Analysis of the public debate on health hazards due to high-voltage transmission lines. Recommendations for the radiation protection related communication with respect of grid extension

With its phase-out of nuclear power generation and the expansion of renewably sourced energy, the German energy turnaround ('Energiewende') has radically changed existing power supply structures, with wide geographical repercussions. One aspect of this is changes to the national power grid. Existing networks are to be upgraded and new long-distance north-south power-lines built. This creates resistance and conflict. Commissioned by the Federal Office for Radiation Protection, and the Federal Ministry of the Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety, the research project entitled Analysis of public discourse on the health impacts of high-voltage power lines - recommendations for action in radiation-protection discourse related to the extension of the power grid starts precisely at the point of conflict. It first investigates from a discourse theory perspective how power grid extensions and possible health-related consequences are communicatively constructed, and what argumentation patterns dominate the discussion. From this it derives recommendations for action, with a focus on health politics information and discourse. Behind the research project stands a socio-constructivist discourse theory that sees 'social reality' not as a given but as a socially evolved entity, and its meanings, therefore, not as stable but as subject to change. The central mechanism for the communication of an objectivized social world is language. The analyses undertaken here of power grid extension are based on a methodological mix of quantitative and qualitative elements that facilitates both the differentiation of central issues and detailed examination of individual aspects. Analysis focuses on the discussion of health issues not only in the relevant literature and on civic initiative websites, but also in the first 50 Google hits, in articles from the Sueddeutsche Zeitung (SZ) and Focus, and in talk shows. The resultant discourse analysis highlights the decisive role played by different social systems and their specific logics in any evaluative judgment. While industry and politics argue from the technological and economic need for new long-distance power lines, and urge this as the basis for their legitimacy, citizens' initiatives base their objections on emotional and aesthetic grounds, rejecting the change to their domestic and social environment as a looming threat, with all its negative connotations. Plans are regularly criticized for their impact on landscape, nature conservation, local economies, tourism, and health. Citizens' initiatives almost unanimously cite health risks and fears in connection with electro/magnetic fields, while the advocates of grid extension - the Federal Network Agency and transmission system operators - take a variety of approaches to this matter. The Federal Network Agency generally marginalizes health issues, and does so in specialist language, or in terms that demand in-depth study. On the other hand Amprion GmbH, as one of the operators, uses language that is readily accessible to laypeople, and its explanations leave less room for doubt than do those of the Federal Network Agency. Amprion argues that it can fulfill its task within the existing legislative framework. Nevertheless, health issues are not the company's main concern. TenneT TSO GmbH takes a more comprehensive approach, and its statements are more readily understandable, even though they also tend to use specialist language, citing scientific studies and generally softening risk. Sound scientific results are so far notably lacking, but improved communication of the known pros and cons of this technology is also urgently required. Another consistent factor is the problematic light in which previous grid extension plans and implementation processes are typically set, and the massive civic protests to which this has at various times given rise. Transmission system operators should have learnt by now to involve citizen groups more actively in their extension plans: the desire for consultation is stronger and more vocal than it used to be. The Bavarian approach was different. The health impact of the plans was not ignored, but constituted only one among several other lines of argument, such as violation of the landscape, loss of 'home' environment, or economic impairment (especially a drop in property values - above all in the value of one's own property). In these contexts, electrosmog, electro/magnetic fields, and space charge clouds (corona discharges) become undispelled fears, or risks that are viewed as factually given rather than as 'under certain circumstances possible'. Against such opposition, to insist on the need for overhead power lines is viewed as morally depraved. In sum, the underlying need for grid extension and the technology involved on the one hand, and issues of landscape, natural environment, health, and local economies, as well as participation in the decision-making process on the other, form central fields of conflict to be negotiated at cognitive, emotional and aesthetic levels of discourse. For all these issues, recommendations geared to specific target groups can be drawn up. In accordance with the different logical systems of the protagonists, health issues in particular are approached differently, which suggests the need for a more forceful widening of perspectives. The information and communication materials produced so far by industry, politics and the grid extension lobby tends to hinder rather than help understanding of the issues by lay audiences. This state of affairs must be remedied if a cognitive dimension is to be introduced into arguments whose basis is as yet predominantly emotional and aesthetic. In this sense, a toolbox developed for professionals of the Federal Office for Radiation Protection provides a range of instruments for dealing with identified problems and situations within the conflict fields analyzed in this study.