Investigation of Electromagnetic Radiation Levels at DVB-T Transmission Points Operated by the Greek Public Broadcasting Service

Abstract

The increase in the popularity of digital terrestrial television broadcasting and the expansion of Greece’s network infrastructure have raised concerns about the possible harmful effects of exposure to long-term radio frequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMFs) on sensitive groups. This study presents measurements of RF-EMFs generated in three locations of digital terrestrial television broadcast stations of the national public broadcasting company of Greece. The measurements and calculations of the radio frequency (RF) electric-field strength and RF electromagnetic field (EMF) power density were carried out in the near-field and far-field regions of the antenna of a digital television broadcasting station. In these three locations, the results of real measurements were compared to reports by the Greek Atomic Energy Commission (EEAE) and the limit levels of International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP).

1. Introduction

The growing trend in digital terrestrial television (DTTB) and the expansion of the network system has raised public concern about the potential health impacts of long-term exposure to radio frequency electromagnetic fields (EMFs) [1]. People and parents oppose the installation of microcells and transmitter antennas, expressing concerns about the potential damage caused by exposure to children and the general public.

Electromagnetic waves are generated from radio, television transmitters, base stations, and electronics, generating electromagnetic fields in wireless communications environments with frequencies ranging from 100 kHz to several GHz. Recent studies indicate a significant increase in RF-EMF levels in urban areas compared to measurements conducted approximately three decades ago, during which analog broadcasting systems were the dominant sources of environmental electromagnetic radiation [1,2].

In the European Union, the ultra-high frequency (UHF) band, spanning 470 to 608 MHz, is primarily allocated for terrestrial digital television broadcasting. There is considerable public concern, particularly among parents, regarding the installation of microcells and transmitter antennas. These concerns primarily relate to the potential health risks associated with radiofrequency exposure, especially for children and the general population.

Radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) are characterized as non-ionizing radiation spanning the frequency range of 100 kHz to 300 GHz [2]. Electromagnetic waves are generated from radio, television transmitters, base stations, and electronics, generating electromagnetic fields in wireless communications environments. Research shows that such systems have significantly increased the level of RF-EMF in urban areas compared to the measurements thirty years ago, when analog radio and television stations were the most important sources of environmental information.

The data collected from measuring point surveys show that television broadcasting development has greatly increased the levels of EMF in rural areas [3]. In addition, the 2015 Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks (SCENIHR) report presented a summary of studies on electromagnetic emissions around radio and television transmitters, which showed that although emitted power was lower after digitalization, average EMF emissions in the frequency range used for television broadcasting increased significantly. People exposed to RF-EMFs may have thermal tissue effects. This energy is expressed as the specific absorption rate (SAR), calculated in W/kg. Τhe International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) recommends that the average body’s SAR limit be 0.08 W/kg (ICNIRP) [4]. The ICNRP guidelines recommend the inclusion of a number of measurement reference levels, particularly to protect the public from harmful health effects arising from excessive RF exposure.

The limits of exposure of the general public under Greek law are based on recommendations 1999 of the Council of the European Union. The guidelines set for the limit levels for the total EMF in the environment by ICNIRP for each carrier frequency are given in

Table 1. ICNIRP guidelines’ reference levels for general public exposure (1998).

Frequency Range	E (V/m)	H (A/m)
1–10 MHz	87/f0.5	65.25/f0.5
10–400 MHz	28	0.073
400–2000 MHz	1.375 × f0.5	0.0037 × f0.5
2–300 GHz	61	0.16

for general public exposure to time-varying electric fields [5]. Table 1 presents the baseline frequency ranges for electric and magnetic field strengths. The limit value of digital terrestrial television (DTTV) with 474 MHz is 29.7 V/m, while the limit value of television transmitters with 514 MHz and 498 MHz is 31.05 V/m and 30.5 V/m.

