News

We have seen in our earlier blog that ionization of air requires a high density electric field, normally achieved in nature through natural high-energy processes that provide enough energy to remove electrons from air molecules (like nitrogen and oxygen), forming ions and free electrons. Cosmic rays, UV radiation, lightening, radioactive decay, auroras, triboelectric effects (static), intense heat, Lenard effect (water), photodissociation.

Generally a balance of +ve and -ve ions in air is good. Abundant -ve ions have been shown to support health in particular situations. +ve ions generally cause oxidative stress. For those who are concerned that 5G mmWave Telco systems could possibly be ‘weaponised’ is there a possible mechanism for ionizing air with lower frequency waves (in the so called non-ionising spectrum) ?

One put forward is multi-photon excitation (similar to natural photodissociation). Technically this can indeed happen, but again in very specific circumstances which are unlikely to be present with current Telco equipment.  For multi-photon excitation to ionize air it requires a very intense and high-energy light source, such as an ultra-short pulse laser. This needs specific hardware.

Multi-Photon Ionization Process

• Multi-photon ionization occurs when multiple photons are absorbed by an atom or molecule simultaneously or in very quick succession, providing enough energy to eject an electron and ionize the atom or molecule.
• In the case of air, which is mainly composed of nitrogen (N2N2​) and oxygen (O2O2​), ionization would mean removing electrons from these molecules, creating plasma (a mix of ions and free electrons).

Key Factors in Ionizing Air with Multi-Photon Excitation:

1. Photon Energy: Each photon carries a specific amount of energy depending on its wavelength (or frequency). To ionize a molecule like nitrogen or oxygen, the total energy absorbed must exceed the ionization energy of the molecule (which is about 15.6 eV for oxygen and 14.5 eV for nitrogen).
   • For example, a single photon in the ultraviolet (UV) spectrum might not have enough energy to ionize air molecules, but multiple photons (typically in the visible or near-infrared spectrum) can combine their energies to achieve this.
2. Laser Intensity: The multi-photon process requires very high photon densities, which can only be achieved with extremely intense light sources, such as high-power pulsed lasers (e.g., femtosecond or picosecond lasers). The intensity needs to be sufficient for several photons to interact with the same atom or molecule at the same time.
3. Number of Photons: The number of photons required for ionization depends on the wavelength of the light and the ionization energy of the gas. For example:
   • If you are using photons from a visible laser (with a photon energy of about 2 eV), it might take 7 or 8 photons to ionize a nitrogen molecule (with an ionization energy of ~14.5 eV).

Air Ionization via Multi-Photon Excitation

When a high-intensity laser pulse interacts with air:

• If the photon density is high enough, several photons can be absorbed simultaneously by nitrogen or oxygen molecules.
• This results in the ejection of electrons, creating ionized particles (ions and free electrons) and forming plasma.
• The plasma can cause effects such as optical breakdown (where the medium becomes opaque due to ionization) and self-focusing of the laser beam.

This is the mechanism behind laser-induced breakdown or laser filamentation in air, where a laser pulse ionizes air along its path, creating a plasma channel that can sometimes even conduct electricity.

Practical Applications

• Multi-photon ionization of air is used in high-energy physics, plasma physics, and laser-induced plasma technologies.
• It also plays a role in applications like remote sensing, atmospheric studies, and even experiments in laser-guided lightning (where a plasma channel is used to direct electrical discharges).

In summary, multi-photon excitation can ionize air under the right conditions, primarily requiring a high-intensity laser to overcome the ionization energy of the air molecules. Do we see this hardware in small cells and 4G/5G phased array masts ?

There are other claims that particles as such do not exist, and so theories about ions and electrons are moot. We would argue however that current particle models still account for alot of what works and is observed. We can invoke new models for how nature is, but we must first see an effect to explain if the current models fall short. So far we are not aware of any data showing that air is +ve ionised to a sufficient density around a Telco mast to cause health issues.

