Forum Topics

Health risk from Fast Chargers in Public places

To date not one local authority has been able to produce a safety certificate or insurance certificate permitting on street fast chargers.It's not just pacemakers, they can seriously damage Hearing Aids and some older devices as well as electronic chips in Non EV vehicles up to 25ft awayI wonder if Ms. Costigan is aware given her Union role on Heath and safety?  No-one else seems to be including the operators.This is one report of many and in some countries warnings are marked on the pavements.Issue: BCMJ, vol. 63 , No. 3 , April 2021 , Pages 120-121 MDs To BeBy: Caleb A.N. Roda, MDABSTRACT: Patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) are susceptible to electromagnetic interference and its potential harmful consequences from a variety of sources. Recent widespread consumer adoption of electric vehicles poses a new source of electromagnetic interference in the daily environment for patients with CIEDs. Current research shows no interference for CIED patients charging electric vehicles at low power; however, the effects of high-powered electric vehicle charging have yet to be experientially tested. Understanding the potential consequences of this powerful technology for patients with CIEDs is necessary to keep them safe while progressing toward a more sustainable future.A look at the potential consequences.A+ A-IntroductionCardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs), including pacemakers, implantable cardiac defibrillators, and cardiac resynchronization, have become well established standards of care for a variety of tachyarrhythmias, bradyarrhythmias, and in more recent years, heart failure.[1-3] Cardiac implantations have been increasing globally due to improvements in technology, growing medical indications, and an aging population.[4,5] More than 1 million cardiac implants in 61 countries occurred during 2009, a substantial increase over the previous world pacing survey conducted in 2005.[4] CIEDs are known to be susceptible to electromagnetic interface (EMI) from environmental, industrial, and hospital sources.[6-9] The electric current flowing through these sources generates a magnetic field (valid proxy for EMI) that can induce electrical fields in CIED circuitry, leading to pacing inhibition, device reprogramming, and inappropriate shock delivery.[9] Electric vehicles (EVs) have become ubiquitous in the global vehicle market and pose a new potential environmental source of EMI for CIED patients, especially as it pertains to their high-powered charging.[10]Effects of electromagnetic interference on cardiac devicesDuring EV charging, the current flow in the charging cable creates a magnetic field that can potentially induce EMI in nearby devices. It has been experimentally shown that current flowing through an electronic arc welder cable during operation generated a magnetic field strength of 100–130 micro Tesla (µT), and induced inappropriate atrial sensing in a participant with a unipolar sensing pacemaker.[11] Current CIEDs almost exclusively use bipolar leads and have a higher magnetic field threshold of about 300 mT before EMI is apparent.[12,13] Ventricular oversensing is clinically the most relevant problem caused by EMI, which may lead to asystole in the case of pacing inhibition in pacemaker-dependent patients. Device manufacturers have taken many steps to limit EMI on modern CIEDs through shielding, filters, bipolar leads, and components with less ferromagnetic material.[9] Despite these efforts, there remain reports of EMI in the general environment at an incidence of 0.27% per patient per year.[14] As EV charging continues to become more powerful with higher current flow, it is important to test whether charging an EV can generate a magnetic field strong enough to cause EMI in patients with CIEDs.Safety of electronic transportation systemsCurrent research assessing the safety of electrically powered transportation systems for patients with CIEDs shows no measurable interference. Magnetically levitated linear motor cars, trains, trams, and hybrid vehicles have proven to be safe for patients with CIEDs to ride in and or operate.[15-17] More recently, the magnetic fields generated during regular-powered charging of the consumer EVs Volkswagen e-up!, BMW i3, Nissan Leaf, Tesla model 85S, and Tesla model S P90D have been examined on patients with CIEDs.[18,19] The highest magnetic field recorded was 116.5 mT by the Tesla model 85S around the charging cable. In both experiments there were no episodes of over- or undersensing, inappropriate pacing, pacing inhibition, or device reprogramming. Furthermore, Lennerz and colleagues recently published the complete methodological details of their 2018 study, highlighting the wide selection of cardiac devices tested and thus the generalizability of their safety results.[20] Both experiments had a small sample size and were underpowered to detect rare events; nonetheless, CIED patients should feel reassured operating and charging EVs under similar circumstances.High-powered electric vehicle chargingCurrently, EV manufacturers such as Tesla have established a public global network of high-powered charging stations for their vehicles. The “supercharging” offered by Tesla is able to charge their EVs faster using higher current flow. It was shown experimentally that magnetic field strength around the charging cable during Tesla EV charging increased almost proportionally with current flow.[19] Tesla V2 direct current superchargers generate a current flow twelvefold higher than the charging that has been experimentally tested on participants with CIEDs. This creates the potential for generating magnetic fields around the charging cable that exceed the 300 mT shown to cause EMI in unipolar and bipolar CIEDs in vivo.[12,13] Caution is warranted given the gap in knowledge surrounding the effects of high-powered EV charging on CIED function.ConclusionManufacturers of CIEDs are regularly improving their safety and effectiveness; however, these devices are not without risks and will likely continue being susceptible to EMI from a variety of sources. Currently, EV manufacturers offer the capability to charge at much higher powers than previously shown to be safe. More research is needed to elucidate the effects of high-powered EV charging on patients with CIEDs and allow for the continued adoption of more efficient and powerful EVs without sacrificing safety.

