Measurements of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields, including 5G, in the city of Columbia, SC, USA

Koppel,Tarmo; Hardell,Lennart

doi:10.3892/wasj.2022.157

Measurements of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields, including 5G, in the city of Columbia, SC, USA

Authors:
- Tarmo Koppel
- Lennart Hardell
View Affiliations

Affiliations: AI Institute, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC 29208, USA, The Environment and Cancer Research Foundation, SE‑702 17 Örebro, Sweden
Published online on: March 24, 2022 https://doi.org/10.3892/wasj.2022.157
Article Number: 22
Copyright: © Koppel et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License.

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

Abstract

The present study aimed to characterize the wireless infrastructure and public exposure to radiofrequency (RF) electromagnetic fields, including the sub‑millimeter wave 5G, in the city center of Columbia, SC, USA. A downtown measurement route was designed to cover popular outdoor areas, including business, recreational and shopping areas. The route was measured five times during different days and times. An exposimeter, was used to cover all the main civilian wireless broadcasting and downlink sources in frequencies 88‑5,850 MHz. The measurement route at the streets and squares calculated 1.240 V/m as a mean exposure (total as a sum of all frequency bands) and 6.867 V/m as all times maximum. The most common contributors to the exposure budget were bands FM US, 14DL, 27DL, 25DL and 66DL - mainly indicating 4G. The exposure levels were found to be 12‑16% lower during weekends as compared to business hours (P<0.001). The spatial analysis of the field distribution revealed 15‑20 hotspot areas. A number of hotspots were found where cell phone base station antennas were mounted on top of the utility poles and therefore positioned at low levels, close to street level. On the whole, the findings of the present study suggest that cell phone base station antennas should be distinct and noticeable, as this would assist individuals who need to limit their exposure by distancing themselves from RF sources.

