EMF Radiation

[hcsharp]

The test results seemed more "empiracle" than "science".

A) Sample size of one.

It would be quite rare for there to be any significant differences between cars of the same model. In addition, more than one test has been reported in this thread.

B) One meter with limited bandwidth.
C) Meter not calibrated.

Strong assertions when you don't even know. Why would you have any reason to believe the meter wasn't calibrated? Or only testing a limited bandwidth? These were skeptical people looking for serious results. I have no reason to believe they would use equipment that didn't work.

D) Magnetic fields not measured.

Just because they had low readings doesn't mean nothing was measured. Are you suggesting the results wouldn't be legitimate unless they found much higher levels of EMF?

As far as your second question, I think I will chaulk it up to "human nature". I see both sides doing this.

Are you talking about the EMF issue? Can you provide examples of "both sides doing this" in this thread? I haven't heard anybody else demand a scientific study regardless of what "side" they were on. I don't even think there are any "sides." Did I miss something?

I will say, though, as time goes on and knowledge increases, many things that were considered "safe" turn out to be not so safe.

That's very true. What constitutes a safe level of EMF radiation is somewhat controversial and it's often hard to sort the truth from the hype. The tests mentioned in this thread indicate levels that are below anything considered a health risk by even conservative estimates. But I really don't think the purpose of this thread is to determine a safe level of EMF. You can decide that for yourself based on multiple other studies, using the test results that have been reported here. Keep in mind that CR found no correlation between hybrids and EMF levels. The highest levels appear to be from gassers. Oh, and they used a sample size of 1 for each model.:wink:

 

[brianman]

People are just afraid of things they can't see.

I'm afraid of ghosts sprinkling iocane powder on my pillow.

 

[Michael2000]

Like breathing raw and burned gasoline fumes(the alternative)?

Where is it you are breathing all these fumes? This isn't 1964. Cars have evaporative emissions systems now. Gas fillers collect vapors. Cars have catalytic converters. Some cars even have charcoal cabin filters.

I hope you are not drinking any alcohol.

Michael

- - - Updated - - -

The problem is that EMF radiation has been debunked so many times over the past twenty years that folks get tired of explaining it. You get more EMF radiation from your house wiring than you ever will from any car.

That is just nonsense. There are levels of EMF that are not safe. That has not been debunked. What is not clear are what precisely those safe levels are at various frequencies.

Michael

- - - Updated - - -

It would be quite rare for there to be any significant differences between cars of the same model. In addition, more than one test has been reported in this thread.



Strong assertions when you don't even know. Why would you have any reason to believe the meter wasn't calibrated? Or only testing a limited bandwidth? These were skeptical people looking for serious results. I have no reason to believe they would use equipment that didn't work.



Just because they had low readings doesn't mean nothing was measured. Are you suggesting the results wouldn't be legitimate unless they found much higher levels of EMF?





Are you talking about the EMF issue? Can you provide examples of "both sides doing this" in this thread? I haven't heard anybody else demand a scientific study regardless of what "side" they were on. I don't even think there are any "sides." Did I miss something?



That's very true. What constitutes a safe level of EMF radiation is somewhat controversial and it's often hard to sort the truth from the hype. The tests mentioned in this thread indicate levels that are below anything considered a health risk by even conservative estimates. But I really don't think the purpose of this thread is to determine a safe level of EMF. You can decide that for yourself based on multiple other studies, using the test results that have been reported here. Keep in mind that CR found no correlation between hybrids and EMF levels. The highest levels appear to be from gassers. Oh, and they used a sample size of 1 for each model.:wink:

It's a guy who says he has "a meter" that measures EMF on the internet. That is not a scientific test. And to think there is a magic meter that measures EMF with unlimited bandwidth is just ludicrous. There is no such thing. Not only that, the person doing the test should be measuring EMF based on frequency ranges.

Michael

 

[bonnie]

And yet you come on a forum to get that scientific data. Have you asked Tesla?

 

[Michael2000]

And yet you come on a forum to get that scientific data. Have you asked Tesla?

What are you implying with "and yet"? Is there something wrong with someone coming here looking for actual scientific tests?

I don't think I am going to get any response from Tesla. They aren't going to release that, and, frankly, I don't think they care if someone is interested in that. I don't even get a response to any question. Their service at Corp is terrible in my experience. They are selling all the cars they can make.

