According to a large survey released last month, most Europeans believe that cell phones and cell phone antennas damage their health. About three of every four people interviewed expressed moderate to extreme concern. They also expressed considerable concern that they were not being adequately informed about these risks—again, about three out four people interviewed.
Two out of three Europeans felt this way about the health effects WiFi, wireless computer technologies. Because a recent expose in England found that WiFi networks in schools exposed children to much more radiation than cell antennas, several British school districts are reconsidering their commitment to WiFi.
Quite the opposite is the case in San Francisco. The San Francisco Board of Supervisors is considering a citywide WiFi network that would make Internet access free to citizens. The Board will soon decide whether the WiFi network proposed for the city should be reviewed for its environmental and health impacts. Originally, the plan was given a pass on conducting an environmental review by the Planning Commission. An appeal filed by the San Francisco Antenna Free Union caused the Planning Commission to kick the issue up to the Board of Supervisors. WiFi boosters don’t want such a review. They don’t think there’s anything to worry about.
Mayor Gavin Newsom is a big fan of free WiFi. Nathan Ballard, speaking on behalf of the mayor’s office, is quoted as saying that the Union’s appeal “is a frivolous maneuver designed to delay free WiFi for no good reason.”
Mr. Ballard is not well informed. Many well-meaning supporters, including journalists, are in the dark on this issue. In fact, vast numbers of WiFi supporters strenuously ignore the public health implications of a citywide WiFi network, which is why an environmental review is desirable.
What’s maddening is that there’s a less risky alternative under consideration: a wired, fiber optic network owned and operated by the city that would also provide free access to the Internet to San Franciscans. The Board of Supervisors has adopted the precautionary principle as city policy. Performing an environmental review would mean evaluating how to safely deliver free Internet access to the citizens of San Francisco, comparing the possible environmental and health risks of a wireless to a wired network.
The lead character in the science fiction novel The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy by the late Douglas Adams is admonished to always carry a towel. The reason, he is told, is that he might encounter the Ravenous Bugbladder Beast, the most vicious creature in the universe. However, it’s also the most stupid creature in the universe: it believes that if you can’t see it, it can’t see you. So when you encounter a Ravenous Bugbladder Beast, you throw the towel over your head so you won’t see the Beast so the Beast thinks it can’t see you and so it will slink away.
The San Francisco Board of Supervisors is about to throw a towel over its head. Unfortunately, unlike the Ravenous Bugbladder Beast, the microwaves from a wireless network won’t slink away.
But enthusiasm abounds. It will bring the Internet to the poor. It will be free. In fact, the city will make some money on it because the current deal has the Earthlink/Google consortium that will install and run the network paying the city for the privilege.
And the citizens of San Francisco, especially its children, will become a public health experiment. Free WiFi isn’t likely to be free. But I’m sure WiFi boosters will have their towels ready.
