Value chain · CLM-1066
In plain terms
Bees exposed for half an hour at up to twice the beam's peak came home and hatched about as well as unexposed bees; small birds sat through the beam's peak intensity with little more than occasional open beaks, less fluffing of feathers and possibly more resting, and a preliminary estimate put the level that would kill half of resting birds in winter at about six times that intensity.
The claim as recorded
The April 1980 status reports carry the first numbers from the programme's own airborne-biota experiments. Bees: "30 minute exposures to 5 levels (3,6,9,25 and 50 mw/cm2) of 2.45 GHz CW radiation"; "6,000 foraging bees" in the homing study, "Although slightly fewer bees (4% or less) returned successfully to their colonies in the microwave than in the sham exposures, the differences were so small as to be statistically insignificant"; a brood study of 21,600 bees with no statistically significant differences "although fewer microwave treated bees emerged following exposure of the egg stage"; "At this point there are no biologically significant differences that might indicate adverse or beneficial effects". Birds, from field exposures at Manomet while the exposure facility was still being built: white-throated sparrows and dark-eyed juncos "to 25 mW/cm2 for 20 or 200 minutes had no noticeable effects on general behavior except for occassional gaping, reduced fluffing of feathers, and a possible greater tendency to rest"; "Juncos at 155 and 100 mW/cm2 showed gaping behavior beginning 30 seconds after commencement of irradiation"; "One of two birds exposed to 155 mW/cm2 and two birds at 160 mW/cm2 had considerable elevated cloacal temperatures, i.e. 42.3 C"; "preliminary estimates of the median lethal dose for microwaves for resting birds in the field during winter conditions (e.g. in Massachusetts) appears to be about 150 mW/cm2", with the expectation that birds "in flight, or in still air, or at higher humidities and air temperatures ... will be incapacitated and die at lower power densities".
Evidence behind this: T3, two status reports of the programme's own bee and bird exposure experiments, with preliminary field numbers.
Scope and limits
Status reports: the bee longevity study "still being analyzed"; the bird lethality figure is "preliminary" from a handful of animals ("One of two birds"); winter field conditions; no in-flight exposures.
What it assumes
No assumptions are recorded against this claim.
Where it comes from
PDF p.400 / printed 379, normalised: the exposure levels sentence; the facility "A 2.45 GHz CW power supply (300 watts maximum power) transmits variable levels of microwave radiation to a horn antenna located atop a rectangular exposure chamber (internal dimensions 61X61X182 cm)". PDF p.401 / printed 380: "6,000 foraging bees were captured upon their return to their hives, labeled with individually numbered plastic tags"; the 4 per cent sentence; "Analysis of the percentage of adult bees emerging following treatment did not yield any statistically significant differences between corresponding microwave and sham treatment groups although fewer microwave treated bees emerged following exposure of the egg stage"; "a total of 3,000 individually identified bees"; the "no biologically significant differences" sentence; PDF p.402 / printed 381, figure text: "= 21,600 BEES". PDF p.404 / printed 383: chambers at "25mW/cm2" and "0.1, 1.0, and 10 mW/cm2"; the Manomet sentences as quoted, the "One of two birds" sentence running over the page break to PDF p.405 / printed 384, which carries "42.3 C" and the median lethal sentence as quoted; "the rapid onset of gaping under microwaves, e.g. 30 seconds ... may be a valuable and sensitive indicator for microwave effects".
Basis: mW/cm2; minutes of exposure; per cent returning; cloacal temperature in C
Related records
- Answers question
- QST-001 not published in this release
Cite this
energyaperture.com/c/clm-1066
CLM-1066, Energy Aperture, as of 1980-04.
Connected records
Other published records linked to this one. A list, not a judgement.
- Also from SRC-449
- CLM-0964To build two of these satellites a year, about 300 tonnes of material had to arrive at the orbital construction site every day. Getting it...CLM-0974The 1978 reference design shows every loss between sunlight and the power grid as a chain of numbered boxes, and the boxes multiply out...CLM-0975Depending on which published assumptions you take, a satellite needs between about 2 and 6 square kilometres of solar blanket for every...CLM-1058The often-repeated claim that the magnetron is 188 decibels quieter than its carrier traces to a conference abstract in which the tube...CLM-1059By spring 1980 the engineers, the reviewing panel and the ionosphere experimenters were all saying the beam-intensity ceiling the whole...CLM-1060The 1980 review did not agree with itself on how much of a satellite's cost was rockets: one paper said over a third, the programme's own...CLM-1061In one 1980 volume the satellite cost anywhere from about 2,300 to 3,800 dollars a kilowatt depending on who added what - and the programme...CLM-1062In 1980 the launch vehicle that everything was costed on was said by its own designers to be arbitrarily big, and they proposed a rocket a...More on the source page.