[CliveG]

The law compels the Power Company to provide a special power point to masts.

What is special about it?

One property = one power box and meter.

Exception by act of Parliament for Comms companies who get what they want.

One property - but tower company renting on that property gets another dedicated power point.

[Bored chemist]

The average kW for each day is show as 4.5 to 5 kW and 2.7 kW for the day it was switched off.
...
- The average kW for the 15th Jan is shown as 5.7 kW
- The meter company states that the 15th was "atypical" because it was a in situ test power on for only an hour.

OK, so typical use is about 4.7 KWHr per day. Divide by 24 hrs in a day.
About 196 Watts

And on the 15th it was 5.7 KWHr
About 237 Watts

Now the difference between the typical consumption- 4.7 KWHr and the consumption on the 15th - which was 5.7 KWHr is 1 KWHr
But the claim is that the additional about kWh was used in just 1 Hr.
So their test must have used 1 KW.

OK, that's quite a lot of power, but nothing special. If you were in this hemisphere, I'd joke about the guy turning the heater on.

Perhaps he left a fan running all day.

[Bored chemist]

but tower company renting on that property gets another dedicated power point.

Do they pay the bill for it?

[CliveG]

but tower company renting on that property gets another dedicated power point.

Do they pay the bill for it?

We do. By paying them for their expensive service. But if they get the bill which they do, they pay.

[CliveG]

The average kW for each day is show as 4.5 to 5 kW and 2.7 kW for the day it was switched off.
...
- The average kW for the 15th Jan is shown as 5.7 kW
- The meter company states that the 15th was "atypical" because it was a in situ test power on for only an hour.

OK, so typical use is about 4.7 KWHr per day. Divide by 24 hrs in a day.
About 196 Watts

And on the 15th it was 5.7 KWHr
About 237 Watts

Now the difference between the typical consumption- 4.7 KWHr and the consumption on the 15th - which was 5.7 KWHr is 1 KWHr
But the claim is that the additional about kWh was used in just 1 Hr.
So their test must have used 1 KW.

OK, that's quite a lot of power, but nothing special. If you were in this hemisphere, I'd joke about the guy turning the heater on.

Perhaps he left a fan running all day.

You are mixing kW (power) and kWhrs (energy used). See my next post.

[alancalverd]

One property - but tower company renting on that property gets another dedicated power point.

This is entirely normal and essential for any enterprise on rented property. The landlord's rent is based on the commercial value of the land plus any statutory provisions for which the landlord is liable - this may include street lighting and security but will not include significant consumables incurred by the lessee.

Been there. My landlords had to light the communal fire exits (about 100 watts)  but I had a separate meter (including continuous remote reading) for the 400 kW consumed by my machinery. However 300 kW of this was taken up by the continuous standby power of the equipment, 50 kW was variable consumption of the airconditioning, lifts, etc., and only about 25 kW by the RF transmitters, so you couldn't really tell from the consumption graph what power was being transmitted.

[CliveG]

You seem to have no problem trying to be an expert in my field.

It's good to see that you are an expert.
Would you like to explain why you are asking us mere mortals for help?

They take the instantaneous voltage, the instantaneous current and the instantaneous angle between them

If they are doing the multiplication in anything like real time, they don't need the angle- which isn't "instantaneous" anyway.

If that was an attempt to "blind me with science" it backfired badly.

How can I display the one A4 sheet with the two graphs on this forum. And the one page write-up.

And that's where you point out that you have not yet presented the data you are complaining about.

But once more you are blind to the point I am making.
Why not say 0.00 kWhrs for day 9, day 10 and day 11 and 142.25 kWhrs for day 15?

If, as seems likely, their meters (like mine) show cumulative use, why would they not present to the court a graph of cumulative use?

It is, of course, rather hard for us to tell because...  you have not actually given us the data.

A one hour test cannot consume 142.25 kWhrs. The poor graph hides this number. It would mean that the power of the installation would be over 142 kW.

Has the penny finally dropped?

Yes the penny has dropped that all they need to do is say they were testing the lights and heater and battery charger and whatever as well.
Simple, if rhetorical question.
Do you actually know what is in the tower?

