Price for refusing AEP’s smart meters negotiated down to $24/month
One way two way open way is NO WAY GOOD FOR US! Be concerned with what they have already installed and is operating in your towns and cities. The SMART GRID PILOTS are an upgrade to where the applications and functions will mean even higher radiation levels. We cannot tolerate the ERT, AMR meters whether it be read through land sea or air!!!!
“I keep hearing the smart meters are not here yet” “The smart meters are coming to our town”; when you should be saying I don’t want what is already here and turned on~~~That being, the infrastructure carrying the radiation and dirty electricity into your homes 24/7. We cannot tolerate any non-thermal RF radiation because it puts us ALL, even the idiots who are disbelievers and deceivers at risk.
NOTES: Encoder receiver transmitter (ERT) is a trademark of Itron, Inc.The information below is based upon Grid Insight’s independent research. It is offered here without warranty.
Itron’s encoder receiver transmitter (ERT) technology was originally developed in Minneapolis by Itron’s predecessor company, EnScan. At the time, it was revolutionary in the utility industry in that it allowed human walk-by meter readers to be replaced by a human driving an automobile equipped with a special computer and radio receiver capable of receiving each meter’s consumption data through a simple digital radio protocol.
This general technique has come to be known as automated meter reading, or AMR, and has been mimicked by competitors who have implemented similar, but incompatible, protocols.
ERT devices transmit entirely within the North American 900 MHz industrial, scientific, and medical (ISM) radio band, consisting of the spectrum from 902 MHz to 928 MHz.
First generation ERTs required a wake-up tone in order to initiate transmission. The utility’s AMR vehicle would drive through an area constantly transmitting this wake-up signal. When the receiver in each ERT detected the signal, it would send out its own data for a period of time, during which the AMR receiver would pick it up before moving on to another area.
Most ERT devices can be configured to transmit in what Itron calls “bubble-up” mode. In this mode, no wake-up tone is required. The device simply transmits its consumption data every few seconds. All recently-manufactured ERT transmitters tested by Grid Insight and by our beta testers have been observed to operate in bubble-up mode. Itron’s data sheets seem to confirm that bubble-up mode is now either the default setting or the only available option on new ERT units.
Some ERTs manufactured after Itron’s first generation series 40 and 41 units transmit an optional interval data message (IDM) in addition to (or instead of) the standard consumption message (SCM) the earliest models had used. Our field tests have shown that some series 45 and newer Centron C1SR electric meter ERTs in the utility areas visited transmit this much larger interval data message. The IDM format, rather than reporting the meter register reading in real time, instead reports the meter’s interval consumption (the change in register value) for a series of 47 time intervals. The current total meter reading is included, but is valid as of the close of the last interval (for which an offset is provided). The interval period has been observed to be either five or ten minutes, depending on the version of the IDM format used. Thus, each interval data message contains consumption data spanning either four or eight hours. To build a complete data set from these messages (some caveats aside), transmissions need only be received from each meter a few times a day.
It seems that little changed in ERT technology as meters transitioned from electromechanical (with the spinning metal disc) to wholely solid-state in the early 2000s. Itron phased out manufacturing of the series 45 add-on modules and began focusing its attention on the its Centron C1S meters. One ERT-equipped version of this model is called the C1SR, and was sold originally under the Schlumberger brand name until Itron completed the acquisition of Schlumberger. Based on field observations, it seems that all C1SR models transmit in “bubble-up” mode, so no wake-up transmission is required to receive signals from Itron and Sclumberger solid-state ERT-equipped meters.
The Centron C1SR has come in a number of versions with a number of ERT data output formats. Some meter types transmit consumption in 1 kWh units, while others use more granular 10 Wh units.
A few years ago, probably to take advantage of some recent changes to FCC regulations, Itron began shipping a version of the Centron C1SR with a higher-power transmitter. This new transmitter significantly increases reception distance at the expense of a reduction in how frequently it sends the data message. Where signals can be received from a low-powered ERT every few seconds (at short range), the high-powered models may only be heard once per minute or more (per our observations).
Fortunately, interval data messages do not need to be received frequently in order to be useful. Because the high-powered C1SR transmits interval data messages, this is not an issue. For the subset of low-powered models that only transmit the shorter SCM messages, and especially those that use 1 kWh units, the low granularity/precision of data can, especially when reception conditions are poor, make it very difficult to assemble a useful real-time load profile.
For that reason, it is important to understand the characteristics of the target meter models. What may work well with one type of meter may work poorly or not at all with another.
