DESTROYING OUR FUTURE: Christy Clark .. Site C .. and Corporate Canada

No Site C Dam Here

“Creative Commons No Site C Dam Here” by tuchodi is licensed under CC BY 2.0

(March 24, 2016)  The big problem in Canada is that The Corporations run the country.  They own The Big Media, and they control The Top Politicians.  The politicians ‘manage’ us – and the Media keep us divided and uninformed so we don’t get in the way.

Site C is one example.  It’s an economic and environmental disaster – but it works for the 1% of the 1% – so Christy Clark is building it for them.  She’ll spend Billions of our dollars to build Site C and destroy some of Canada’s best farmland.  And Site C will also help bankrupt – and privatize – BC Hydro. It’s Win Win for big business. Continue reading

Interesting Experience Holding a Vigil out side the Legislature.

By Norm Ryder.

Many examples of the government and Worksafe/WCAT abuse and bullying of the most vulnerable – an injured worker almost by definition is in the category of the most vulnerable, One is left with the impression that it is government policy to bully the disadvantaged and the more they are disadvantaged the more they qualify to be bullied.

One certainly can not accuse the government or its agencies of caring and compassion. The government among other gifts to the least vulnerable in their recent budget have decided the richest 2 % should be given 230 million a year or $690 over 3 years in breaks and advantages. Contrast this to the $170 million over 3 years they are providing the least advantaged of the disabled. Continue reading

Trudeau Names President of Canada China Business Council to Senate …

(March 18, 2016) Peter Harder is now the Trudeau Government’s ‘representative’ in the Senate. Mr. Harder is also President of the Canada China Business Council … and headed the Trudeau government’s Transition Team. He also worked in the federal government for almost 30 years.

For Mr. Trudeau to place the President of a Corporate Trade Group into such a prominent position without fully informing Canadians is worrisome. Does Mr. Harder represent Canadians, or Corporations?

Canada China Business Council Board of Directors.

Jack Etkin: jetkin@hotmail.com
The Bridge News Service

Why a Cell Tower Should Be In No One’s Backyard

By Norm Ryder.

From Cell Tower Siting Considerations

During the process of reviewing the scientific papers regarding the harmful effects of Electromagnetic Radiation I have noted that up until approximately the 1990’s the research generally noted there were harmful effects from the radiation. During the period that cell phones and data communication devices started to gain widespread use use a number of professional opinions that the radiation could not possibly cause harm began to appear. In virtually every case the people offering the opinion had ties to the telecom industry.

More recently the weight of scientific papers on the topic has shifted with a greater number of the more recent papers noting a number of reasons for concern regarding exposure to Electromagnetic Radiation even at low levels or power densities. The papers noting a variety of concerns also were more often written by scientists with no ties to the telecom industry.

A comparison between the way the telecom industry is attempting to use all their considerable economic clout to sway the science to the well documented tactics used by large pharmaceutical companies and the tobacco industry to sway the public knowledge and concerns about the health effects of their product quickly comes to mind. An example of industry “buying” favourable positions is Dual chairs when Ystad bought Apple computers to students & Teachers extra work can give Apple benefits to school

For the full summary of why a Cell Tower should be in no one’s backyard – Cell Tower Siting Considerations

Radiation Danger zones around Wifi and other personal communication Devices

By Norm Ryder.

All electrical and electronic equipment emit Electromagnetic Radiation (EMR), fortunately most devices do not emit high levels of EMR. The ones of prime concern are those that emit radio signals. These include but not limited to: Cell Phones, Cordless Phones, Laptop, Tablets, Baby Wireless Monitors, Wireless Routers. The laptop this is being written on emits approximately 25 milivolts per meter (Electric Field) when turned on, 25 more when the charger is plugged in and regularly over 1000 milivolts when on Wifi. To determine the Power Density would would also need to measure the amps per meter (Magnetic Field). Few radiation meters measure the Amps per meter. These regular meters calculate the amp reading based on established physics when the measurements are in the far field or at a distance from the source.

Yes this is a topic that few of us are aware of or understand on first reading. More explanation of the physics of Radio Frequency is in Cell Tower Siting Considerations. An excerpt on Near Field Radiation is in the pdf accompanying this article. The full booklet is available on request by contacting worksafe@sios.ca .

The radiation field around a transmitting device is divided into 3 primary zones: the Near, Far and a zone that is called the Intermediate or Transition zone – a blend of the other 2.

figure A1 - General antenna field regions
Safety Code 6 (SC6) Radio Frequency Exposure Compliance Evaluation Template (Uncontrolled Environment Exposure Limits) Industry Canada Technical Note-261

In the near field Spectacular peaks and Valleys of radiation intensity can occur, the radiation pattern is considered to be difficult to model if it is possible to model it. In the Radio Frequency Tool Kit For Environmental Health Practitioners by the BC Centre for Disease Control (BCCCDC) the near field zone is referred to as chaotic. In his zone both Industry Canada (IC) and the BCCDC specify both the Electric Field and Magnetic Fields must be measured in several locations to obtain the true power density readings.

The extent of the danger zones around an emitting device is determined by a series of calculations based on the frequency (wavelength) and size of the antenna. Additional confusions can be introduced by interference from other sources, reflected energy, stored energy and antenna design and imperfections to name a few of the other sources of complexity that may possibly exist.

The Danger zone around a cell phone can be consider to be in the order of 0.1 m and greater if the phone is using wifi. A cell phone antenna – even ones on roof tops over 12 meters to the extreme danger limit and 50 meters to the high danger zone. Larger antennas or higher frequencies could extend these distances considerably. A home wifi router the minimum distance to the extremely dangerous zone limit 0.1 and to the highly dangerous zone 0.3 meters (1 ft). For a laptop assume distance in excess of 1 meter and 4 meters respectively.

Excerpt Cell Tower Siting Considerations