Telstra won in Cheltenham, but Rainworth is holding out

In my earlier post I discussed the case of Telstra v Hornsby Shire Council, where a council blocked a Telstra mobile phone tower, only to be overturned in the NSW Land Court.  Well Telstra has a fight on its hands in Bardon in Brisbane over a plan to upgrade an existing mobile phone tower near the Rainworth State School in the suburb of Bardon.  The fight started when Telstra notified locals in September 2009 about the plans, as they are required to do by law.


Bardon is a leafy well off middle class conservative suburb to the west of Brisbane CBD.  A tower has been in the area for some fifteen years and was to be moved.  The proposed tower is some 170 m from the Rainworth State School, and is in a residential area, but the existing tower was closer to the school.



The difference here is that Bardon has run an extremely well organised and vocal protest against the tower and Telstra.  Check out the web site in the link.  They have also been effective in getting heard above the other noise in the various media including TV news, radio and the Courier Mail and local throw over your fence free paper.  The fight is very much in the public arena.  Claims of the protest group using children for the TV cameras were raised by Telstra.


http://www.notowersnearschools.com/index.html


Telstra have done all the usual EMF measurements in the area, and again the main contributor is broadcast radio and TV, not mobile phones (Broadcast signals at the school were 18 times higher than the close by mobile signal).  To further complicate things, there already is a tower, but Telstra lost the lease and has to relocate.  Their current solution is to use multiple stations mounted throughout the suburb rather than a single tower, but the single tower is the preferred solution.

But is there anything different in the science associated with the proposal?  Not really.  The protest group would be more honest in claiming NIMBY rights, and effects on the resale value of their tree lined streets than trotting out the usual scare propaganda about RF fields and catastrophic health effects on their poor suffering schoolchildren.  The local member, the now dispossessed Michael Johnson, made a speech in parliament outlining his ignorance of the RF issues.  

I wonder just how many of the little dears and their teachers and teachers aides at the school actually have mobile phones?  The science shows that the field from a phone in use is at least 50 to 100 times stronger than the tower signal.  Does the Rainworth school have a Faraday cage where all students and visitors are required to leave their mobiles so as not to irradiate their fellow schoolmates?   One wonders what the carnage would be if the canteen used a microwave oven to heat the lunchtime pies.

My favourite precautionary principle was again trotted out.  The protesters claim  "This code recommends that the Australian telecommunications industry use the precautionary approach. So far this has not been done."

One wonders if the scientific approach is taught at the Rainworth State School.  Might be time for a few parents to sit in class if they do teach the course.


Here is the Telstra FAQ link.
http://www.telstra.com.au/abouttelstra/download/document/bardon-faqs.pdf