RF Safe

Spatial and temporal assessment of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields emitted by smart meters and smart meter banks in urban environments

2020 · No effect · Insufficient evidence

← Research stream
No effectInsufficient evidencePaper 1601

RF-EMF measurements around single AMI smart meters and banks (20–81 meters) in a facility and at five urban locations found maximum electric-field levels at 0.3 m of 10–13 V/m for a single meter and 18–38 V/m for meter banks. Observed 6-min average duty cycle…

Study snapshot

Publicationmanual · 2020
Study typeexposure_assessment
Reported directionNo effect
Evidence ratingInsufficient

Abstract

Spatial and temporal assessment of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields emitted by smart meters and smart meter banks in urban environments Aerts S, Van den Bossche M, Vergara X, Odie S, Verloock L, Martens L, WoutJ. Spatial and temporal assessment of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields emitted by smart meters and smart meter banks in urban environments. Environmental Research. 183. Apr 2020. 109196. Highlights • We present a method to assess spatiotemporal RF-EMF exposure to AMI smart meters. • Measurements of smart meter(s) (banks) were performed in a densely populated area. • Maximum field levels at 0.3 m were 13 V/m (1 m) and 38 V/m (>20 m). • Duty cycles were between 0.01% (1 m) and 14% (81-m bank). • The maximum time-averaged exposure level was 9.43% of the ICNIRP reference level. Abstract This paper describes radiofrequency (RF) electromagnetic field (EMF) measurements in the vicinity of single and banks of advanced metering infrastructure (AMI) smart meters. The measurements were performed in a meter testing and distribution facility as well as in-situ at five urban locations. The measurements consisted of gauging the RF environment at the place of assessment, evaluating the worst-case electric-field levels at various positions around the assessed AMI meter configuration (spatial assessment), which ranged from a single meter to a bank of 81 m, and calculating the duty cycle of the system, i.e. the fraction of time that the AMI meters were actually transmitting (12-h temporal assessment). Both in-situ and in the meter facility, the maximum field levels at 0.3 m from the meter configurations were 10-13 V/m for a single meter and 18-38 V/m for meter banks with 20-81 m. Furthermore, 6-min average duty cycles of 0.01% (1 m) up to 13% (81-m bank) were observed. Next, two general statistical models (one for a single meter and one for a meter bank) were constructed to predict the electric-field strength as a function of distance to any configuration of the assessed AMI meters. For all scenarios, the measured exposure levels (at a minimum distance of 0.3 m) were well below the maximum permissible exposure limits issued by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP), the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC), and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Indeed, the worst-case time-average exposure level at a distance of 0.3 m from an AMI installation was 5.39% of the FCC/IEEE and 9.43% of the ICNIRP reference levels. sciencedirect.com

Machine Enhanced Logic

AI evidence extraction

Structured fields below were generated from the paper’s abstract and metadata to make the evidence easier to inspect. Automated extraction may be incomplete or incorrect; verify important details against the original paper.

Study typeexposure_assessment
Effect directionno_effect
PopulationNot supplied
Sample sizeNot supplied
ExposureRF · 12-h temporal assessment; 6-min average duty cycles reported
Evidence strengthInsufficientConfidence: 78% · Peer reviewed: yes

Main findings

RF-EMF measurements around single AMI smart meters and banks (20–81 meters) in a facility and at five urban locations found maximum electric-field levels at 0.3 m of 10–13 V/m for a single meter and 18–38 V/m for meter banks. Observed 6-min average duty cycles ranged from 0.01% (single meter) up to ~13–14% (81-meter bank). Worst-case time-averaged exposure at 0.3 m was reported as 5.39% of FCC/IEEE and 9.43% of ICNIRP reference levels, i.e., below those limits.

Outcomes measured

  • Electric-field strength (V/m) near AMI smart meters and smart meter banks
  • Duty cycle (fraction of time transmitting)
  • Time-averaged exposure as % of ICNIRP/FCC/IEEE reference levels
  • Distance-based prediction models for electric-field strength

Limitations

  • Frequencies of the AMI transmissions not specified in the provided abstract/metadata
  • Number of individual measurements/sampling strategy not reported in the provided abstract/metadata
  • Assessment focused on electric-field levels and duty cycle; no health outcomes evaluated
View raw extracted JSON
{
  "study_type": "exposure_assessment",
  "exposure": {
    "band": "RF",
    "source": "smart meter",
    "frequency_mhz": null,
    "sar_wkg": null,
    "duration": "12-h temporal assessment; 6-min average duty cycles reported"
  },
  "population": null,
  "sample_size": null,
  "outcomes": [
    "Electric-field strength (V/m) near AMI smart meters and smart meter banks",
    "Duty cycle (fraction of time transmitting)",
    "Time-averaged exposure as % of ICNIRP/FCC/IEEE reference levels",
    "Distance-based prediction models for electric-field strength"
  ],
  "main_findings": "RF-EMF measurements around single AMI smart meters and banks (20–81 meters) in a facility and at five urban locations found maximum electric-field levels at 0.3 m of 10–13 V/m for a single meter and 18–38 V/m for meter banks. Observed 6-min average duty cycles ranged from 0.01% (single meter) up to ~13–14% (81-meter bank). Worst-case time-averaged exposure at 0.3 m was reported as 5.39% of FCC/IEEE and 9.43% of ICNIRP reference levels, i.e., below those limits.",
  "effect_direction": "no_effect",
  "limitations": [
    "Frequencies of the AMI transmissions not specified in the provided abstract/metadata",
    "Number of individual measurements/sampling strategy not reported in the provided abstract/metadata",
    "Assessment focused on electric-field levels and duty cycle; no health outcomes evaluated"
  ],
  "evidence_strength": "insufficient",
  "confidence": 0.78,
  "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
  "keywords": [
    "radiofrequency",
    "RF-EMF",
    "smart meters",
    "advanced metering infrastructure",
    "AMI",
    "smart meter banks",
    "urban environments",
    "electric-field strength",
    "duty cycle",
    "ICNIRP",
    "FCC",
    "IEEE",
    "exposure assessment"
  ],
  "suggested_hubs": [
    {
      "slug": "smart-meters",
      "weight": 0.95,
      "reason": "Study measures RF-EMF emissions/exposure from AMI smart meters and smart meter banks and compares to guideline limits."
    }
  ]
}
AI can be wrong. Always verify against the paper.

AI-extracted fields are generated from the abstract and metadata and may be incomplete or incorrect. This material is for informational purposes and is not medical advice.

Identifiers and source

DOI: Not supplied
PubMed: Not supplied

Read the original paper →

Related papers

← Back to the Research Library