Electromagnetic pollution |
|
| I erased the first content of
this page for two reasons: it became way too long a blog and I was
accumulating errors. Most Web sites on the subject of the
electromagnetic pollution contain heavy misjudgments and ugly mix-ups
of scientific data. At least I try to better my understanding on the
subject... These are my conclusions so forth: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Below is the best statistic I
could build. I noticed that I
could work easily in some places in libraries but not at all in some
other places... Before I made any measurement, I gave a note to each
place. This yields the horizontal scale. 8 means that I can work quite
well a that place, while 3 means that it is hardly possible. Then I
made measures of the intensity of the electrosmog. That's the vertical
scale. But the absolute values of the measures mean nothing. I was
using
a device that I build to measure high frequency radio waves, while the
actual waves present were low frequency. So the measure only allow for
a relative comparison of the places. Nevertheless the result is very
clear: the less radiation, the better I work. With just one notable
exception, that can maybe be explained by the fact that there were a
lot of wires and computers at that place. Maybe this acted as a
protection... Or maybe the intense radio waves produced by the
computers are of a kind that does not disturb me... |
|
![]() |
|
| Below are some of the devices I
build to measure the ambiant electrosmog and the radiations produced by
devices or transported by electric wires. The ones that can
differentiate low and high frequencies are not shown, neither the one
that just translates the radio waves in a hearable sound. They served
me well but they all share the same problem: I can never be sure that
the figure displayed really shows the absolute intensity of the
oscillating electric field, even very roughly. I'm working on that. The
detection diode I'm currently using is the BAT15. The last picture does
not show a measuring tool, it is just a little circuit I build as
a present for a person. The red LED lights up according to the
intensity
of the radio waves received by the short antenna. (Most pictures are
shown scaled down. You can ask your browser to show the picture
independently, to see the details.) |
|
|
|
| An example to show you that
things are not simple. I often hear people telling me that they threw
away their Wi-Fi router and made efforts to place ethernet cables all
over their house. I've always been complimenting them for their
responsibleness. Now, I'm currently at a table in a library with a
probe close to my head. I'm in a room where I have difficulties to work
but I searched out a place where the radiation level is low. It seems
to work fine, I am perfectly able to work. With my laptop switched on,
I have a loose measure of 9 mV/m. Then I connected an ethernet cable...
and the level rose to 30 mV/m. That cable carries a strong amount of
radio waves and uses my laptop as an antenna. It's not the fault of the
ethernet system itself. A simple ferrite on the cable would solve the
problem. Anyway I immediately choose to use the Wi-Fi rather than that
ethernet cable. The Wi-Fi is a nicely conceived system, that only emits
radio waves when it needs to. Since I'm just going to send little mails
and ask for little web pages once in a while, my exposition to Wi-Fi
radiations will simply not be measurable by my probe. It's harmless. |
|
| Some more examples to show what
I'm trying to deal with. Friends of mine have several children. All
have brilliant results at school, except one. When I scanned their
home, the desktop of that child was the sole one that was lit by a
highly polluting economic lamp. The parents were shocked and they
replaced the lamp immediately. That's a sound reaction but actually
this has almost no scientific value to prove my point. Another such
example is about two different people I know, who became alcoholics
lately. It's in their homes that I measured the strongest levels of
electrosmog... One of them is a caricature: to start drinking, he sits
down at one of the most polluted places in his home. While drinking, he
tends to use his cell phone constantly. A few hours later, once he's
completely drunk, he goes laying in the place where I measured the
highest level... While I was measuring, I found a place with quite a
low level of radiations. His reaction: "well indeed that's the only
place where I can sit down and read a book a little bit." Again, while
this is interesting because it hints at something maybe important, it
has no value to pretend that anything has been proven... |
|
| My city has one sole very strong
source of radio waves pollution: a local big hospital with huge
antennas atop the building. In the center of the city, in exposed
places, the intensity rises up to 4,000 mV/m. In some rooms I measured
more
than 1,000 mV/m. This is insane but I was warned that there is few hope
to
stop this pollution, whatever the impact on the health of the
inhabitants or their children. |
|
| This is a schematic of the
device I'm currently using to measure the electrosmog. It's 10
centimeters antenna is too long to measure correctly cell phone, Wi-Fi
and microwave oven radiations. If you need to measure such high
frequencies, use say a 2 or 3 centimeters long antenna. What the
voltmeter will show has to be multiplied. If you are using a 10
centimeters long antenna, which is 1/10 meter, multiply by 10. If you
are using a 2 centimeters long antenna, which is 1/50 meter, multiply
by 50. That way you get Volts per meter. This is a very simple and
approximative device... The BAT15 diodes are Schottky SMD diodes that
can detect up to 12 GHz. The fact they are SMD makes them a little
difficult to solder... Also they may break easily if some force is
applied on their wires. Any digital multimeter should fit but best (for
low frequencies) is to have a multimeter with a high input impedance,
like 10 MOhm or more. |
|
![]() |
|
| I made some shielding that were
incorporated to my clothes but this wasn't a very exact science. I got
headaches with some shapes... Some rules of thumb emerged to build
efficient shielding... A simple solution is to wrap the head and the
neck completely in aluminum foil, leaving just holes for the nose and
the eyes. I was glad of the result, it allowed me to sleep well for the
first time since long. Except for the discomfort of having the head
wrapped up in a watertight material... |
|
| The current shielding of my tent
is much simpler and efficient than my trials of partial shieldings in
clothes. The three rules of thumb are that you need full circles, you
need surfaces and you need circles in every three of the perpendicular
directions. The best to achieve this is a particular brand of aluminum
sheet for cooker. One face is aluminum, the other face is a heath
resistant plastic. Make sure the aluminum face is tightly wrapped
against itself to close the rings made with this material. |
|
| Somebody asked me how to measure very low frequency of 50 or 60 Hz. This is necessary to evaluate high tension power lines but also simply in houses. I found a very simple method. It is totally approximate anyway it helps. Simply connect only one probe wire to a multimeter, let it hang, tune the multimeter on Volts AC and multiply the reading by a factor. If the multimeter is a quality one, it probably has an input impedance of 10 MΩ . Then you multiply the reading by 100. In other words : if the multimeter shows 2.3 mV AC, which is the same as 0.0023 Volts AC, this means the actual field has a strength very very approximately in the order of 0.23 volts. If you have a very low-cost or miniaturized voltmeter, it probably has an input impedance of 1 MΩ . Then you multiply the reading by 1,000. The input impedance is mentioned in the user guide of the device. | |
![]() |
|
This text can be considered to be
continued on this page:
|
|