That being said, Grid Insight’s field testing and beta users in various cities across the U.S. have had considerable success with in-home monitoring of everything from older series 60 water meter transmitters sending only SCM data, to newer C1SR R300 HP meters sending very solid IDM data.
The above text discussed ERT technology as it applies to electricity (killowatt-hour) meters. The same information, more or less, applies to the ERT technology that is sold and used for natural gas and water metering. If you have additional information to share, please add it to the comments below.
solutions to the net of Technocracy that is falling over us.
BOOK LINK: http://www.technocracyrising.com/
The dark horse of the New World Order is not Communism, Socialism or Fascism. It is Technocracy.
With meticulous detail and an abundance of original research, Patrick M. Wood uses Technocracy Rising to connect the dots of modern globalization in a way that has never been seen before so that the reader can clearly understand the globalization plan, its perpetrators and its intended endgame.
In the heat of the Great Depression during the 1930s, prominent scientists and engineers proposed a utopian energy-based economic system called Technocracy that would be run by those same scientists and engineers instead of elected politicians. Although this radical movement lost momentum by 1940, it regained status when it was conceptually adopted by the elitist Trilateral Commission (co-founded by Zbigniew Brzezinski and David Rockefeller) in 1973 to become its so-called “New International Economic Order.”
In the ensuing 41 years, the modern expression of Technocracy and the New International Economic Order is clearly seen in global programs such as Agenda 21, Sustainable Development, Green Economy, Councils of Governments, Smart Growth, Smart Grid, Total Awareness surveillance initiatives and more.
Wood contends that the only logical outcome of Technocracy is Scientific Dictatorship, as already seen in dystopian literature such as Brave New World by Aldous Huxley (1932) and Nineteen Eighty-Four by George Orwell (1948), both of whom looked straight into the face of Technocracy when it was still in its infancy.
With over 250 footnotes, an extensive bibliography and clarity of writing style, Wood challenges the reader to new levels of insight and understanding into the clear and present danger of Technocracy, and how Americans might be able to reject it once again.
The Baltimore Sun
5:25 p.m. EDT, March 23, 2015
Though global and national public health organizations, smart meter manufacturers, researchers and utilities insist smart meters pose no health danger to the public, a small number of people remain worried about the devices as utilities across the country replace older meters with the new ones. While the Maryland Public Service Commission strongly supported smart meters, it voted to allow people to opt out, as long as they paid a fee.
But some, like Lattimore, feel blindsided when they discover the opt-out option is what is known as an ERT meter, which uses radio waves like a smart meter to transmit data, though less frequently than a smart meter.
Smart meters have “been reported to cause fires and it’s not settled as to their safety,” said Lattimore, 58. “This is a fairly new technology and it could take generations to find out whether it’s safe or not, just like with cigarettes.”
Lattimore said his electric meter is behind a fence and BGE typically sent him estimated bills. When he opted out of receiving a smart meter in April 2014, agreeing to pay a one-time fee of $75 plus $11 per month, he arranged a monthly appointment for a BGE technician to read his analog meter.
This month, Lattimore said, BGE sent him a letter saying they couldn’t continue making appointments to read the meter and that he must get an ERT meter installed. If he did not, the letter said, his electricity would be turned off.
Lattimore filed a complaint with the PSC, putting the matter on hold until it is resolved there.
Rhea Marshall, a BGE spokeswoman, said the company couldn’t comment on an individual case but said the PSC allowed ERT meters as an acceptable replacement for analog meters that can’t be easily reached.
ERT, short for Electronic Receiver Transmitter, is sort of a first-generation smart meter and can transmit data on energy usage without wires, Marshall said. The digital meters can respond to a signal from a truck passing by once a month, so a technician doesn’t need to make an appointment to visit a resident’s home. Smart meters, she said, transmit data on daily basis, allowing customers to track their usage more closely.
BGE is close to the end of the smart meter rollout, Marshall said, with about 90 percent of customers switched. About 1 percent have opted out, including those who were automatically opted out because they did not respond to multiple requests to install a meter, she said.
Lattimore said he hadn’t been aware when he opted out of receiving a smart meter that he could be forced to accept an ERT meter.
“Our point, though, is after a year, why now?” he said. “And why weren’t people told that this could happen when they made the choice to opt-out?”
Jonathan Libber, president of the Maryland Smart Meter Awareness group, which advocates against the devices, said he considers smart meters “the worst of all worlds” but said there were still concerns about ERT meters.
