Re: Speaking of PG&E Scam...Analogue Meter Users Heads-Up
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Misty Me:
So you live in the woods ..., you honestly believe your findings and measurements will be accurate for all people?.
Honestly, I would guess the smart meter in the woods would radiate more power than in the city since there are few other smart meters near; so I would conclude that most people would experience less RF. And in the city, there are more smart meters (likely though at lower power) but also more wifi, so the relative density of EMF between smart meters and wifi would be similar I guess. So for a rough order of magnitude, yes, I think the results are valid.
I don't know much about infrared, but I know quite a bit about RF and standing 2 meters from the smart meter, I don't think oxygen absorption would have much effect on the results.
My point, to be explicit, is that it appears that smart meters produce a de minimus effect on EMF when considered in conjunction with wifi, cell phones, and AM/FM radio, principally because of the ephemeral nature of the signal.
Re: Speaking of PG&E Scam...Analogue Meter Users Heads-Up
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by kane:
Hi, curious what power levels did you see with your equipment?
Cell Phones produce up to 5 Watts or so(maybe less now?). Frequencies vary a little to a lot by carrier; which bands they use, 900mHz range or 2.1gHz range. Water is resonant around 2gHz(microwave ovens), =====
Power measured at about 2 meters were about -30 dBm as I recall, but I don't have the number for antenna efficiency so hard to convert that directly to transmitter power; you need the effective area of the antenna, plus efficiency factor to compute ERP of the transmitter. But I could compare it to the wifi (although that is at 2.4 GH, but I think it was a rather broad band antenna) and so they should be relative for comparing power density. Wifi is easy to measure as it transmits nearly constantly. If I were to guess, I think the effective area of the antenna was about .03 meters, which makes it about .011 steradians; means absorbing 1/1000 th of the power less the gain which makes it another 6 dB less. If my recollection of -30 dBm is correct, the ERP would be on the order of 5 mwatt. Seems pretty small to me, in fact less than I would expect.
BTW, water peak dielectric loss is actually near 20 GHz, where it is about 8 timers more absorptive than 2.4 GHz and maybe 20 times more than at 900 MHz. You don't want all the RF absorbed in the outer layer of the item cooking so you like it to be mostly transparent to 2.4 GHz. Nice reference here: https://www.tan-delta.com/mw_heating.html
Re: Speaking of PG&E Scam...Analogue Meter Users Heads-Up
Are you Sure? Smart meters farther away from other smeters up their Power? I thought they were not that smart/stupid.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by spam1:
Honestly, I would guess the smart meter in the woods would radiate more power than in the city since there are few other smart meters near; ...
