PolicyTracker spoke to Rodney Croft recently. He’s the chair of ICNIRP, the organisation that provides scientific advice and guidance on the health and environmental effects of non-ionising radiation.
We asked him about the potential health impact of 6G, and his response was that it’s being monitored. Fundamentally, though, it’s too soon to tell if there will be anything to worry about.
Communications vendors will certainly be hoping that there won’t be (especially following the conspiracist–led furore over 5G) as a great deal has already been invested in the next generation of mobile technology.
This includes establishing which bands will be required for 6G. Samsung has said that the mmWave bands that currently support 5G rollout will also play a vital role in 6G, especially 24.25—27.5 GHz, 37—43.5 GHz, 45.5—47 GHz, 47.2—48.2 GHz and 66-71 GHz.
Nokia has produced a roadmap for 6G spectrum that envisages its use in most mobile bands eventually.
Ericsson notes that the lower frequency bands (up to about 6 GHz) are currently used by 4G/5G and will remain important in the 6G era, especially for wide-area coverage. And as very little new sub-6 GHz spectrum is expected to be made available, “it is essential that a 6G radio access technology will be able to share lower-frequency spectrum with previous generations,” the company has said.
Huawei adds that large bandwidth is still the fundamental requirement for next-generation technologies development. This means that “6 GHz is one of the best choices for mid-band expansion in the near future”.