Dear Editor,
There has been so much opinion, information and misinformation on the possible medical effects of the radiation from smart meters that we should at least look at some of the information from the "other side" of the controversy, or in this case from a source in between.
A recent study at Washington State University considered the exposure of human beings to radiation from one example of a wireless smart meter at 900 and 1900 MHz and concluded that the Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) values obtained (absorption of electromagnetic radiation by a human body) were within safety guidelines except in the contrived situation where an individual essentially placed his or her head against the meter and the radiation was assumed to be continuous.
This did not take into account the typical duty cycle of transmissions (0.088 per cent — transmissions for less than one second in every thousand). If this were taken into account, even when the head was placed against the meter and the antenna aligned with the nose, the guidelines would be met. This assumed free space between the human and the meter; the existence of a wall would further reduce exposure. All whole-body SAR values were substantially less than the safety guidelines in IEEE Std C95.1, 1999.
Looking at the smart meter on my own house, there does not appear to be an antenna there, so presumably no radiation at all. Any antenna would have to be outside any metal screen within the meter enclosure and it would be stuck to the inside of the glass.
The title of the study is "A Study of RF Dosimetry from Exposure to an AMI Smart Meter" and there are 38 references, including a few expressing fear of the effect of radiation and opposing the very concept of the meters.
Health Canada also took a look at the situation. Have a look at hc-sc.gc.ca/hl-vs/iyh-vsv/prod/meters-compteurs-eng.php
Bob Eldridge
Pemberton