For more on the Wave Structure of Matter – which is most likely:

https://www.spaceandmotion.com/Wolff-Wave-Structure-Matter.htm

Over the last 3 years a few milestones have been reached, even though judicial challenges have been fraught.

1. The award of an EHCP to a school girl with EHS, via a Tier 3 Tribunal, also disability awards approved after actions by PHIRE medical.
2. Brighton Council backed off on proximity of a mast to a school, when they didn’t have an ICNIRP certificate 2021. The council had to pay £13k costs after losing the case against them.
3. A refusal of a 5G mast on health grounds in Mendip 2022.
4. 99 masts refused in Bristol, Mr Christie’s  75% refusals achieved on 100 applications this year in the UK. Last year over 50% percent refusal rate was seen across the country, with up to 70% historically. We don’t know for sure how many of these decisions were based on a concern about health as well. The official reasons tend to remain ‘siting and appearance’.
5. Judge Jarman recognised the need to take the effect on metal implants into account at a JR for a case in Cheltenham 2024.
6. Stroud Council recently acknowledged the necessity of having sight of the public exclusion zones and the antenna power output. When the applicant refused to provide these it was weighed as a lack of evidence of safety in Stroud’s risk benefit analysis of the application and the mast was refused. “Insufficient information has been submitted in relation to the benefits of the upgrade over the existing and proposed infrastructure performance as well as existing and proposed output and exclusion zones in relation to EMFs, to enable the LPA to understand the full benefit and potential harm of the proposed development. The applicant/agent refused the LPA request for this additional information. Thus, based on the application submission, the non-evidenced connectivity public benefit does not outweigh the identified heritage harm…” 
7. DLUHC did not remove all planning obligations when they wanted to 2 years ago, during their update of the NPPF.  Prior Approval still requires some assessment in situ (siting and appearance) for new applications.
8. The UK now has information about non-thermal effects which they wouldn’t have if not for us sharing letters, news, outreach and mast objections
9. Growing awareness that the LPA (local authority) must risk assess even though they deny it.  The government have been legally challenged about policy not enforcing local risk assessment and not requiring full data spec of masts to be made available. (per Stroud case above)
10. EU law directly applies. All defence of this has led to more proof that it applies. Administration provisions became active in 2018 at the moment of signing the Brexit agreement. The previous 2009/140/EC, 2014/61/EC directives ceased in that moment, and so from then on those functions were covered by the EECC, they did not depend on the transposition of EU Law in Dec 2020. As competent authorities, LPAs are obliged to protect public health, particularly under the 2018/1972/EC Directive and Article 45)2h. It is ALSO important to note that the 1999/519/EC Recommendations are procedural standards which must be adhered to and they are written on the back of every ICNIRP Certificate.
11. Campaigners have been pushing against mis-leading policy guidance in 121/122 of the NPPF, and presenting to Planners that they need to make evidence-based decisions, we are starting to see recognition of this with the Stroud result (above).
12. In Swansea the EU law and competent authority status has been re-inforced by the advice issued to LAs by the government. “Notification Requirements Article 3(3) of the Implementing Regulation states that operators who have deployed SAWAPs (Regulation 2020/1070 small cell systems) of class E2 or E10 (as defined in the European Standards 62232:2017) shall notify the national competent authority within two weeks from the deployment of each such point about its installation and location as well as the requirements they have met in terms of its characteristics and appearance. We consider that the national competent authority in this respect is the local planning authority. This view is shared by the UK Government and the other Devolved Administrations.“
    From this 10 December 2020 document.
    https://www.gov.wales/changes-town-and-country-planning-general-permitted-development-order-1995-html
    
    It’s value is not so much in what it requires Councils to do in itself, but that it demonstrates that they have ongoing public health protection obligations designed into the European Electronic Communications Code 2018. Those obligations cant be ignored nor trivialised.