This study provides an experimental evaluation of electromagnetic field (EMF) exposure levels in vicinity of three digital television broadcasting stations located in rural, urban and suburban environments. By measuring the electric field strength and calculating the power density at multiple points and comparing the results with official data provided by the Hellenic Atomic Energy Commission (EEAE), this research offers a practical verification of compliance with national safety limits. The findings contribute to the understanding of spatial variability in EMF exposure across different geographical settings and offer valuable data for public health assessment and infrastructure planning in the context of digital broadcasting systems.

This survey is conducted as follows. Section 2 describes the details of the measurement systems and methods that are used. Section 3 presents the results of broadband measurement and the calculations of secondary results. Finally, the survey is concluded in Section 4.

2. Materials and Methods

To obtain field analysis around the radio masts, measurements were made on site. This section provides information on the specifications of digital terrestrial television transmissions on three selected masts. For this study, all parameters were collected, such as mast height, horizontal (azimuth) directions, number of antennas, maximum gain of main lobe, and transmission power. The parameters of the investigated terrestrial digital television antennas are presented in

Table 2. Parameters of the terrestrial digital television antenna system.

Parameter Type	Site A	Site B	Site C
Name Site	Vari	Foinikas	Eyzonoi
Latitude (ϕ)	37°49′43.0″ N	37°24′04.0″ N	41°06′22.0″ N
Longitude (λ)	23°49′02.0″ E	24°52′21.0″ E	22°33′44.0″ E
Frequency (MHz)	474	514	498
Service	DVB-T	DVB-T	DVB-T
Antenna Model	SIRA-01	SIRA-01	SIRA-01
Number of elements	6	2	4
Directions (Azimuth°)	11°, 29°, 227°, 230°, 309°, 312°	76°, 127°	230°, 310°
Gain of array (dBi)	6.15	11.15	14.15
Polarization	Horizontal	Horizontal	Horizontal
Antenna height (m)	27	27	27
EIRP (dBm)	46.15	51.15	54.15
Trx power (dBm)	40	40	40

, and the actual measurement scenes are shown in Figure 1.

2.1. Measurement Setup

2.1.1. Measurement System

In this study, the measurements were carried out in three different areas using the Narda SRM-3006 EMF meter and 3501/03 isotropic field probe [6]. The instrument was available at the university laboratory and was not sourced directly from a manufacturer for this study. This tool allows the environmental measurement of high frequency electromagnetic fields between 27 MHz and 3 GHz and a dynamic range of 0.2 mV/m to 200 V/m. In addition, the SRM-3006 shows the contribution of each source and the total field level, expressed as the electrical field strength of V/m. The equipment is shown in Figure 2, and the measurement system settings are given in

Table 3. Measurement system settings.

Parameter	Description
Instrument	NARDA SRM-3006–Radiation Meter
Units	E-Field, (V/m)
Measurement Mode	Spectrum Analysis
Measured Center Frequencies	474, 514, 498 MHz
Channel Width	8 MHz
Antenna Type	Electric field probe, 3501/03
Detection	RMS
Dynamic Range	0.2 mV/m to 200 V/m
Measurement Duration	6 min
Environment	Outdoor
Axis	X, Y, Z (isotropic)
Instrument Uncertainty	±2.2 dB

.

This device can accurately analyze individual frequency ranges and field exposure levels accurately down to a single communications channel. It is also able to calculate the total and compare the level with the current limit.

2.1.2. Measurement Methods

Electromagnetic waves are created of two types of fields, an electric field and a magnetic field. The relationship between electromagnetic waves and electromagnetic fields is similar to the relationship between voltage and current in electrical circuits. The electric field (E) is proportional to the voltage of the circuit (V), and the magnetic field (H) is related to the current of the circuit (I). The mathematical relationship between the (Ε) field and the (H) field is complex and includes a four-dimensional expression. However, most applications can reduce math terms to simple formulas [7], as given in Equation (1).

$$E (\mathrm{V}/\mathrm{m})=Z_0\left(\mathsf{\Omega }\right)\times H \left(\mathrm{A}/\mathrm{m}\right)$$

(1)

where E is electric field strength, H is magnetic field strength, and Z₀ = 377 Ω is the characteristic impedance of free space.

