Cellphone Towers

Cellsites (the Industry shorthand covering masts, antennae, towers, aerials etc) are dangerous.

Up until 2008 the phone companies (Telcos) were fairly free to build them where they liked so long as the landowner was willing to have the cellsite on their land.  Until October 2008 the Telcos had to apply for Resource Consent for a cellsite but this was a rubber stamping exercise as the local Councils had no power to reject a consent.

The four areas within the consent are heritage, noise, visual and health.  But in the case of the cellsite at Matiatia there is no heritage, visual or noise issue so if that tower was not to go ahead it would be on health grounds.

Fortunately NZ has limits on the electro-magnetic radiation (EMF) the cellsites emit but the smallest limit was 250 units and Vodafone’s most powerful tower can only get up to 21 units.  So all cellsites are well under the limit so the health check off is a rubber stamping issue.

Visit www.banthetower.co.nz and watch the letter to our Prime Minister to hear the Nelson Deputy Mayor tell how powerless the NCC is.

Focusing on just the health issue, which is no means the only issue re cellsites, many questions come to the fore of which the Industry, the Government and the Regulatory Body – the National Radiation Laboratory (NRL) don’t answer adequately.

The EMF limits were set in 1998 by an International Committee who decided they had no idea what the long-term effects of EMF were so they only set short-term limits.  The ‘experts’ then went on to say that there was suggestive evidence of an association between EMF and long-term adverse health effects but not enough for the committee to set limits.  Every time the committee is challenged about the limits they reply any subsequent studies have not been conclusive enough and don’t meet the criteria of the committee to contemplate reviewing the standards.  The health risks of dioxin, asbestos and tobacco would have failed the same litmus test.

In NZ the InterAgency Committee decide whether we should update our limits.  Dr David Black is an influential member of this committee and is also acts as an advisor for Telecom and Vodafone.   This conflict of interest needs to be clarified.

In September last year the European Parliament stated the limits were obsolete and advised all member Countries to adopt stricter standards.  The Brussels Government did so but had to go to the Appeals Court because three Telcos fought the stricter limits.

The decision of the EU Parliament was based on the Bio-Initiative Report (2007) which recommends the safe limit for EMF should be 0.1 Units to ensure protection from long-term health effects.  Dr Black commented on the Bio-Initiative Report as he doesn’t take note of reports that review other reports (over 1200 reports) and advised the InterAgency Committee to acknowledge the existence of the report and only that.  Interesting the EU decided it was a significant report but a guy in NZ thinks otherwise.

And this is only the tip of the iceberg.

Andrew Crawford.