 200mm, steel shields should be used to separate the batteries and the seating area.
  • The cables connecting battery cells should not form a loop, and where possible, the interconnectors for the positive polarity should be as close as possible to those of the negative polarity.


Magnetic fields in electric cars won't kill you

Jeremy Hsu, IEEE Spectrum, May 5, 2014
“The study, led by SINTEF, an independent research organization headquartered in Trondheim, Norway, measured the electromagnetic radiation—in the lab and during road tests—of seven different electric cars, one hydrogen-powered car, two gasoline-fueled cars and one diesel-fueled car. Results from all conditions showed that the exposure was less than 20 percent of the limit recommended by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP).”
“Measurements taken inside the vehicles—using a test dummy with sensors located in the head, chest and feet—showed exposure at less than 2 percent of the non-ionizing radiation limit at head-height. The highest electromagnetic field readings—still less than 20 percent of the limit—were found near the floor of the electric cars, close to the battery. Sensors picked up a burst of radiation that same level, when the cars were started.”

ELF magnetic fields in electric and gasoline-powered vehicles

Tell RA, Sias G, Smith J, Sahl J, Kavet R. ELF magnetic fields in electric and gasoline-powered vehicles. Bioelectromagnetics. 2013 Feb;34(2):156-61. doi: 10.1002/bem.21730.
We conducted a pilot study to assess magnetic field levels in electric compared to gasoline-powered vehicles, and established a methodology that would provide valid data for further assessments. The sample consisted of 14 vehicles, all manufactured between January 2000 and April 2009; 6 were gasoline-powered vehicles and 8 were electric vehicles of various types. Of the eight models available, three were represented by a gasoline-powered vehicle and at least one electric vehicle, enabling intra-model comparisons. Vehicles were driven over a 16.3 km test route. Each vehicle was equipped with six EMDEX Lite broadband meters with a 40-1,000 Hz bandwidth programmed to sample every 4 s. Standard statistical testing was based on the fact that the autocorrelation statistic damped quickly with time. For seven electric cars, the geometric mean (GM) of all measurements (N = 18,318) was 0.095 µT with a geometric standard deviation (GSD) of 2.66, compared to 0.051 µT (N = 9,301; GSD = 2.11) for four gasoline-powered cars (P < 0.0001). Using the data from a previous exposure assessment of residential exposure in eight geographic regions in the United States as a basis for comparison (N = 218), the broadband magnetic fields in electric vehicles covered the same range as personal exposure levels recorded in that study. All fields measured in all vehicles were much less than the exposure limits published by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Future studies should include larger sample sizes representative of a greater cross-section of electric-type vehicles.

Mythbuster: EMF levels in hybrids

Consumer Reports News: August 4, 2010


“Some concern has been raised about the possible health effects of electromagnetic field radiation, known as EMF, for people who drive in hybrid cars. While all electrical devices, from table lamps to copy machines, emit EMF radiation, the fear is that hybrid cars, with their big batteries and powerful electric motors, can subject occupants to unhealthy doses. The problem is that there is no established threshold standard that says what an unhealthy dose might be, and no concrete, scientific proof that the sort of EMF produced by electric motors harms people

“We found the highest EMF levels in the Chevrolet Cobalt, a conventional non-hybrid small sedan.”

[The peak EMF readings at the driver’s feet ranged from 0.5 mG (milligauss) in the 2008 Toyota Highlander to 30 mG in the Chevrolet Cobalt. The hybrids tested at 2-4 mG. Here are some highlights from the tests. EMF readings were highest in the driver’s foot well and second-highest at the waist, much lower higher up, where human organs might be more susceptible to EMF.

“To get a sense of scale, though, note that users of personal computers are subject to EMF exposure in the range of 2 to 20 mG, electric blankets 5 to 30 mG, and a hair dryer 10 to 70 mG, according to an Australian government compilation. In this country, several states limit EMF emissions from power lines to 200 mG. However, there are no U.S. standards specifically governing EMF in cars.”

“In this series of tests, we found no evidence that hybrids expose drivers to significantly more EMF than do conventional cars. Consider this myth, busted.”


Israel preps world’s first hybrid car radiation scale

Tal Bronfer, the truth about cars, March 1, 2010
“The Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) recommends a limit of 1,000 mG (milligauss) for a 24 hour exposure period. While other guidelines pose similar limits, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) deemed extended exposure to electromagnetic fields stronger than 2 mG to be a “possible cause” for cancer. Israel’s Ministry of Health recommends a maximum of 4 mG.”
“Last year, Israeli automotive website Walla! Cars conducted a series of tests on the previous generation Toyota Prius, Honda Insight and Honda Civic Hybrid, and recorded radiation figures of up to 100 mG during acceleration. Measurements also peaked when the batteries were either full (and in use) or empty (and being charged from the engine), while normal driving at constant speeds yielded 14 to 30 mG on the Prius, depending on the area of the cabin.
The Ministry of Environmental Protection is expected to publish the results of the study this week. The study will group hybrids sold in Israel into three different radiation groups, reports Israel’s Calcalist. It’s expected that the current-gen Prius will be deemed ‘safe’, while the Honda Insight and Civic Hybrid (as well as the prev-gen Prius) will be listed as emitting ‘excessive’ radiation.”

Fear, but few facts, on hybrid risk

Jim Motavalli, New York Times, Apr 27, 2008

“... 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 Americans 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.”

“A spokesman for Honda, Chris Martin, points to the lack of a federally mandated standard for E.M.F.’s in cars. Despite this, he said, Honda takes the matter seriously. “All our tests had results that were well below the commission’s standard,” Mr. Martin said, referring to the European guidelines. And he cautions about the use of hand-held test equipment. “People have a valid concern, but they’re measuring radiation using the wrong devices,” he said.”
“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.”