As electromagnetic waves travel through space, energy is transferred from the source to receivers. The energy transmission rate per area unit (energy density) is the product of the force of the electric field (E) and the force of the magnetic field (H).

The following equation relates electric field (E), power density (Pd), and magnetic field (H) (2):

$$Pd \left(\mathrm{W}/{\mathrm{m}}^2\right)=E \left(\mathrm{V}/\mathrm{m}\right) \times H \left(\mathrm{A}/\mathrm{m}\right)$$

(2)

The exposure ratios λ_i,f for each height i and each frequency range f were calculated from Equation (3),

$${\lambda }_{i,f}=({{\displaystyle \frac{E_{if}}{E_{Lf}}})}^2$$

(3)

where E_i,f is the electric field strength at height i for frequency band f and E_L,f is the electric field reference level at frequency band f.

Measurements were taken directly near the antenna of the television transmitter. The duration of each measurement was 6 min and the average electric field strength (E) was recorded. The measuring points are in a range between 12 and 103 m. The measuring heights are 110 cm, 130 cm, and 160 cm above the ground. The average electrical field intensity is also calculated from the average spatial electrical field values at each height as follows (4):

$$E_{avg}=\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{{\sum }_{i=1}^3{E}_i^2}{3}}}$$

(4)

The exposure ratio λ_f in the frequency band f is obtained as the mean value of the measurements over the three heights (Equation (4)).

$${\lambda }_f={\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}{\sum }_{i=1}^3{\lambda }_{if}$$

(5)

Also, the total exposure ratio Λ_f for the given measurement spot was derived as the sum of the exposure ratios λ_f in each frequency band f.

$${\Lambda }_f={\sum }_f{\lambda }_f$$

(6)

Λ_f is used to estimate the population’s exposure to electromagnetic fields compared to the safety limits defined in current legislation. If total exposure ratio Λ_f is less than 1, then the environment is considered safe in terms of radio frequency radiation [8].

The far-field region is the portion of space wherein the fields can be calculated using the following assumptions [9]

$$r={\displaystyle \frac{2D^2}{\lambda }}$$

(7)

where D is the largest dimension of the transmitting antenna and λ is the wavelength.

Measurements were carried out by sampling compared to the total number of public broadcasters. Figure 3 shows the location of the DVB-T transmitters in three different regions. The terrestrial digital television transmitters are marked with a star and the red circles indicates the location of measurement. Three types of measurement locations have been selected, the first of which is the “Vari” in southern Athens. The second is a rural area called “Foinikas” in Siros Island. The third is located in northern Greece, in an area that is not urban and is called the “Eyzonoi”.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Measurement of Electric Field Strength at Different Distances

A detailed analysis of the average electric field strength around television transmitter in Site A, Vari, is shown in Figure 4. The maximum value of the electric field detected is 0.439 V/m at 41 m north northeast of the company’s radio mast and the minimum detected electric field value is 0.119 V/m, 58 m southwest of the company’s mast. The value of the electric field is also detected at 0.347 V/m at 24 m west of the measurement location, 0.263 V/m at 47 m north–northwest, and 0.199 V/m at 40 m south–southwest of the television mast. To quantify the distribution of the data, the mean value (μ = 0.276 V/m), the variance (σ² = 0.0119 V²/m²), and the standard deviation (σ = 0.109 V/m) were calculated and are displayed within the graph. These statistical indicators provide insight into the variability and spread of the recorded values. Notably, the observed decrease in field strength at specific locations corresponds to areas situated outside the main coverage diagram of the antenna system, indicating reduced exposure due to directional radiation patterns or physical shielding.

