Bees, Butterflies and Wildlife: Research on Electromagnetic Fields and the Environment

dinsdag, 30 mei 2017 - Categorie: Artikelen

mei 2017

New link, 2022 added at the end
Electromagnetic fields from powerlines, cell phones, cell towers and wireless impacts the birds, bees, wildlife and our environment. Below is just a small example of the critical research that has been done on this issue.

The electromagnetic radiation standards used by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) continue to be based on thermal heating, a criterion now nearly 30 years out of date and inapplicable today.”
-The Department of Interior in a 2014 letter on the impact of cell towers on migratory birds.

Balmori, Alfonso. “Anthropogenic radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as an emerging threat to wildlife orientation.” Science of The Total Environment, vol. 518–519, 2015, pp. 58–60
. The growth of wireless telecommunication technologies causes increased electrosmog. Radio frequency fields in the MHz range disrupt insect and bird orientation.
. Radio frequency noise interferes with the primary process of magnetoreception. Existing guidelines do not adequately protect wildlife. Further research in this area is urgent.

Cucurachi, C., et al. “A review of the ecological effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF).” Environment International, vol. 51, 2013, pp. 116–40.
. A Review of 113 studies from original peer-reviewed publications. RF-EMF had a significant effect on birds, insects, other vertebrates, other organisms and plants in 70% of the studies. Development and reproduction of birds and insects are the most strongly affected endpoints.

Balmori, A. “Electrosmog and species conservation.” Science of the Total Environment, vol. 496, 2014, pp. 314-6.
. “Conclusion: At the present time, there are reasonable grounds for believing that microwave radiation constitutes an environmental and health hazard….Concerning the exposure to electromagnetic fields, the precautionary principle is needed and should be applied to protect species from environmental non-thermal effects (Zinelis, 2010). Controls must be introduced and technology rendered safe to the environment, since this new ubiquitous and invisible pollutant could deplete the efforts devoted to species conservation.”

Manville, Albert M. “A BRIEFING MEMORANDUM: What We Know, Can Infer, and Don’t Yet Know about Impacts from Thermal and Non-thermal Non-ionizing Radiation to Birds and Other Wildlife.” Wildlife and Habitat Conservation Solutions, 2014.
. “In summary, we need to better understand … how to address these growing and poorly understood radiation impacts to migratory birds, bees, bats, and myriad other wildlife. At present, given industry and agency intransigence … massive amounts of money being spent to prevent addressing impacts from non-thermal radiation — not unlike the battles over tobacco and smoking — and a lack of significant, dedicated and reliable funding to advance independent field studies, … we are left with few options. Currently, other than to proceed using the precautionary approach and keep emissions as low as reasonably achievable, we are at loggerheads in advancing meaningful guidelines, policies and regulations that address non-thermal effects….”

Zie voor de verdere lange lijst van publicaties de link bovenaan, en ook:
New study suggests insect populations have declined by 75% over 3 decades
Alarm over decline in flying insects

Artikelen/10891/de_manier_om_insecten_uit_te_roeien_rf_straling .

More recent:
Febr. 1, 2022

Lees verder in de categorie Artikelen | Terug naar homepage | Lees de introductie