Some of the behavior is disconcerting. A few people come on here asking a legitimate question, and they are demonized. A few members of this forum sound like more like fanatics, than enthusiasts, making, personal attacks, which behavior not allowed by the forum rules.

Michael

 

[dsm363]

Thanks for link.

As far as your second question, I think I will chaulk it up to "human nature". I see both sides doing this. I will say, though, as time goes on and knowledge increases, many things that were considered "safe" turn out to be not so safe.

Michael

Where is your scientific proof it is a problem then?

 

[Michael2000]

Where is your scientific proof it is a problem then?

I don't know how to make this any clearer. I am looking for the scientific studies. I am not making any assertions or assumptions either way.

Michael

 

[bonnie]

What are you implying with "and yet"? Is there something wrong with someone coming here looking for actual scientific tests?

I don't think I am going to get any response from Tesla. They aren't going to release that, and, frankly, I don't think they care if someone is interested in that. I don't even get a response to any question. Their service at Corp is terrible in my experience. They are selling all the cars they can make.

Some of the behavior is disconcerting. A few people come on here asking a legitimate question, and they are demonized. A few members of this forum sound like more like fanatics, than enthusiasts, making, personal attacks, which behavior not allowed by the forum rules.

Michael

No, the issue is that several people offered up information & several others (myself included) took offense over the casual dismissal of the data as 'non-scientific'. You assumed that the folks here didn't have the proper background to make the claims that were being made. You didn't know that.

If you haven't yet asked Tesla, then you don't know that Tesla won't supply that information. I suspect that the only thing that will meet the standard you seek is a report from a NRTL lab.

For what it's worth, I've had great response from Tesla to questions I've asked. Perhaps it is who I've asked or the approach, I have no idea. If I were concerned about EMF, I'd do a few things ... I'd ask Tesla for the information, I'd look into automotive standards, I'd take a known device with poor immunity (meaning, easy to spot emissions in the area) for immediate feedback - folklore only, but an instant data point, and I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss people here who are physicists and engineers and actually DO know something about which they speak.

 

[Raffy.Roma]

If you are concerned about the electromagnetic field that could enter in the cabin of a Model S I would like to say that there is no issue at all concerning this matter because the frequencies of the electric fields inside the motor and all the electronic stuff of a Model S are too low to allow the electromagnetic field to propagate and enter the cabin.
I would be more careful with a mobile phone inside the car, but also in this case the Model S has a bluetooth interface installed. So no problem at all!

 

[Doug_G]

Where is it you are breathing all these fumes?

At the self-serve gas pump. I've yet to fuel a car without inhaling vapours.

That is just nonsense. There are levels of EMF that are not safe. That has not been debunked. What is not clear are what precisely those safe levels are at various frequencies.

You'd have a pretty hard time deliberately making a low frequency field strong enough to cause damage to a human. We're not talking microwaves here; drive inverters use frequencies in the kilohertz range.

The motor drive in the Tesla is highly efficient, which means that the vast majority of the energy is going into mechanical motion. The remaining inefficiency is mainly due to heat losses. The amount of magnetic field (not really EM fields at these wavelengths) leaking out of the system is quite small.

It's a guy who says he has "a meter" that measures EMF on the internet. That is not a scientific test. And to think there is a magic meter that measures EMF with unlimited bandwidth is just ludicrous. There is no such thing. Not only that, the person doing the test should be measuring EMF based on frequency ranges.

You don't need an unlimited bandwidth. Actually you need a pretty small bandwidth because the range of frequencies used in a drive inverter is very low.

 

[Robert.Boston]

Moderator's Note: I've moved some posts to Snippiness.

 

[upstart555]