This is consistent with the previous analysis of the average electric field strength around television transmitter in Site B, Foinikas, which is shown in Figure 5. The maximum value of the electric field detected was 0.241 V/m, 100 m east southeast of the company’s radio mast, and the minimum detected electric field value was 0.137 V/m, 59 m south–southeast of the company’s mast. The value of the electric field is also detected as 0.155 V/m at 27 m west of the measurement location, 0.175 V/m at 26 m north–northwest and 0.190 V/m at 103 m east northeast of the television mast. The corresponding statistical analysis shows a mean value of μ = 0.178 V/m, a variance of σ² = 0.0010 V²/m², and a standard deviation of σ = 0.032 V/m. These values indicate a relatively uniform distribution of field strength, with minimal variability among the measured points, suggesting consistent exposure conditions across the sampled area.

Figure 6 shows a detailed analysis of the average strength of electric fields around television transmitters at Site B, Eyzonoi. The maximum value of the electric field detected was 0.552 V/m, 15 m northwest of the company’s radio mast, and the minimum detected electric field value is 0.247 V/m, 15 m northeast of the company’s mast. The value of the electric field was also detected as 0.466 V/m at 21 m east of the measurement location, 0.481 V/m at 15 m southwest, and 0.433 V/m at 20 m southeast of the television mast. The variance and standard deviation (σ² = 0.0108 V²/m², σ = 0.104 V/m) reflect a moderate level of dispersion. The values indicate a generally high exposure level, with slight variability primarily influenced by the significantly lower reading at point 1.

Figure 6 presents the higher intensity of the electric field in comparison to the preceding graphs. This increase can be attributed to the fact that the measurement points are located within a distance of less than 22 m. Specifically, as the distance to the source of the emitter decreases, the intensity of the electric field increases. Another reason for the higher field strength is that the transmitter’s EIRP is higher than at the other two measurement locations.

Among the three datasets, the second diagram exhibits the lowest mean value and the smallest standard deviation, indicating a more uniform distribution of electric field strength. In contrast, the third diagram shows the highest average field, accompanied by a relatively large standard deviation due to a single significantly lower measurement. The first diagram also demonstrates considerable variability, with a pronounced drop in field strength at points located outside the main antenna radiation pattern.

Table 4. Comparative statistical analysis of electric field measurements across three locations.

Diagram	Mean (μ) [V/m]	Variance (σ2) [V2/m]	Std Deviation (σ) [V/m]
1st	0.276	0.0119	0.109
2nd	0.178	0.001	0.032
3rd	0.432	0.0108	0.104

presents a comparative summary of the statistical properties of electric field measurements conducted at three different DVB-T transmission sites. The values include the mean electric field strength (μ), variance (σ²), and standard deviation (σ), offering insight into the central tendency and variability of the measurements. Notably, Site 2 exhibited the lowest field levels and minimal dispersion, while Site 3 showed the highest average field strength and a relatively broader spread of values, likely due to proximity to the antenna and higher transmission power.

3.2. Measurement of Magnetic Field Strength at Different Distances

In this section, the MF measurements were carried out in three different areas using the Narda FieldMan and HFD-3061 isotropic field probe. This instrument, which was already available at the university laboratory and not newly sourced from a manufacturer, is specifically designed for the accurate measurement of low-frequency magnetic fields, offering high sensitivity and isotropic response across all three spatial axes. Its capability of capturing precise field values in complex outdoor environments makes it well-suited for evaluating ambient magnetic field exposure levels in accordance with international safety standards. A detailed analysis of the average magnetic field strength around television transmitter in Site A, Vari, is shown in Figure 7. The maximum value of the magnetic field strength detected is 0.0011 A/m at 41 m north–northeast of the company’s radio mast and the minimum detected magnetic field strength value is 0.0003 A/m, 58 m southwest of the company’s mast. The value of the magnetic field strength is also detected as 0.0008 A/m at 24 m west of the measurement location, 0.0006 A/m at 47 m north northwest, and 0.0004 A/m at 40 m south–southwest of the television mast. The magnetic field measurements at the five locations show a mean value of 0.000712 A/m. The calculated variance (8.74 × 10⁻⁸ A²/m²) and standard deviation (0.000296 A/m) indicate moderate variability among the observed values. The peak occurs at location 2, while the field strength steadily decreases across the remaining points.