Where did I say I was asking for help on this point? This is a discussion forum and I am getting your point of view and seeing how detailed I must be to get an explanation across.

Average sine wave power is calculated by the rms voltage, the rms current and the cosine of the angle between them.
If the angle is zero the load is resistive and behaves like a DC load. If the angle is plus or minus 90 deg then the load is either fully capacitive or inductive and the average power is zero because the energy flow in on one part of the cycle and out on the other part. The other terms you need to know are kVA and kVAr.
Try electronics-tutorials.ws/accircuits/power-in-ac-circuits.html

Note: I worked starting up big power istallations in SA in my early career. Transmissions lines act as inductors. When the line gets too long the power goes in (the magnetic field) and comes back out and no power gets to the other end. To transmit long distances one needs series capacitors every 100 km or so. I worked on these. Imagine telling someone of a single capacitor rated at 400,000 volts (above ground) and capable of thousands of amps. They had to take full fault current also so we had a "power zener" (a special carbon electrode gap) to limit the fault voltage across the bank. Each of the phase banks was mounted on 6 meter ceramic posts. But I digress.

How do I display a PDF page here?

I have used various techniques to get a page which fairly accurately show the cumulative readings. I blew it up and then used measuring tools to get distances on the graph. 9 days of usage shows as 1.77 units. The 1 hour of test usage shows as 0.20 units. If I assume a constant power usage then the nine days is 384 hours = 1.7 graph units and the 0.20 graph units would then equate to 74 hours.

I calculate the hours of both the illegal turn-on and the test period to be 64 hours but if they upped the power (which I think they did) then my graphing would show a possible 64 hours.

The power consumption for the lights is minimal. Cooling fans are minimal. Check the daily variation on the daily power average. The variation is low. I have a very good idea of what is in the various boxes and on the masts. Not make and model but certainly equipment type and consumption.

If I subpoena the power company records then I will be shown to be correct. Do you grasp the magnitude of the claimed hours run and the actual hours run. A 6400% error on my part is not possible without an arithmetic error. A 10 hour error is only 15 percent error. How would the metering company explain such a discrepancy?

[CliveG]

One property - but tower company renting on that property gets another dedicated power point.

This is entirely normal and essential for any enterprise on rented property. The landlord's rent is based on the commercial value of the land plus any statutory provisions for which the landlord is liable - this may include street lighting and security but will not include significant consumables incurred by the lessee.

Been there. My landlords had to light the communal fire exits (about 100 watts)  but I had a separate meter (including continuous remote reading) for the 400 kW consumed by my machinery. However 300 kW of this was taken up by the continuous standby power of the equipment, 50 kW was variable consumption of the airconditioning, lifts, etc., and only about 25 kW by the RF transmitters, so you couldn't really tell from the consumption graph what power was being transmitted.

You are quite right. The power company charges the property owner - be it an individual, a corporation or a cooperative. The owner must put in private meters for various renters.

But the tower company avoids fraud by direct billing from its own power company point. And the energy consumption is for the tower only - mostly the power amplifiers for the transmitters, then the power for the receivers, for the communications (modems to fiber or dish) and the lights, fans, alarms and battery chargers.

The battery charger stores energy and releases it so a short duration of transmission one gets the pretty much same power for the time period except for the inefficiency of the battery system. That accounts for the discrepancy for the higher power.

[Bored chemist]

The average kW for each day is show as 4.5 to 5 kW and 2.7 kW for the day it was switched off.
...
- The average kW for the 15th Jan is shown as 5.7 kW
- The meter company states that the 15th was "atypical" because it was a in situ test power on for only an hour.

OK, so typical use is about 4.7 KWHr per day. Divide by 24 hrs in a day.
About 196 Watts

And on the 15th it was 5.7 KWHr
About 237 Watts

Now the difference between the typical consumption- 4.7 KWHr and the consumption on the 15th - which was 5.7 KWHr is 1 KWHr
But the claim is that the additional about kWh was used in just 1 Hr.
So their test must have used 1 KW.

