Authors
Dr Chris Brzozek
Mr Rohan Mate
Dr Chhavi Raj Bhatt
A/Prof Sarah Loughran
Prof Andrew W. Wood
A/Prof Ken Karipidis
Institutions
The Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency
Swinburne University of Technology
Journal
International Journal of Environmental Evidence
Background
In many countries, humans are protected from harmful radio wave exposure by safety limits that are based on guidelines by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection. However, there are currently no recognised international guidelines to specifically protect plants and animals.
It’s important to understand if there are potential effects from radio wave exposure on plants and animals. This is because certain animals, such as birds and insects, can reach areas not typically accessible to the public such as in front of a mobile base station, radar, or broadcast antenna. These locations could exceed internationally recognised safety limits. Therefore, it’s important to understand if safety limits for humans are also protective of plants and animals.
Method
From 26,537 papers, 334 articles (237 on fauna and 96 on flora) were identified as eligible to be included in the systematic map for analysis. Studies were omitted from the analysis if they did not meet the eligibility criteria. That eligibility criteria included being published in English, not being a duplicate and looking at the effects of radiation exposure in the radio frequency range of the electromagnetic energy spectrum.
Conclusion
The main finding was that there was a relationship between the quality of the methods and if an effect on plants and animals was found. For poor quality studies, radio waves were found to adversely affect plants and animals. For good quality studies, radio waves were not found to cause adverse effects on plants and animals.
The authors acknowledge that there is a language bias as they only considered papers in English. Also, because of the large number of studies included, the authors did not seek data such as the power density or specific absorption rate if not reported in the studies they assessed.
Further high-quality research is needed to resolve the differences between what is found in poor quality studies and good quality studies.
Link to study: International Journal of Environmental Studies