Figure 8 presents the average magnetic field strength around the television transmitter in Site B, Foinikas. The maximum value of the magnetic field strength detected was 0.0006 A/m, 100 m east–southeast of the company’s radio mast, and the minimum detected magnetic field strength value is 0.0004 A/m, 59 m south–southeast of the company’s mast. The value of the magnetic field strength was also detected as 0.0004 A/m at 27 m west of the measurement location, 0.0004 A/m at 26 m north–northwest, and 0.0005 A/m at 103 m east–northeast of the television mast. The average magnetic field strength across the five points is 0.000486 A/m. The data show relatively low variability, as indicated by a variance of 6.34 × 10⁻⁹ A²/m² and a standard deviation of 0.000080 A/m. The highest value was recorded at location 4, suggesting a localized increase in magnetic field intensity.

Figure 9 shows a detailed analysis of the average magnetic field strength around the Site C, Eyzonoi, television transmitter. The maximum value of the magnetic field detected was 0.0015 A/m, 15 m northwest of the company’s radio mast, and the minimum detected magnetic field strength value was 0.0005 A/m, 15 m northeast of the company’s mast. The value of the magnetic field strength is also detected as 0.0012 A/m at 21 m east of the measurement location, 0.0012 A/m at 15 m southwest, and 0.0011 A/m at 20 m southeast of the television mast. The average magnetic field strength recorded across the five positions is 0.001118 A/m. The variance and standard deviation, 9.67 × 10⁻⁸ A²/m² and 0.000311 A/m, respectively, reflect a slightly higher spread in values compared to previous datasets. The minimum value at position 1 contrasts notably with the peak at position 2, indicating a strong local variation.

Table 5. Comparative analysis of magnetic field strength (H) measurements across the three DVB-T transmitter locations.

Diagram	Mean (μ) [A/m]	Variance (σ2) [V2/m]	Std Deviation (σ) [V/m]
1st	0.000712	0.000000009	0.000296
2nd	0.000486	0.00000001	0.000080
3rd	0.00011	0.00000010	0.000311

summarizes the magnetic field strength measurements conducted in the urban (Vari), rural (Foinikas), and non-urban (Eyzonoi) areas. The highest average magnetic field was recorded at the non-urban site, likely due to proximity to the antenna and higher EIRP. In contrast, the rural area showed the lowest variability and field strength, consistent with greater measurement distances from the source.

The selected measurement points for electric and magnetic field strength were chosen based on their distance, azimuthal orientation, and relative position to the DVB-T transmitting antennas, aiming to capture spatial variation in field exposure. Importantly, the same locations were used by the Greek Atomic Energy Commission (EEAE) in their official field measurements. Aligning with these reference points ensured consistency and comparability between datasets, allowing for the reliable cross-verification of the results and reinforcing the validity of the present measurements.

3.3. Calculation of Secondary Results for Each Scenario

In addition to the primary measurement results presented for the three areas, the calculated values of the secondary results for these areas are also provided for each measurement point.

Table 6. Detailed presentation of power flux density and total exposure ratio in the urban area.

Measurement Point	Absolute Uncertainty (V/m)	Power Density (W/m2)	Total Exposure Ratio (Λ)	Times Below the Limit (Total Λ)
1.	0.00674	0.000179	0.00011	9089
2.	0.01124	0.000526	0.00035	2857
3.	0.00890	0.000291	0.00022	4540
4.	0.00511	0.000089	0.00006	16,650
5.	0.00305	0.000045	0.00002	49,999

,

Table 7. Detailed presentation of power flux density and total exposure ratio in the rural area.