OK, that's quite a lot of power, but nothing special. If you were in this hemisphere, I'd joke about the guy turning the heater on.

Perhaps he left a fan running all day.

You are mixing kW (power) and kWhrs (energy used). See my next post.

Oops!
But, since you have data for power that rather undermines your claim that you only have data for cumulative energy use.

Where did I say I was asking for help on this point?

Here

Now, the question is. Why did the tower company act in the way it did?
Explain what went on here.

and here.

11) Why show an accumulated kWhr on a graph rather than numbers for each day?
12) Why show average kW for each day on a graph instead of daily consumption and the number of hours?

I will have another go.
The average kW for each day is show as 4.5 to 5 kW and 2.7 kW for the day it was switched off.
...
- The average kW for the 15th Jan is shown as 5.7 kW
- The meter company states that the 15th was "atypical" because it was a in situ test power on for only an hour.

OK if the average power is 4.7KW and the power on the 15th was 5.7KW
then that's a net energy of 112.8 KWHr  and 136.8 KWHr respectively
So, there's a difference of 24 KWHr
So the apparent "excess" power during the test is 24 KW

That's a lot, but it's still not 142 KW

And my point still stands.
There's some indication that they used 24KW of power for an hour (though their "1 hour" may actually have taken some more time in setting up etc- winch pulls the peak power down).
But there's no evidence that they connected any or all of all that to the transmitter.

You are making up your claim about what they did- because you simply don't know.
You were not there.

[Bored chemist]

But if they get the bill which they do, they pay.

So, it's not actually special.
It is, as Alan pointed out, exactly the same as you would expect for commercial premises and a commercial tenant.

[CliveG]

Enough on the power fraud. It was useful to define the issues.

At the beginning of my holiday last week I stopped all medication. No more pain tablets. I am now very sensitive to the radiation. I can tell the difference between 10 minutes in the kitchen and 10 minutes in the lounge. After 2 hours in the house (despite the shielding) I have to leave because of the pain in my body. Not my head because I wear a head shield. Within 10 minutes of my leaving tonight a lot of the pain had disappeared.

Yesterday I spent 8 hours at home. Tried to be inside most of the time while supervising the worker but there were a number of periods outside. By 4 pm I was wasted. I came back to my apartment and slept till the morning. Took half a sleeping tablet to fall asleep because I felt so ill. There will be very little doubt about the box test I propose.

Tuesday I see the neurologist again. I have some questions because I have learned more. Alzheimers is one topic. Unfortunately I am in the early stages which advanced rapidly near the tower. It too involves calcium channels. The bone marrow produces amyloid proteins that are defective. Some liken it to a cancer. But I have to do more reading and understanding.

It would seem I have been hammered by the background cell radiation in the last few years. I no longer need the anti-fungal it seems but it is early days. The fluoroquinolones seem to have been a catalyst because there was too great a period from the last time I took them and the slow onset of my medical problems. The increase in my problems coincides with the increase in cell towers in our area.

But there is another story which I will leave until tomorrow. Anyone reading most of what I have said in this thread should be alarmed. But denial can be strong if people do not understand the physics AND desire that alarmists like me are hopefully wrong (although I am not).

[CliveG]

But if they get the bill which they do, they pay.

So, it's not actually special.
It is, as Alan pointed out, exactly the same as you would expect for commercial premises and a commercial tenant.

No. It is not. If it was, the owner of the property would get the total bill for the property and the tower would have a private meter to determine the tower usage. But the tower get a second and separate box and meter from the power company. The owner has no idea of the tower energy and the company wants that to be that way. The less info out there the better for them.

[Bored chemist]

I can tell the difference between 10 minutes in the kitchen and 10 minutes in the lounge.

Of course you can; one of them has a cooker and a sink.
Do you have any understanding of the importance of "blind" trials?

[alancalverd]

You are quite right. The power company charges the property owner - be it an individual, a corporation or a cooperative. The owner must put in private meters for various renters.