Raymond Havelock ● 1312d0 Comments ● 1312d

Update on energy companies SSE and OVO.

ILLEGAL TRANSFER FROM ENERGY PROVIDER SSE TO OVO.A response given on Trustpilot on 26-1-23  by energy provider SSE regarding my illegal transfer from energy company SSE to energy company OVO which are part of the same company."Hi, Thank you for your recent email, I apologise for the delay in my response.We appreciate you contacting us. When I check your account, it has already been transferred to OVO Energy. As a result, your account has been closed and we no longer have access to it. I suggest you to get in touch with OVO Energy because they are the team that can assist you.Thank you for contacting SSE."John from OVO has informed me that I was tricked by SSE to sign up to OVO with a false promise of a £50 energy credit.And the response given on Trustpilot by OVO. Thanks for getting back to me, Neil.I've checked over your account and I can see you've managed to reach the team. I am sorry that the letter has caused such confusion, but the install would have had to have been with SSE.Thanks,Dave.Both SSE and OVO are continuing to argue that the other party are to blame for the illegal transfer. I have to wait about 7 weeks for SSE and OVO to sort the mess out before the Energy Ombudsman will intervene. Anyone wishing to change energy providers would be wise to check on Trustpilot the company they are thinking of using before deciding. SSE and OVO are having shocking reviews. See part of Which magazine review of OVO below.                                                              "Ovo Energy came near the bottom of the table in 13th place out of 16 energy companies rated by 10,197 members of the public in the annual Which? customer survey. This is a big drop from last year, when it came joint second. It had poor two-star ratings for almost all of the aspects of service we looked at, managing an average three stars for just one - the accuracy of its payments."One dissatisfied customer said: 'It’s impossible to contact them. Online options don’t make it easy to solve problems.'

Neil Milkins ● 1319d6 Comments ● 1319d

Research: City dwellers in the UK ‘"need more botanical beauty."

Wottasurprise!  As if LBE under Labour give a flying fornication .....A study published today (16 January) to mark Blue Monday – dubbed the most depressing day of the year – reveals that city dwellers feel that a lack of greenery adds to their blues. Research by Mitie’s living wall specialist Biotecture highlights that 66 per cent of people living in urban environments want to see more botanical beauty where they live and that more than 26 per cent are demotivated by the lack of green space, with one in five feeling isolated. Biotecture’s living walls are panels of plants, grown vertically on structures that are either freestanding or attached to walls containing plants that help to clean the air, provide enhanced insulation and shading for buildings, and improve the aesthetics of an area. More than half of the 2,000 people surveyed think there is a lack of investment in urban greening and 43 per cent observe that there is too little space for nature to thrive. As there is limited horizontal space for parks and open areas, 57 per cent of respondents said they wish to see more vertical greenery – such as living walls up the sides of buildings – to make up for the sparsity of ground-level plant life. Others want more trees (43 per cent), flower beds (38 per cent) and grass (36 per cent) – with 78 per cent saying that greenery improves their mental wellbeing. Although 79 per cent of respondents cite the convenience of urban living for work opportunities and social life, 67 per cent would consider moving to a suburb or the countryside to get more out of nature. However, 62 per cent would consider staying in a metropolitan environment if there was more investment in urban greening, citing the key benefits of having cleaner air (47 per cent) and more wildlife (45 per cent). Richard Sabin, managing director of Biotecture said: “Having access to green space shouldn’t just be a bonus when it comes to living in a city, everyone should be able to easily enjoy nature. It’s no surprise people feel demotivated and isolated if they don’t have access to greenery, whether that’s at their place of work, where they live or where they socialize. “But it’s true cities can lack the space, which is why vertical living walls can be a great solution. The countryside has its draws, but it’s easy to see why people love living an urban life. Plants and greenery can make our cities healthier, happier, and more resilient to climate change.” 16 January 2023 Deborah Shrewsbury, The PlannerSOURCE:   https://www.planningportal.co.uk/services/weekly-planning-news/planning-news-19-january-2023#research:-city-dwellers-in-the-uk-'need-more-botanical-beauty'

Rosco White ● 1333d0 Comments ● 1333d