RF EMFs Causing Accelerated Corrosion of Power Plants, Buildings & Infrastructure

RF EMFs Causing Accelerated Corrosion of Power Plants, Buildings & Infrastructure
November 26, 2013

Louise Levert
Secretariat
Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
280 Slater St. P.O. Box 1046
Ottawa, Ontario
K1P 5S9

Re: Commission Decision to Dismiss Qualified Science Specific to the Agenda

GE Canada, Other Operations – GE Nuclear, 1025 Lansdowne Ave, Toronto, ON M6H 3Z6

Dear Ms Levert,

The letter of November 25, 2013 wasn't provided to the commission with an agenda except to inform them of a real danger that is very specific to the GE-Hitachi plant. The letter included specific federal law, transcripts from the BCUC and confirmation of 24/7 exposure by Health Canada. My professional opinion isn't singular; we are warning of liability as is done for all industry as well as insurers.
 
For the commission to administratively dismiss the letter will recklessly endanger the public by ignoring the applicable science professionals credentialed by the government you work for. Policy is based on science, not the other way around. When fire departments, police or engineers tell anyone to immediately to leave a building, are they ignored?
 
While the commission didn't accept the letter of Nov. 25, 2013, others have including lawyers, insurers, engineers, medical education, media, citizens and others across the board have. The commission has no alternative but to disqualify the technical aspects of everything in the letter. Can you please provide the reporting from registered engineers supporting their decision? I would suggest retaining Andrew Michrowski and associates because of their expertise related to accelerated corrosion.

Could the commission please pass on the reporting letter or consultation from medical professionals dismissing adverse health effects of the employees or visitors to the Lansdowne facility?
 
The commission's decision ignoring Government professionals will be reported for the urgency it is and through applicable channels. I would further advise the commission members that politically and administratively dismissing this for the inconvenience will not negate liability for recklessly endangering the public. None of us are exempt and it was reported in our capacity or I would be guilty of reckless endangerment as well.

Sincerely,
Curtis Bennett
Chief Science Officer
Interprovincial Journeyman Electrician(Red Seal)
Engineering Technologist
Adjunct Faculty for IHF & GEDI
33 Year Advanced Thermography Background
www.thermoguy.com
curtis@thermoguy.com   
2013 11 26 CNSC

Click on the right for 3 page pdf.

Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission Agenda.pdf Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission Agenda.pdf
Size : 17.077 Kb
Type : pdf

November 25, 2013

Louise Levert
Secretariat
Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
280 Slater St. P.O. Box 1046
Ottawa, Ontario
K1P 5S9

Re: GE Canada, Other Operations – GE Nuclear, 1025 Lansdowne Ave, Toronto, ON M6H 3Z6

RF EMFs Causing Accelerated Corrosion of Power Plants, Facilities, Buildings & Infrastructure



Dear Ms Levert,

I am resubmitting the letter regarding nuclear safety specific to 1025 Lansdowne Ave. That said, I wouldn't be doing my job for the commission or engineers if I didn't clarify that the earlier document of November 21, 2013 referencing all Nuclear Facilities can't be ruled out or dismissed.

As government certified energy and building engineering professionals, we should have been informed of the Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Field(RF EMFs) exposure in its entirety. Attempts through BC Provincial MLA Norm Letnick, Minister Rich Coleman and federal ministries to clarify missing science did not get the required qualified response. The orientation of the RF EMFs, intensity of the fields specific to Nuclear Facilities is information critical to the  objectives of the commission and cannot be left out, without exception. Engineers are insured for errors or omissions. That brings a liability and compromises design.  

All development is designed to comply with building codes which accommodates all loading including vibration. RF EMFs penetrating buildings induces currents and causes atomic or molecular polarizing at billions of times per second as well. Simply put, buildings were not designed for 24/7 RF electromagnetic radiation exposure.  

There have been important changes in science that need to be incorporated into any consideration of safety regarding Nuclear Power Safety, building development and infrastructure. All building development and infrastructure is designed for compliance with applicable codes.

While wireless technology use grows, there are important considerations and science missed. Health Canada's Safety Code 6 governs the limits of human exposure to RF EMFs and has adopted the Specific Absorption Rate(SAR) for testing the limits of human exposure. The SAR values are dosage of electromagnetic radiation based on 6 minutes exposure for a 200 lb man.

An alarming reality is that even though Safety Code 6 uses the same science standards as the FCC and other governing bodies, they admit causality linking the frequencies to adverse health effects has been missing. Here is a link to the SAR testing for human exposure only.
http://www.ce-mag.com/archive/03/01/miller.html


The SAR test for cell phones was also applied to Wi-Fi and wireless smart meters. Health Canada deemed that because the laptop or smart meter isn't held against the head like the cell phone, 24/7 exposure was acceptable.

http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hl-vs/iyh-vsv/prod/meters-compteurs-eng.php
 
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hl-vs/iyh-vsv/prod/wifi-eng.php
 
Government professionals reported errors or omissions in Safety Code 6 in September 2010 linking the frequencies to adverse health effects. I provided expert witness for Canadian Parliament's Standing Committee at their request in October 2010 and lectured medical education on RF EMFs at the University of Central Florida in January 2011. Here is a letter about the accreditation of the medical education program and it is applicable in Canada. http://www.thermoguy.com/pdfs/Integrative_Health_Forum_on_Medical_Education_Including_Wireless_Exposure.pdf

Once you incorporate the grid and all bio electrical information of humans, you have causation and biological plausibility substantiating adverse health effects.
 
