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

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.

AI evidence extraction

Main findings

RF-EMF measurements around single AMI smart meters and banks (up to 81 meters) found maximum field levels at 0.3 m of 10–13 V/m for a single meter and 18–38 V/m for banks of 20–81 meters. Observed 6-min average duty cycles ranged from 0.01% (single meter) up to 13% (81-meter bank). For all scenarios, measured exposure levels at a minimum distance of 0.3 m were reported to be well below ICNIRP, FCC, and IEEE limits; the worst-case time-average exposure at 0.3 m was 5.39% of FCC/IEEE and 9.43% of ICNIRP reference levels.

Outcomes measured

• Electric-field strength (V/m) around AMI smart meters and meter banks
• Duty cycle / fraction of time transmitting (temporal assessment)
• Comparison to ICNIRP, FCC, and IEEE maximum permissible exposure/reference levels
• Statistical models predicting electric-field strength as a function of distance

Suggested hubs

• smart-meters (0.95)
  Direct RF-EMF measurements of AMI smart meters and smart meter banks, including duty cycle and comparison to exposure limits.
• who-icnirp (0.6)
  Explicit comparison of measured levels to ICNIRP reference levels.

{
    "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) around AMI smart meters and meter banks",
        "Duty cycle / fraction of time transmitting (temporal assessment)",
        "Comparison to ICNIRP, FCC, and IEEE maximum permissible exposure/reference levels",
        "Statistical models predicting electric-field strength as a function of distance"
    ],
    "main_findings": "RF-EMF measurements around single AMI smart meters and banks (up to 81 meters) found maximum field levels at 0.3 m of 10–13 V/m for a single meter and 18–38 V/m for banks of 20–81 meters. Observed 6-min average duty cycles ranged from 0.01% (single meter) up to 13% (81-meter bank). For all scenarios, measured exposure levels at a minimum distance of 0.3 m were reported to be well below ICNIRP, FCC, and IEEE limits; the worst-case time-average exposure at 0.3 m was 5.39% of FCC/IEEE and 9.43% of ICNIRP reference levels.",
    "effect_direction": "no_effect",
    "limitations": [],
    "evidence_strength": "moderate",
    "confidence": 0.7800000000000000266453525910037569701671600341796875,
    "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
    "keywords": [
        "radiofrequency",
        "RF-EMF",
        "smart meters",
        "advanced metering infrastructure",
        "AMI",
        "meter banks",
        "urban environments",
        "electric-field strength",
        "duty cycle",
        "ICNIRP",
        "FCC",
        "IEEE",
        "exposure assessment"
    ],
    "suggested_hubs": [
        {
            "slug": "smart-meters",
            "weight": 0.9499999999999999555910790149937383830547332763671875,
            "reason": "Direct RF-EMF measurements of AMI smart meters and smart meter banks, including duty cycle and comparison to exposure limits."
        },
        {
            "slug": "who-icnirp",
            "weight": 0.59999999999999997779553950749686919152736663818359375,
            "reason": "Explicit comparison of measured levels to ICNIRP reference levels."
        }
    ]
}

Comments

Log in to comment.

No comments yet.