Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

T-Mobile wants to put a cell tower in a wooded area in the middle of the Country Club of Billerica on Baldwin Rd. It also wants to put one at Akeson Field on Boston Rd, and an antenna at the water tower at 549 Boston Rd. The only complaint I have is that Verizon is not in the mix and that reception in East Billerica will remain hit or miss. But, there will be plenty of complaints before the Planning Board in an attempt to stop the proposed T-Mobile Towers.

Here are some facts:

All of the residents in the recently constructed condominium abomination that occupies what was once the back 9 holes at the Billerica Country Club will be no closer than 500 feet from the location of the tower. The tower height is a maximum of 140 feet tall and at its planned location; it will be barely visible to the condominium residents. I wish we could say the same for the condominium project itself with respect to the rest of us Billerica residents. Before going any further, let me say that the debate on the Akeson Field site, property owned by the town, has gone on long enough. It’s time for the Planning Board to muster the guts to make a decision and get off the porcelain throne.

Mr. Ed. McLaughlin, a member of the Planning Board, stated, “Billerica is beginning to look like the cell tower capital of the world.”Really? When did Mr. McLaughlin last venture beyond the boundaries of Billerica? Has he been to Somerville, Boston, New York City, or even neighboring Lowell? It sounds like Mr. McLaughlin has already made up his mind and that leads me to ask what exactly is his background and from what source is he basing his judgment?

People look at the number of cell towers already in place and some begin to question the need for so many. Obviously, radio waves, which are what these towers use to receive, interpret and send along signals have a limited range. They travel from your cellular telephone to a base station, which in turn travel to a switching station and on to the person who is being called. The longer the distance between cell phone, tower and switching station, the weaker the signal and the greater chance of dropped calls. Also, higher use demands more infrastructure, especially in dense communication area.

Fear of cell towers by some, often nears the level of irrational hysteria perpetuated by parrot intellect whereby one feels comfortable arguing with “data” relayed by people with little or no background in the subject or through only partially investigated “news-media” sources. It makes no difference to them that the America Cancer Society finds cell towers safe (with rare exception of close proximity to the transmitter source itself). These are the same people who would sign petitions to ban dihydrogen monoxide.

I’m not going to put up a detailed argument to support my view that those opposed to cellular towers (for reasons other than aesthetics or from those with a NIMBY persuasion. What I will do is give you a link to the American Cancer Society’s article on cell phones and cell towers to read and to evaluate for yourself. I will give you a brief outline on the transmission of radio waves and how they propagate through air.

Cell telephone transmissions are no different from radio station transmissions to your nightstand or kitchen radio (AM or FM). Data from a source, such as a radio station or a C.B. radio is transformed from voice or recording into a format that can be sent along to a receiver. The closer the receiver is to the source, the stronger the signal will be. If you’ve traveled to Northern New England (e.g. the White Mountains) while listening to your favorite radio station, then, you know that as you get closer to your destination, the more likely it is that you will have to change radio stations as the signal fails to reach your radio.

This can be adjusted for by the use of switching and relay stations. Switching bandwidth can also change the distance a radio wave can travel effectively. If you take the time to look at the electromagnetic spectrum you will see radio waves are just below microwaves and way below X-rays. The frequencies used in the RF bandwidth have no ability to penetrate and disrupt DNA chains in a manner similar to X or Gamma Rays; therefore, they cannot produce the DNA changes needed to cause cancer.

One other hint as to the danger of RF waves rests with the fact that as the bandwidth becomes tighter, it comes closer to microwave energy. The noticeable effect is that those near tight bandwidth or high-energy radio waves will feel localized or generalized heating of their bodies. For example, if I put you in an MRI scanner to evaluate your knee, your body will be exposed to radio frequency energy sent out at a predetermined bandwidth. Because the knee is a small body part and relatively little energy is needed with very close approximation between the receiver coil (the device around your knee) and the transmitter coil (the device around your knee or the main coil (the tunnel), you will not feel heating locally.

If, however, I were to perform a vascular scan from your chest to your toes in a full body vascular coil, the experience would be different. Because of the size of the coil, the surface area of the body scanned, and the higher energy range used to capture moving protons and contrast agents in a short period of time; you would come out of the study in a heavy sweat. The more body mass (the more fat and muscle) you have, the more heat will be generated as the amount of radio frequency used is dependent, pretty much, upon the weight of the patient.

Abdominal imaging by MRI always generate internal rise in localized body temperature. The body uses the blood to disperse the heat to cool off the core, and those who receive this imaging methodology come out sweating profusely. Since MRI has been around, hundreds of thousands of pregnant women have been scanned using this method to rule out some insidious and dangerous condition where the risk of not imaging becomes too high to ignore. To date, there have been no reports of fetal abnormalities or abnormalities in adolescents and young adults due to such exposure to MRI radio frequency.

Of course, I do not expect this information to calm the hysterical, but I do hope that it will encourage the more rational among us to read data from credible sources, like the American Cancer Society, and avoid the whacked out blogs that are based on junk science and/or fuzzy logic. Radio towers, CB towers and microwave transmission/receiver stations have been around for most of my life. Now, I may be judged less than handsome, but I will never be mistaken for a being other than human. I have been confined for months to a living area approximately 300 feet long, 20 feet wide and 25 feet high for months at a time, from which radio and satellite transmissions have been made frequently and I still have only two arms and two legs. For the record, none of my children look like amphibians.

Cheers!