In the debate over whether radio-frequency emissions from handsets cause adverse human health effects, the wireless telecommunications industry should borrow a page from the energy industry.
Recently, the Wall Street Journal ran a package of stories on corporate response to the contentious global warming issue. The series was subtitled, “Dropping the fight on science, companies are scrambling to look a little greener.”
From that, here’s a notable quote from Dale Heydlauff, vice president of environmental affairs for American Electric Power Co., the nation’s second-largest producer of coal-powered electricity: “Once you realize you can’t kill this thing, then it’s incumbent upon you to try to be a player in the process of shaping policies.”
AEP isn’t sure whether global warming is fact or fantasy, but it wants credibility to gain a seat at the negotiating table. Therefore, it will spend $5.5 million-pocket change for a utility-to plant enough trees to absorb its carbon dioxide emissions, which many (but not all) believe contribute to global warming.
There also is a debate over whether the MBTE oil refiners have added to gasoline to control air pollution actually causes water pollution. But Getty Petroleum Corp. took out a full-page ad in the New York Times announcing it has replaced MBTE with ethanol, which it said, “helps clean the air without harming our drinking water.”
I am not sure whether RF emissions from wireless handsets are a health threat to people or if the scientists who specialize in this sort of thing know for certain either. Nor do I know whether aftermarket RF shields for mobile phones are for real, any more than I can tell if microwave-oven leak detectors work.
But I do know from first-hand experience that the shielded cable connecting my computer, modem and fax prevents interference among those devices, whereas an unshielded cable does not. And I do know that many people pay more for bottled water than they do for gasoline, even though most American water suppliers exceed safe drinking standards.
So it seems a safe bet that consumers would pay a little extra for an industry-certified RF-shield embedded into their wireless devices by manufacturers. After all, no one has stopped watching television or using computers just because manufacturers of those electronic devices use leaded glass screens to shield users from possibly harmful cathode-ray tube emissions.
