SAGE
SAGE is the Stakeholder Advisory Group on ELF EMFs.
It was initiated by National Grid but was then adopted by the Department of
Health in order to provide advice to Government on how to respond to the NRPB's
2004 recommendation to
consider possible precautionary measures. It is funded equally by the
electricity industry, Government, and the charity Children with
Leukaemia. It is run on inclusive lines, with an emphasis on including
all viewpoints, and a facilitator rather than a traditional Chairman.
SAGE's First Interim Assessment was published in April 2007. It considers a
number of generic issues, then possible precautionary measures for EMFs from
three different sources: house wiring, appliances, and power lines and
property. SAGE intends to consider other sources (distribution and railways)
next.
See also:
SAGE's own website
More information on precaution
on this website
download the Assessment
itself and
supporting papers
When Government received the SAGE Assessment, they asked the HPA for a response to it. The HPA's response is available here and the Minster's reply is here.
The scientific evidence
SAGE does not assess the scientific evidence itself but identifies a range of
views of the scientific evidence adopted by other review bodies. It summarises
them as two positions.
-
The "WHO/HPA" view that there is a possible link between magnetic fields
and childhood leukaemia. More on what
HPA have said
-
The "California" view that there is a possible link between magnetic
fields and a range of adverse health effects. More on what
California have said
Reducing exposures where reasonable
SAGE says:
"We have adopted a principle of seeking ways to make people's exposure to
electric and magnetic fields "as low as reasonably achievable." We use this
phrase in its plain English sense rather than as a legally defined principle.
Much of our work has been in determining what is "reasonable."
Cost benefit analysis
SAGE considers how to determine what is "reasonable" and gives a lot of
attention to cost-benefit analysis. It says:
"We recognise that cost-benefit analysis is an important tool for society in
determining the most effective use of resources, and in ensuring that society
does not devote so much resource to one issue that it results in more harm in
other areas than the benefit it creates. It is a way of assessing the
proportionality of any response to a health or safety issue. We also recognise
that cost-benefit analysis is just one tool; other social or political factors,
which do not lend themselves to inclusion in a cost-benefit analysis, are
relevant."
SAGE gives a lot of quantitative detail on costs and benefits; see
here for a summary.
One example SAGE gives of relevant factors other than cost-benefit is public
concern.
"We agree that it is right and proper for a government to give consideration to
public concern when determining what action to take."
House wiring
SAGE recommends a package of changes to house wiring practices. It says these
should introduced for all new building and for complete rewiring of existing
homes, and should be available as an option for applying to existing homes if
high fields are identified. The estimated extra cost is £20 per house newly
wired in this way.
The package includes:
-
Using radial power circuits instead of ring mains
-
Keeping "go" and "return" currents together
-
Keeping meter tails together
-
Require an RCD for the whole installation
-
Phase out rotating disc electricity meters
-
Provide information for householders
See more detail on these and how they
reduce fields
Domestic electrical appliances
(SAGE uses the terminology "equipment")
SAGE recommends:
"Equipment manufacturers should investigate whether fields could be reduced at
low cost, and whether offering consumer choice of low-field appliances could be
an advantageous marketing strategy"
More on fields from
appliances
Power lines and property
SAGE makes two Recommendations and analyses an Option.
The Recommendations:
-
More information for householders
-
Rephasing of some 132 kV lines. More on
phasing in general and the SAGE
recommendation in particular.
The Option:
-
"Corridors" along power lines where new building would not be allowed
The "Corridors" Option
SAGE analyses an Option of introducing "corridors" round power lines. It
suggests:
-
The corridor would be 60 m from the centre of the line for 400 kV and 275 kV
lines, 30 m for 132 kV and 66 kV lines, and no corridor for lower voltages.
These distances were chosen as the average distance for the field to fall to
0.4 µT. more
-
No new buildings would be allowed within this distance of existing power lines
and no new power lines within this distance of existing buildings
-
It would apply to buildings for residential use and some other uses such as
schools
-
It could be implemented, if desired, as policy rather than requiring regulation
SAGE participants were divided on whether this Option should be implemented,
which is why it is an Option rather than a Recommendation. It appears that,
broadly:
-
Some participants think it should not be implemented as the adverse
consequences outweigh the benefits, and in particular that it fails
cost-benefit analysis
-
Other participants think it should be implemented, either because the
cost-benefit analysis should include adverse health outcomes other than just
childhood leukaemia which may make the outcome favourable, or because factors
other than just cost-benefit analysis, such as public concern, should be
considered
More on the SAGE cost-benefit
analysis of this option
Existing homes near power lines
SAGE says:
"Taking action on existing situations (with the exception of limited rephasing
of 132 kV overhead lines as already discussed) would be more complex and more
expensive and we suggest that the initial decision Government should make is
whether or not to take action in relation to new construction."
more on existing homes near power lines
back
|