NO NO NO! That can be true for private domestic tenants but is never the case for significant industrial premises. We didn't even have the same supply company in any of the premises I have used. Because our demands were completely different (3 phase, high peak loads, etc) from the general building and fire exit supplies, we frequently renegotiated terms with competitive suppliers - it wasn't worth the landlord's time to do so for his tiny consumption. Indeed we installed a new megawatt substation, driven from the wholesale 11 kV supply, in one case, and got a rebate for supplying the rest of the street with 220V mains from our surplus!

[CliveG]

You are quite right. The power company charges the property owner - be it an individual, a corporation or a cooperative. The owner must put in private meters for various renters.

NO NO NO! That can be true for private domestic tenants but is never the case for significant industrial premises. We didn't even have the same supply company in any of the premises I have used. Because our demands were completely different (3 phase, high peak loads, etc) from the general building and fire exit supplies, we frequently renegotiated terms with competitive suppliers - it wasn't worth the landlord's time to do so for his tiny consumption. Indeed we installed a new megawatt substation, driven from the wholesale 11 kV supply, in one case, and got a rebate for supplying the rest of the street with 220V mains from our surplus!

Okay. I might be wrong for SA as well. However, at a meeting opposing the tower a real estate man wanted to know how they got a separate supply when he said he could not get it done for any other property. We have only one supplier Eskom also known as Eishkom. (Standing SA joke - Eish is a local expression of amazement or shock.) They distribute through the municipalities but they too are a monopoly.

[CliveG]

I can tell the difference between 10 minutes in the kitchen and 10 minutes in the lounge.

Of course you can; one of them has a cooker and a sink.
Do you have any understanding of the importance of "blind" trials?

Did I say this was a test or a proof?

No. Just a comment as to my increased perception of the harm being done to me. Which should assist my double blind test.

[CliveG]

Here is the new lesson.

I have been trying to find a way to reduce or discontinue any medications. There were times I was taking 3 Tramadol tablets a day. They have side effects that are unpleasant. The neurologist prescribed Gabapentin but even in the lowest dose I felt dizzy and weird so I stopped after a few days. She then prescribed Tegratol - a half tablet twice a day. It helped a little but I was still not happy. Two weeks ago I tried half Tegretol at night (it helps me sleep) and one Tramadol in the morning for the pain. The Tramadol would take 3 hours to take effect so sometimes I set my alarm for 4 am and take it then.

Sunday 20 October I took my last medications.

Monday - we flew to Uhlanga at lunch time. The weather was overcast and cool. We walked on the beach but spent some time in the room on the 15th floor and ate chicken and a salad in the room. I felt stomach cramps and wondered what I had eaten. During the trip we got up at 5 am most of the time and did an early beach walk.

Tuesday - the weather was partly raining and we spent most of the time in the room with my wife reading a book and me sleeping. I was having some withdrawal. In the afternoon I got sharp stomach cramps followed by diarrhea. I told my wife it must be the dried fruit I have been eating the last two days and did not have any more.

Wednesday - the day was sunny but with some wind. We spent time by the pool. At 5pm we went to a good seafood restaurant. I was feeling good with hardly any pain, and my knees were not a problem. That night my wife said she had a knot in her stomach and I felt nauseous as if I had food my stomach was not used to. I was up most of the night. We both blamed the calamari we had.

Thursday - Fantastic day. Sunny and not too hot and humid. Spent from 8am to 2pm by the pool. Felt great. Took some pizza up to the room. At 7pm my wife said she was worried about the pain in her stomach. We went to sleep at 8 pm. I woke at 10 pm with a growing queasiness, the same sensation as the night before. This time I said it cannot be the food. WiFi. Luckily the service panels had broken off the flat wall cabinets where the wiring and cabling for the WiFi and fiber modem and TV connections were. One in the bedroom and one in the living room. I turned the power off both. Within 10 minutes I started getting relief and after 30 minutes my stomach had settled down enough for me to sleep.

Friday - Another great day. At the pool again. Now I was not feeling any pain when outside. The hotel shielded us from towers and there was no radiation from the sea. At 1pm we got on the 1 hour flight home.