Measurement Point	Absolute Uncertainty (V/m)	Power Density (W/m2)	Total Exposure Ratio (Λ)	Times Below the Limit (Total Λ)
1.	0.00399	0.000066	0.000045	22,200
2.	0.00450	0.000083	0.000053	18,849
3.	0.00488	0.000098	0.000067	14,910
4.	0.00617	0.000150	0.000107	9336
5.	0.00352	0.000054	0.000034	29,382

and

Table 8. Detailed presentation of power flux density and total exposure ratio in the non-urban area.

Measurement Point	Absolute Uncertainty (V/m)	Power Density (W/m2)	Total Exposure Ratio (Λ)	Times Below the Limit (Total Λ)
1.	0.00634	0.000038	0.00011	9081
2.	0.01414	0.000424	0.00052	1921
3.	0.01233	0.000277	0.00039	2561
4.	0.01110	0.000183	0.00032	3121
5.	0.01196	0.000242	0.00037	2700

present the absolute uncertainty, the power density, total exposure ratio at three height levels, and the value indicating how many times it falls below the permitted limit. The reporting of absolute uncertainty in field measurements is essential for accurately assessing the reliability and precision of the data obtained. Absolute uncertainty indicates the potential deviation from the true value, helping users to understand the accuracy of their measurements. By reporting absolute uncertainty, a more realistic picture of the results is provided, preventing any misunderstandings regarding the exact value of the measurement. The absolute uncertainty for each electric field value was calculated by multiplying the corresponding measurement by the instrument’s uncertainty percentage (3%).

Furthermore, the results presented in Table 6, Table 7 and Table 8 confirm that, in all cases, the total exposure ratio remains significantly below unity. The column “Times below the limit (Total Λ)” provides an intuitive measure of this margin by showing how many times lower the exposure is relative to the regulatory threshold, calculated as 1 divided by the total exposure ratio Λ.

The following physical quantities were calculated for each measurement point based on the experimental data for all three areas.

The calculation results presented in Table 6 indicate that the RF-EMF power density emitted by the transmitter at all five points is extremely low and well below the official safety limit. Moreover, the total is less than 1 and therefore the environment is considered safe against radio frequency radiation.

Furthermore, the calculation results presented in Table 7 demonstrate that the RF-EMF power density emitted by the transmitter at all five measurement points is exceptionally low and significantly below the official safety limit. In comparison, the electric and magnetic field values from the two other transmitters are lower, owing to the measurements being taken at greater distances. Here again, the exposure rate is less than 1, indicating that the environment is considered safe from radio frequency radiation.

The results of the calculations presented in Table 8 indicate that the RF-EMF power density emitted by the transmission at all five measurement points is very low, remaining well within the official safety limit. Once again, the exposure ratio is below 1, suggesting that the environment is deemed safe from radio frequency radiation.

Moreover, three DVB-T sites were analyzed, each featuring different antenna configurations and operating frequencies. The configurations and corresponding far-field thresholds were computed as shown in

Table 9. Antenna configurations and calculated far-field thresholds for each DVB-T site.

Site	Frequency (MHz)	Number of Bays	Panels Per Bay	D (m)	Near-Field Rnear (m)	Far-Field Rfar (m)
Vari	474	3	2	2.4	≈3.7	≈18.2
Foinikas	514	2	1	1.05	≈1.3	≈3.8
Eyzonoi	498	2	2	2.4	≈3.7	≈19.1

. For the Foinikas site, a pair of horizontally aligned SIRA panels operating at 514 MHz was used. The Eyzonoi site employed two groups of vertically stacked panels operating at 498 MHz, while the Vari site utilized three groups of vertically stacked panels at 474 MHz. The maximum dimension D for each configuration was determined based on typical SIRA panel dimensions (1.2 m height and 0.5 m width). The calculated far-field limits ensure that measurement distances were appropriately selected to capture the correct signal behavior in each region.

