4.4.13 Microwave Radiation Microwave radiation levels will be elevated in the vicinity of the SPS rectenna station. Levels within the exclusion zone will be as high as 23 mW/cm^, Levels below 0.1 mW/cm^ will be experienced beyond the exclusion zone.l Limited information exists regarding the direct impact of microwave radiation on biological systems. All of the information that is available relates to high-level microwave exposures.141 Although the likelihood of occurrence of microwave effects is unknown, the potential severity could be significant. Microwave exposure may alter the mortality, reproduction, and behavior of birds, invertebrates, and beneficial insects. Disturbances of pollinization by bees could affect food supplies and is currently under study.141 Direct microwave exposure could increase the susceptibility of crops to environmental stress such as drought, resulting in decreased yields. Birds relying on the earth’s magnetic field for navigation may show altered migration patterns.141 Judicious siting may reduce the extent of impact from microwave exposure. 4.4.14 Aesthetic Disturbances Direct aesthetic impacts are site-specific, and the extent of these disturbances can be moderated by avoiding archaeological, cultural, and historical areas, protected scenic and recreational areas, and habitats of rare and endangered species during the siting process. Other types of aesthetic degradation may arise from unsightly mines; visually disturbed areas, e.g., facilities sited in rural areas; transmission corridors; visible cooling tower and stack plumes and plume shadows; and noise-producing operations . The aesthetic impacts of satellite operation include the brightness of the satellites visible in the night sky. The diffuse glare from reradiated light may also interfere with optical astronomy. 4.5 RESOURCES This section summarizes the comparative assessment of five resources — land, materials, energy, water, and labor. The materials, energy, and labor assessments include only a side-by-side analysis; for land and water, the assessments include an alternative futures perspective using the results of the scenario analysis described earlier in Sec. 4.1. Seven technologies are compared with regard to the land and water issues, which are considered to be the most important resource issues. Conventional coal with flue gas desulfurization, LWR, CG/CC, LMFBR, TPV, SPS, and fusion were the technologies compared for these issues, and subsets of this group were compared for the other issue areas. The essential ingredient of the alternative futures analysis for land and water use is energy supply, by technology, through the year 2030. These data (baseload capacities), produced as part of the scenario development, are
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTU5NjU0Mg==