View Figures

View References

1	United States Census Bureau. City of Columbia. QuickFacts-Columbia City, South Carolina. 2021. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/columbiacitysouthcarolina. Accessed November 19, 2021.
2	Carlberg M, Hedendahl L, Koppel T and Hardell L: High ambient radiofrequency radiation in Stockholm city, Sweden. Oncol Lett. 17:1777–1783. 2019.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
3	Hardell L, Carlberg M, Hedendahl LK, Koppel T and Ahonen M: Environmental radiofrequency radiation at the Järntorget Square in Stockholm Old Town, Sweden in May, 2018 compared with results on brain and heart tumour risks in rats exposed to 1.8 GHz base station environmental emissions. World Acad Sci J. 1:47–54. 2019.
4	Hardell L, Carlberg M, Koppel T and Hedendahl L: High radiofrequency radiation at Stockholm Old Town: An exposimeter study including the Royal Castle, Supreme Court, three major squares and the Swedish Parliament. Mol Clin Oncol. 6:462–476. 2017.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
5	Koppel T, Ahonen M, Carlberg M, Hedendahl LK and Hardell L: Radiofrequency radiation from nearby mobile phone base stations-a case comparison of one low and one high exposure apartment. Oncol Lett. 18:5383–5391. 2019.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
6	Hedendahl LK, Carlberg M, Koppel T and Hardell L: Measurements of radiofrequency radiation with a body-borne exposimeter in Swedish schools with Wi-Fi. Front Public Health. 5(279)2017.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
7	Hardell L, Koppel T, Carlberg M, Ahonen M and Hedendahl L: Radiofrequency radiation at Stockholm Central Railway Station in Sweden and some medical aspects on public exposure to RF fields. Int J Oncol. 49:1315–1324. 2016.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
8	Jalilian H, Eeftens M, Ziaei M and Röösli M: Public exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields in everyday microenvironments: An updated systematic review for Europe. Environ Res. 176(108517)2019.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
9	Sagar S, Dongus S, Schoeni A, Roser K, Eeftens M, Struchen B, Foerster M, Meier N, Adem S and Röösli M: Radiofrequency electromagnetic field exposure in everyday microenvironments in Europe: A systematic literature review. J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol. 28:147–160. 2018.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
10	Viel FJ, Clerc S, Barrera C, Rymzhanova R, Moissonnier M and Cardis E: Residential exposure to radiofrequency fields from mobile phone base stations, and broadcast transmitters: A population-based survey with personal meter. Occup Environ Med. 6:550–556. 2009.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
11	Estenberg J and Augustsson T: Extensive frequency selective measurements of radiofrequency fields in outdoor environments performed with a novel mobile monitoring system. Bioelectromagn. 35:227–230. 2014.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
12	Sagar S, Adem SM, Struchen B, Loughran SP, Brunjes ME, Arangua L, Dalvie MA, Croft RJ, Jerrett M, Moskowitz JM, et al: Comparison of radiofrequency electromagnetic field exposure levels in different everyday microenvironments in an international context. Env Int. 114:297–306. 2018.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
13	Thielens A, Van den Bosschea M, Brzozekc C, Bhatt C, Abramson M, Benke G, Martens L and Joseph W: Microenvironmental personal and head exposure measurements of radio-frequency electromagnetic fields. In: Joint Annual Meeting of the Bioelectromagnetics Society and the European BioElectromagn Assoc (BioEM 2018). Melbourne, pp273-279, 2018.
14	Misek J, Laukova T, Kohan M, Veternik M, Jakusova V and Jakus J: Measurement of low-level radiofrequency electromagnetic fields in the human environment. Acta Med Martiniana. 18:27–33. 2018.
15	Iyare RN, Volskiy V and Vandenbosch GA: Study of the electromagnetic exposure from mobile phones in a city like environment: The case study of Leuven, Belgium. Environ Res. 175:402–413. 2019.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
16	Cansiz M, Abbasov T, Kurt MB and Celik AR: Mapping of radio frequency electromagnetic field exposure levels in outdoor environment and comparing with reference levels for general public health. J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol. 28:161–165. 2018.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
17	Kurnaz C and Mutlu M: Comprehensive radiofrequency electromagnetic field measurements and assessments: A city center example. Environ Monit Assess. 192(334)2020.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
18	Tang C, Yang C, Cai RS, Ye H, Duan L, Zhang Z, Shi Z, Lin K, Song J and Huang X: Analysis of the relationship between electromagnetic radiation characteristics and urban functions in highly populated urban areas. Sci Total Environ. 654:535–540. 2019.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
19	Federal Communications Commission. A Rule by the Federal Communications Commission on 10/10/2012. 2012. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2012/10/10/2012-24792/private-land-mobile-radio-rules. Accessed November 19, 2021.
20	ETSI EN 300 392-2 V3.2.1 (2007-09), European standard, Terrestrial Trunked Radio (TETRA); Voice plus Data (V+D); Part 2: Air Interface (AI). 2007. https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_en/300300_300399/30039202/03.02.01_60/en_30039202v030201p.pdf. Accessed November 19, 2021.
21	Loy M, Karingattil R and Williams L (eds): ISM-Band and Short Range Device Regulatory Compliance Overview, Application Report, Texas Instruments. 2003, http://www.ti.com/lit/pdf/swra048. Accessed November 19, 2021.
22	Federal Communications Commission. Unlicensed Personal Communications Service Devices in the 1920-1930 MHz Band. A Rule on 07/23/2012. 77 FR 4300. 2012. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2012/07/23/2012-17793/unlicensed-personal-communications-service-devices-in-the-1920-1930-mhz.band. Accessed November 19, 2021.
23	European Telecommunications Standards Institute. Digital Enhanced Cordless Telecommunications (DECT); A High Level Guide to the DECT Standardization, ETSI TR 101 178 V1.5.1 (2005-02) Technical Report. 2005. http://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_tr/101100_101199/101178/01.05.01_60/tr_101178v010501p.pdf. Accessed November 19, 2021.
24	Recommendation 13 (page 16) of the State of New Hampshire report: ʻCommission to Study The Environmental and Health Effects of Evolving 5G Technology’. http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/statstudcomm/committees/1474/reports/5G%20final%20report.pdf.