The calculation of the far-field was made to determine the distance from the antenna where the electric field behaves as a free wave, and the effects of the near-field become negligible. This helps in measurements by allowing an accurate assessment of the radiation distribution and the behavior of the field at greater distances, ensuring that measurements are taken in areas where the radiation has fully developed and the results are reliable.

3.4. Comparison of the Measurement Data with the Reports of the Greek Atomic Energy Commission (EEAE)

Figure 10 presents the comparison of field measurement data with reports from the Greek Atomic Energy Commission (EEAE) for the three areas. The distances used for field measurements were aligned with those in the organization’s reports to ensure comparability [10,11,12]. Additionally, each measurement point is presented with its distance from the antenna, along with its direction relative to the horizon. Following the analysis of the presented results, it is evident that no significant differences were observed among the measurements. The slight variations identified may be attributed to factors such as the precision of each measuring instrument, the height and distance at which the instrument was installed [13].

3.5. Presentation of the Electric Field Exposure Ratios in Different Spectral Bands Across Three Locations

The diagram in Figure 11 shows the mean of the electric field strength across different spectral regions at measurement point 2, located in the urban area, where the highest electric field intensity was observed, along with the total exposure ratio. The 460–870 MHz band shows the highest average intensity, exceeding 0.439 V/m, which likely reflects significant usage by broadcasting or older mobile communication systems. As the frequency increases, the average electric field decreases noticeably, with the 2200–3000 MHz range showing the lowest values, under 0.054 V/m. The electric field measurements across frequency bands yield a mean value of 0.200 V/m. The relatively high standard deviation of 0.139 V/m and variance of 0.01932 V²/m² reflect significant differences in spectral contributions. The 460–870 MHz band dominates the exposure levels, likely due to the presence of high-power broadcasting services. This trend suggests that higher frequency bands are less prevalent or attenuate more rapidly in non-urban settings, possibly due to factors like distance from transmitters, terrain obstructions, or reduced use of higher-frequency services in such areas. The aforementioned measurements were conducted using the Narda SRM-3006 measurement instrument, configured in the safety evaluation mode.

Also, Figure 12 presents the mean of the electric field strength across different spectral regions at measurement point 4, located in the rural area, where the highest electric field intensity was observed, along with the total exposure ratio. The 460–870 MHz band exhibits the highest average intensity, nearing 0.240 V/m, which may be attributed to the presence of broadcasting service. In contrast, the higher frequency bands, particularly those above 1700 MHz, display significantly lower electric field values, all under 0.093 V/m. This reduction can be associated with the limited deployment of high-frequency communication infrastructure, such as 4G/5G networks, in sparsely populated rural regions. The mean electric field strength across the observed spectral bands is 0.100 V/m. The variance and standard deviation—0.00688 V²/m² and 0.083 V/m, respectively—suggest a noticeable disparity between low and high frequency ranges. The dominant contribution again comes from the 460–870 MHz band, consistent with broadcasting or public safety transmissions.

Figure 13 presents the mean of the electric field strength across different spectral regions at measurement point 2, located in the non-urban area, where the highest electric field intensity was observed, along with the total exposure ratio. The 870–970 MHz and 1700–1900 MHz bands exhibit the highest average electric field intensities, both exceeding 0.587 V/m, followed closely by the 460–870 MHz range at approximately 0.551 V/m. The average electric field intensity recorded across the full spectrum is 0.428 V/m. A high standard deviation of 0.189 V/m reflects considerable variation in exposure levels between frequency bands. The most dominant contributions stem from the 870–970 MHz and 1700–1900 MHz ranges, likely due to active mobile and data communication services. These elevated values suggest active utilization of these frequency bands in the area, potentially by mobile communication systems and broadcast services. These measurements suggest that lower frequency bands tend to have stronger electric field intensities in non-urban areas, possibly due to greater propagation range and lower attenuation. The results highlight how electromagnetic exposure can differ substantially depending on the frequency band, even in less populated regions.

