The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is responsible for safeguarding the environment from damage caused by communication infrastructure. This mandate includes protecting wildlife and human health, preserving historic sites, and preventing aesthetic blight. However, when companies seek to add new cell phone towers, build on protected land, or launch satellites, the FCC typically does little or nothing to address the potential environmental impacts. The agency’s neglect of environmental protection is particularly concerning as it presides over a nationwide buildout for 5G service, which will require 800,000 new “small cell” transmitters placed near schools, apartments, and homes. Despite this massive effort, the FCC has refused to revise its radiation-exposure limits and has cut back on required environmental reviews while restricting local governments’ control over wireless sites. Additionally, the agency’s approach is hands-off, delegating much of its responsibility to the industries it regulates and allowing companies to decide for themselves whether their projects require environmental study. In the rare instances in which the FCC investigates, even brazen illegality is often met with a minor fine or no action at all. The agency declined to make officials available for interviews for this article or to respond to questions sent in writing.
Research News Archives
SAR Links
Archives
Recent Posts
- A Letter to Every American Parent April 26, 2025
- How Mobile-Phone Radiation Alters Neural Rhythms April 26, 2025
- President Bill Clinton – The 62 Words That Sold Our Children To The Wireless Industry April 26, 2025
- How Big Would an Antenna Have to Be to “Broadcast” 7.83 Hz? (And Why Your Pendant Isn’t Doing It) April 26, 2025
- 100 Years of Entropic Waste April 26, 2025
- The First Casualty of the Wireless Age April 26, 2025
- The Silent Auction of Childhood April 26, 2025
- White House Corruption: The FCC’s Betrayal of Our Children’s Health April 26, 2025
- White House Failure: How FCC Spectrum Auctioneers With No Medical Authority Became the Gatekeepers of Safety April 26, 2025
- White House Failure, Corporate Capture, and the Epidemic We’re Handing to Our Kids April 26, 2025
- When Wireless Turns Viscous: How a Smartphone Can Make Your Blood Clump—and Why That Should Keep Us Up at Night April 26, 2025
- A New Hypothesis: Hertz First Victim Of Bioelectrical Dissonance from Non-native EMFs (nnEMFs) April 25, 2025
- “Clean Ether,” Not Magic Rocks: A Science-First Roadmap for Ending Microwave Monopolies April 25, 2025
- The Discovery Hertz Missed That Killed Him — How the First Radio Waves Became Humanity’s First Electromagnetic Pollution April 25, 2025
- Heinrich Hertz — Experiments, Symptoms & Timeline April 25, 2025
- WHO: Radiofrequency Radiation and Male Fertility – What the Science Says April 23, 2025
- Electromagnetic Waves and an Unseen Illness Connection April 23, 2025
- Heinrich Hertz: a Statistical Outlier at the Dawn of Radio-Wave Exposure April 23, 2025
- Heinrich Hertz: When the Birth of Radio May Have Birthed Its First Casualty April 23, 2025
- Silent Signals: How Low-Frequency Electromagnetic Fields May Rewrite Early Life — and Why We Need New Exposure Guidelines April 23, 2025
Recent Compares
-
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max vs Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra View Comparison →
-
Samsung Galaxy S24 SAR Levels vs Apple iPhone 15 SAR Levels View Comparison →
-
Samsung Galaxy S24 Plus SAR Levels vs Apple iPhone 15 Plus SAR Levels View Comparison →
-
Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra SAR Levels vs Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max SAR Levels View Comparison →
-
Apple iPhone 15 vs Samsung Galaxy S23 SAR Levels View Comparison →
-
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max vs Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max SAR Levels View Comparison →