The SAR test not incorporating the Smart Grid, Wi-Fi Routers or the electrical information associated with biological systems was confirmed in FortisBC's application to the BCUC for wireless smart meters.

Here are transcripts from the BCUC where FortisBC admit to electromagnetically inducing the 17,000 sq. kms of their coverage areas. That substantiates the RF EMF interaction with building development and the same is applicable to Toronto and other areas.

Questions to FortisBC on costs of wired versus wireless meters were not answered. FortisBC lawyers argued the costs associated with blanket electromagnetic radiation of everything in 17,000 sq. km was outside the scope of costs. The BCUC ruled for FortisBC even though the real costs and liabilities were not represented.

Cross examination of FortisBC experts substantiated the deployment of frequencies over 17,000 sq. kms. On page 1171, line 20 of the BCUC transcripts, the utility's engineer takes exception to me saying they will cover 17,000 sq. Km. On page 1172 he confirms the 17,000 sq. km of their coverage area. http://www.thermoguy.com/pdfs/Fortis_BC_AMI_Vol_6.pdf

My cross examination begins on page 104 and it was frustrating to see experts try to dismiss science to support a flawed report on safety. They were pinned down on important key issues for causation and biological plausibility. On page 1112, line 24 their electrical engineer states it would be his duty to revise the report if it missed information. The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission should insist Scholnikov provide the revised report. Page 1116, line 4 Scholnikov as an electrical engineer confirms the FCC, Canada as well as other agencies use the same science and that the SAR is a dosage of electromagnetic radiation.
 
On page 1141 of the cross examination of Dr. Bailey, he confirms the electricity of the body. On line 10, I ask how many frequencies associated with a human organism. Line 14 he confirms he doesn't know where that information is. Keep reading and he confirms the electrical information associated with biology isn't in their Exponent Report.

The health and adverse health effects are included in this document because of their importance to nuclear safety. The electromagnetic induction inside facilities will adversely affect the health of people in or visiting the facilities.

It was confirmed at FortisBC's application how wireless smart meters moved forward without consultation. The BC Legislature "entrusted" BC Hydro as "experts" to install smart meters and the grid. BC Hydro received special consideration to bypass all regulatory process and the horror story started. Utilities have the right to work on meters but it has to be done properly. They did not have the right to deploy antennas and wireless infrastructure to electromagnetically radiate municipalities, agriculture and large coverage areas per utility. Buildings, infrastructure, crops, trees, biology, pollinators, etc are not designed for it.

Magnetic, RF EMF and even solar EMFs interacting with buildings can be seen with advanced infrared applications. The exterior colour of buildings can change the interaction of solar EMFs where we have documented generated heat on building development close to boiling temperature. That in itself causes buildings to grossly exceed climatic data supplied through building code by Environment Canada. Here is evidence at the BCUC website for the FortisBC application for smart meters showing massive energy waste that couldn't be seen before. Shade, paint or mitigating technologies would limit solar EMF exposure and knock the energy waste off the grid immediately where wireless smart meters will not address it. http://www.bcuc.com/Documents/Proceedings/2012/DOC_32604_C19-6_WKCC-Submission-RDCK-Nelson-Creston_Suspension.pdf

Neither engineers, education, insurers or municipalities were told their building designs were being affected and they aren't insured for it. It is critically important the commission allow this information to be presented and all applicable questions by the commission be answered.


Sincerely,
Curtis Bennett
Chief Science Officer
Interprovincial Journeyman Electrician(Red Seal)
Engineering Technologist
Adjunct Faculty for IHF & GEDI
33 Year Advanced Thermography Background
www.thermoguy.com
curtis@thermoguy.com 

CNSC 2

Click on the right for 3 page pdf.

Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission.pdf Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission.pdf
Size : 22.781 Kb
Type : pdf

Note: The above letter is a revised version of the one first submitted on November 21, 2013.

Adjunct Professor Curtis Bennett

Related News

Nuclear Power Plants, Refineries, Gas Plants, Buildings, Infrastructure, Etc. Being Radiated

January 27, 2013

Twitter
 
Bookmark and Share

Educational and Informational Purposes: All information on this site and all links that are linked to from StayOnTheTruth.com represent solely the opinions of their producers.

This information and links to more information are made available to you as a resource for your own research and evaluation not as an endorsement.

StayOnTheTruth.com is not in the business of persuading you or anyone else to believe anything that that is presented linked to from this site; however, it does encourage you to use all available resources to form your own judgement about very important things that affect your life.

Fair Dealing and Fair Use Notice: The material on this site is provided for educational and informational purposes. It may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. It is being made available in an effort to advance the understanding of scientific, environmental, economic, social justice and human rights issues etc. It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair dealing' or 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in copyright law. In accordance with the Fair Dealing or Fair Use intention, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have an interest in using the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair dealing' or 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. The information on this site does not constitute legal or technical advice. 

 

Attribution Noncommercial Share Alike Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License

Make a Free Website with Yola.