OK first. The measuring device that has been meaningful to me has been a gauss meter. Let me say that whether EMF is harmful or not is less the question for me than how EMF levels correlate with unpleasant phenomenon in my body. Let me explain. Back in 2002 I rented a first generation Prius that I drove from SF to Oregon . By the time I got there I was a discombobulated mess. I was spaced out, exhausted, frazzled beyond anything I ever experienced in my life. Did it have something to do with this Prius I wondered? Well fast forward to 2011 and I bought a used Camry. I noticed that after ten minutes of driving it, my left leg would go numb especially near my foot. I got out my Gauss meter and it read over 100 gauss near my left foot but only 15 near my right foot. Hum! A coincidence? My numb left foot was so vexing, I decided to investigate further what was happening near my left foot. Well I found the fuel pump power line ran along the left side base board. The closer I moved my meter to the wire, the higher the reading. So I rerouted the wire (I am an auto mechanic) to the right side of the car. No more numb left foot. Yes. I learned there is a word for people like me. Electrosensitive. There is even a group called the Electrosensitive society about folks who are sensitive to EMF fields. Some of you reading this post may be and not know it. One test to ask yourself is if you feel frazzled after a long car ride. See if some cars differ in their effect on you and what gauss reading correlates. I now own a 2012 Subaru that has low EMF (15 to 25 gauss on average) and I don't feel so wiped after a 3-5 hour trip. I did eventually get to measure that first gen Prius and its EMF level exceeded the upper range of my meter (100 g max). I have tested successive generations and each get lower and lower. Lastly, have anyone put a gauss meter on a Tesla? What was the reading?

 

[ecarfan]

My father has a friend who is a physicist and is very aware of EMF issues in our environment. He told me that he had measured the EMF in my father's Tesla (including the rear seats) and found it to be very low, lower than in other cars he has tested. I don't recall the numbers. But this guy is extremely concerned about EMF exposures and has done some rewiring in his house to reduce them. I have spoken to him quite a bit about EMF and feel he is pretty knowledgable so if he is not concerned about the EMF levels while riding in a Model S neither am I.

 

[RichardC]

M father has a friend who is a physicist and is very aware of EMF issues in our environment. He told me that he had measured the EMF in my father's Tesla (including the rear seats) and found it to be very low, lower than in other cars he has tested. I don't recall the numbers. But this guy is extremely concerned about EMF exposures and has done some retiring in his house to reduce them. I have spoken to him quite a bit about EMF and feel he is pretty knowledgable so if he is not concerned about the EMF levels while riding in a Model S neither am I.

I have also done some EMF tests in the Model S and have found it is generally good, but found some increased EMF levels under the dash when running the electric heating (but not the seat heaters).

 

[upstart555]

"I have also done some EMF tests in the Model S and have found it is generally good, but found some increased EMF levels under the dash when running the electric heating (but not the seat heaters)."

What gauss number range do you consider "generally good" and what is the ceiling on this? What is the threshold gauss reading number that is generally bad?

 

[Doug_G]

Just for the record, there is no evidence to support any impact of low frequency EMF radiation on the human body, and plenty of reasons to expect there to be none. The human body simply doesn't absorb fields in that frequency range in any measurable amount as it is not nearly conductive enough. At those frequencies you'd need a pretty thick piece of highly conductive aluminum or copper to absorb anything substantial.

 

[Raffy.Roma]

You are right Doug. At low frequencies the electromagnetic wave doesn't even manage to propagate. Then in the case that the frequency of the electromagnetic field is high enough to allow the propagation the power carried by the electromagnetic wave is proportional to the squared frequency meaning to say that at low frequencies the power is also low.
Then we should also consider that the radiated energy attenuates with the inverse of the squared distance. Some calculations have been done in the case of the radiated energy of mobile phones and it has been calculated that after some centimeters the radiated energy has become negligible and cannot affect for this reason the human body.

 

[upstart555]

Doug,
You have posted over 10,000 times. And you seem to be advocating for Tesla at every turn. Do you work for Tesla?

 

[liuping]

One test to ask yourself is if you feel frazzled after a long car ride.

If fatigue or feeling frazzled is an indication of high EMF levels, they must be super low in my Model S, because I feel better ever time I get in the car.

Seriously, if I'm feels down, frustrated or tired, a drive in the Tesla never fails to put a smile on my face.

 

[rjcbox]

Doug,
You have posted over 10,000 times. And you seem to be advocating for Tesla at every turn. Do you work for Tesla?

Most on this forum *LOVE* this company and the cars/tech it produces.
Some of us are investors.
Very few work for the company.

Having said that, most of us are critical when we think Tesla could have done something better.

Welcome to the board!

- - - Updated - - -

As long as no one makes fun of me for having an emf reader, I will report that I took a ride with my performance S, burned rubber, and never saw any reaction from the reader. In front and back seats it stayed under 1 mg. Held it low near feet, nothing. By comparison if I hold same device near back of my refrigerator I get reading of 150 mg. all around my house the ambient readings are around 1 mg. the reader was set to range of 1-200mg.

I have no meter, but have a Physics and Chemistry background. There is no EMF risk here.