The flight. After 40 minutes into the flight I told my wife I had headache, mostly between my eyes. I had pain when pressing the bones around the inside part of my eye sockets as well as the bridge of my nose. My wife suggested I had sinus pain. No, it is outside, not inside I replied. It is the WiFi in the plane I said. Many people on their cell phones. I also had a slight queasiness.

We got a taxi for the 30 minute ride home. The pain/stomach issues had gone and I was feeling okay. But as we drove into suburbia with its many masts I began to feel the general pain which had started me on pain tablets.

Now that I am not on medication, I am aware that at the apartment where I stay to avoid the cell tower, the radiation is a typical 2-6 uW/sqm and I can at least tolerate this. I sleep better and am less tired. But even 2 uW/sqm continuously is going to be bad for people in the long term. Hence my prediction of a solution to climate change by dropping the population.

When I am at the house with the tower radiation, I can feel the overall pain that was the reason for me to start on pain tablets.

Can you imagine the harm being done to people as the suburban background radiation slowly degrades their body? A long slow rot that is being blamed on every other toxin and pollutant BUT NOT CELL RADIATION! Yeah right! Sperm damage, bone marrow damage, brain damage - and lots more.

[alancalverd]

Unwashed salad,  cold chicken, dodgy seafood, third party pizza, short haul flying....enough to give anyone a bad time, let alone someone withdrawing from habitual opioids.

[Bored chemist]

No. Just a comment as to my increased perception of the harm being done to me.

Perception being the important word.
There is no evidence of actual harm caused, is there?

I felt stomach cramps and wondered what I had eaten.

What you had eaten was almost certainly "no tramadol".

[CliveG]

Unwashed salad,  cold chicken, dodgy seafood, third party pizza, short haul flying....enough to give anyone a bad time, let alone someone withdrawing from habitual opioids.

The salad was an upmarket sealed pre-washed package. The chicken had been roasted in the hour before we bought it at the upmarket (the best) retail outlet. The seafood was from a restaurant that if you did not make reservations you could not get seating. Umhlanga is an upmarket seaside resort. The pizza was from the hotel restaurant and the hotel was very upmarket. I have never had an upset stomach from dried fruit but there is always a first time.

Initially I blamed the food. I have a delicate stomach. If the food is off, I will get cramps and diarrhea within 4 hours of eating it. Like clockwork. But this was different. Not cramps but queasiness that lasted for hours. Except when I turned the WiFi off.

I have been through the withdrawal a number of times and know what it feels like. Mostly the shakes. And only a couple of days. Twitchy legs. Tramadol is a codeine derivative known for its weakness. The other times were from a stronger dose that I barely tapered off.

Short haul flying. No food or drinks before, during or after. Walk on, sit down, walk off. Why would that cause problems?

The other fact you overlook is that I had no pains when on the beach or at the pool even though not taking pain tablets. Do you know when I last felt that way and was not on pain tablets? About 3-4 years ago. The pains came and went depending on my location. Room or no room. I said to my wife when we were in the room that I had pain across my shoulder blades. Minutes later by the pool the pain was not there. That was Wednesday and I did not relate it to the room.

Since I did not think either myself or my wife were susceptible to WiFi (even though we keep all WiFI in our home off) I do not think it was a placebo/nocebo effect.

So now I have another possible test where the WiFi can be set to a random pattern and that experimenter is not aware of and is only made known at the end of the test. Double blind.

My wife has to go and see an eye specialist. The insides of her eyes are blistering and turning yellow with considerable reddening. When she spends time in the house she complains that it feels like there is grit in her eyes. It is a symptom that I have experienced a couple of times before we shielded the house.

So now we come to the central nervous sleep apnea. The waveforms of my breathing show a slowing down to zero and then a slow return to normal. Obstruction is a sudden stop and a gasp. After Saturday I was fatigued and had to lie down and sleep. I was also aware that the muscle tiredness was such that it was tiring to breathe. If the cell emf tires out the muscles by constant on/off pulsing stimulation then no wonder all my muscles are painfully tired.

I will be adjusting my sleeping patterns to see how I do if I have had a good day with no radiation.