What are the recommended exposure limits for wifi radiation by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection?
Executive summary
The International Commission on Non‑Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) issues exposure guidelines for radiofrequency electromagnetic fields that cover Wi‑Fi frequencies and express limits as "basic restrictions" (SAR or absorbed power density) plus corresponding reference levels in units such as W/m2 or V/m; these limits are intended to prevent heating and other established adverse thermal effects [1] [2]. For practical comparison, ICNIRP reference levels commonly cited for general public exposure include power‑density ceilings on the order of 10 W/m2 for certain Wi‑Fi bands and occupational field strength reference values up to tens of V/m, while pulse‑specific and localized limits (averaged over tissue) are also specified [3] [4] [5].
1. What ICNIRP actually sets: basic restrictions and reference levels
ICNIRP's 2020 RF guidelines define basic restrictions—metrics tied to absorbed energy that relate directly to biological heating—principally the specific absorption rate (SAR, in W/kg) for localized exposure and absorbed power density for higher frequencies, and then provide simpler "reference levels" in measurable quantities (V/m, A/m, W/m2) that are conservative proxies for compliance with the basic restrictions [1] [2]. The guidelines state that exposure below the thermal threshold is unlikely to cause adverse health effects and that limits include conservative safety factors to cover uncertainties [2].
2. Concrete numeric examples cited in public reporting
Different sources extract different numeric reference values from ICNIRP: studies and measurements commonly compare observed Wi‑Fi fields to a general‑public reference‑level of about 10 W/m2 (noting frequency dependence) and report typical classroom or office Wi‑Fi measurements many orders of magnitude below that value (e.g., measured maxima of hundreds of μW/m2 versus the 10 W/m2 reference) [3]. Telecommunications guidance documents and ITU reporting also show reference‑level field strengths in volts per metre that vary with frequency; an example cited for occupational reference levels in ITU material notes values on the order of tens of V/m (e.g., ~66 V/m for some occupational bands) [4]. ICNIRP's own Wi‑Fi information emphasizes SAR and absorbed‑energy limits to control localized heating [6].
3. Special‑case limits: pulses, localized exposure and averaging
ICNIRP includes additional, more specific constraints for pulsed or localized exposures: for example, recommendations aimed at avoiding auditory (thermoelastic) effects set limits on specific energy absorption (SA) for pulsed exposures averaged over 10 g of tissue—values reported in reviews include about 2 mJ/kg for the general public and 10 mJ/kg for workers [5]. These pulse/energy metrics supplement the SAR and power‑density framework when short, high‑power bursts occur [5].
4. Why the limits look the way they do: focus on thermal effects and measurable proxies
The commission grounds its limits on the only substantiated adverse effect from RF exposure to date—tissue heating—and sets basic restrictions linked to absorbed energy with conservative margins; reference levels (W/m2, V/m) are provided because they are practical for measurement and enforcement [2]. ICNIRP explicitly covers the 100 kHz–300 GHz range that includes Wi‑Fi and other common wireless technologies and frames protections around thresholds for whole‑body heat stress and excessive localized heating [1] [2].
5. Dissenting views and limits of the guidance
Critics argue ICNIRP (and FCC/IEEE) limits rest on older thermal‑threshold science and do not account for studies claiming non‑thermal effects at lower exposures; scholarly critiques and advocacy groups call the current reference SAR thresholds—often associated in debate with a 4 W/kg benchmark for certain effects—insufficiently protective and urge precautionary approaches or lower limits, while ICNIRP and many public‑health bodies maintain that current evidence does not demonstrate harmful non‑thermal effects below their limits [7] [8] [5]. Some reviews and commentaries also highlight the institutional and membership contexts of standards bodies as part of the controversy over how limits are set [9].
6. Bottom line for Wi‑Fi exposures
ICNIRP's 2020 guidelines require exposures to remain below basic restrictions expressed as SAR or absorbed power density and provide practical reference levels (e.g., ~10 W/m2 cited for general‑public comparisons and field strengths of tens of V/m for occupational contexts) that are designed to prevent thermal harm; measured Wi‑Fi levels reported in multiple studies are typically many orders of magnitude below these reference values, but debate continues about non‑thermal effects and whether the safety margins are adequate [1] [3] [2] [5] [8]. Where detailed numeric compliance is needed, the ICNIRP 2020 Guidelines document and its RF webpages contain the full tables of basic restrictions and frequency‑dependent reference levels [1] [10].