3.6. Presentation of a Comparative Analysis of the Mean Values of Measured and Simulated Results Across Different Spectral Bands at Three Distinct Locations

Additionally, Figure 14 presents a comparative analysis of the measured and simulated mean electric field strength values across various spectrum ranges. The bar chart illustrates the electric field intensity (E in V/m) corresponding to each frequency band, with measured data shown in orange and simulated data depicted in red. The simulation was performed using the ICS telecom EV software, incorporating technical specifications and emission data from neighboring broadcasting and mobile communication base stations to ensure realistic modeling. Despite this comprehensive approach, minor discrepancies are observed between the measured and simulated results. Specifically, the measured values tend to be slightly higher across all frequency ranges. As the frequency increases, both the measured and simulated field strengths decrease, and the deviation between them becomes less significant. These variations may be attributed to factors such as environmental reflections, obstructions, atmospheric conditions, and simplifications inherent in the simulation models. Similarly, the results for the other two areas were analyzed and presented in Figure 15 and Figure 16, respectively.

3.7. Limitations of the Study

While the present study provides meaningful insights into RF-EMF exposure levels from DVB-T transmitters operated by the Hellenic Broadcasting Corporation, certain limitations should be acknowledged.

First, the density of measurement points was relatively low, which may restrict the spatial granularity of the observed electromagnetic field distributions. A higher resolution in sampling locations could allow for a more comprehensive characterization of spatial variability, particularly in complex urban environments or areas with uneven terrain.

Second, the lack of temporal repetition in the measurements limits the ability to capture potential variations in exposure levels across different times of day, seasons, or operational states of the transmitters. Including repeated measurements over extended periods would improve the reliability and representativeness of the recorded data.

Third, the analysis was restricted to only three transmission sites, each representing a different geographical context (urban, rural, and non-urban). While this selection facilitates comparative analysis across environments, it may not fully reflect the diversity of real-world broadcasting infrastructure or EMF exposure conditions in other regions of Greece.

These limitations, while not undermining the validity of the findings, highlight the need for broader and more systematic investigations in future studies, ideally incorporating denser spatial sampling, longitudinal measurements, and a wider array of transmitter sites.

4. Conclusions

In this study, we aimed to estimate the mean Electric Field Strength (V/m) of RF-EMF radiation from three digital low-power transmitters of the Hellenic Broadcast Corporation in Greece. The measured and calculated values of electric field strength and power density around television transmitters were found to comply with the official permissible limits stipulated by national legislation. Based on the measurements conducted in this survey, the E-field levels from DVB-T transmitter antennas in the three examined areas were found to be significantly below the exposure limits. In the region of Vari, the highest recorded electric field (E-field) level was 0.439 V/m, which represents only 1.48% of the exposure limit of 29.7 V/m, as stipulated by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP), specifically the 1998 guidelines for electromagnetic field (EMF) exposure. Also, in the region of Foinikas, the highest measured electric field (E-field) level was 0.241 V/m, accounting for only 0.78% of the exposure limit of 31.05 V/m. Finally, in the region of Eyzonoi, the highest recorded electric field (E-field) level was measured at 0.551 V/m. This value corresponds to only 1.81% of the prescribed exposure limit of 30.50 V/m. These findings indicate that the E-field levels in these regions remain well within the established safety thresholds.

Although the present study primarily focused on digital television (DTV) broadcasting, it is acknowledged that fourth- and fifth-generation (4G and 5G) mobile communication systems are also significant contributors to ambient electromagnetic field (EMF) levels, especially in urban and non-urban environments. A comparative evaluation of the exposure levels associated with these systems, alongside an investigation into potential correlations with reported health symptoms within affected communities, may substantially enhance the broader understanding of environmental EMF-related risks. This line of inquiry represents a critical and promising direction for future research.