“There is a small percentage of the population that is sensitive to this kind of radiation, it’s like an allergy,” Libber said. “If you’re one of the ones that has a bad reaction to it, it can be absolutely miserable. … A lot of people are suffering and they don’t know what they have.”
Libber said he’s heard concerns about ERT meters from others coming to his group, which numbers about 1,100. “If a person is sensitive then even the ERT meter could be a problem.”
Marshall said traditional analog meters aren’t manufactured any more, making it impossible to replace a malfunctioning or hard-to-reach analog meter with anything other than one that electronically transmits data. BGE has used ERT meters since 1996 and analog meters became hard to come by about a decade ago, she said.
Lattimore said the experience has been “extremely disappointing” and said he was “looking hard” at switching to solar for his energy needs.
Why are there votes against this bill? Hmmmmmmmmmmm…….not very prudent…..Sandaura
EPA Rule-Making Guidelines – Passage – Vote Passed (241-175, 16 Not Voting)The House passed a bill that would prohibit the EPA from proposing, finalizing or disseminating a rule or other covered action unless all scientific and technical information used to decide upon the rule is made available to the public so the research can be independently analyzed and reproduced. Rep. Dave Loebsack voted NO – See more at: http://coralvillecourier.typepad.com/mikes_politics/2015/03/loebsack-votes-to-keep-epa-decision-making-process-from-public.html#sthash.PKGryskO.dpuf
The inspiring story of Jonathan Libber, an attorney and retired Environmental Protection Agency employee, now President of Maryland Smart Meter Awareness, who is dedicated to raising awareness of the risks of wireless smart meters.
Trying to change minds in smart-meter debate by Jamie Smith Hopkins, The Baltimore Sun, 22 March 2013
Retired EPA attorney leads the opposition in Maryland
Concerns about utility smart meters are frequently dismissed as tinfoil-hat paranoia. But it’s not so easy to dismiss Jonathan Libber. The Baltimore man delivers his arguments against the wireless devices in the calm manner of an attorney. He is, in fact, an attorney — retired from the Environmental Protection Agency, a point he notes when he reminds people of the country’s spotty record of figuring out environmental hazards before they’re widespread. As the force behind Maryland’s smart-meter opposition, Libber is spending the early part of retirement in a way he’d never envisioned. He hadn’t even heard of the devices until 2011. Now, as president of Maryland Smart Meter Awareness, he’s burning 30 to 40 hours a week answering anxious questions, writing testimony and speaking to community groups — pro bono.
It’s had some effect. Maryland’s Public Service Commission, which said it hadn’t found convincing evidence of risks to customers regarding health and other issues, nevertheless decided in January that “the public interest requires” an alternative to standard smart meters if a customer requests it. http://mieuxprevenir.blogspot.com/2013/03/united-states-retired-epa-attorney.html
May 22, 2012: “At a hearing before the Maryland Public Service Commission, [Baltimore Gas & Electric] told regulators the replacement meters, which it’s already started installing, could save power and customers money on their bills at the same time.”
“But a former enforcement attorney for the Environmental Protection Agency isn’t buying it. Jonathon Libber says there’s nothing smart about digital meters that may carry
costs we’re not even aware of yet.
“People who are going to have these meters are going to have huge amounts of radiation coming into their home,” said Libber, “There’s a potential for fires…potential for interference with medical devices. It’s going to invade their privacy.”
Full Story (or watch video):
http://www.abc2news .com/dpp/ news/local_ news/questions- surrounding- devices-health- impacts#ixzz1vfN rsxBa
PAGOSA DAILY POST
It appears to me that Ron Meier’s response to Cathy Justus’ list of questions on smart meters was, except for the long delay, all that could reasonably be expected. Mr. Meier is an engineer, not a scientist. I doubt LPEA has a scientist on their staff. Ms. Justus’s list covered a lot of ground. She seems to like large numbers: questions, transmissions per day from smart meters, unsubstantiated assertions…
Mr. Meier’s key point was: Ultimately, LPEA makes no claim to the health impacts of the RF system we are using, just that the system we are using falls well within all safety guidelines from the FCC, OSHA, and the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection.
LPEA has no responsibility and does not have the knowledge or resources to address hazard claims falling outside the regulatory guidelines.
If Ms. Justus thinks the regulations are inadequate, Ms. Justus should go after the regulators. It will be a long uphill fight. I’ve been there, and even had some success in getting regulations changed (on pipeline leak detection and how to determine performance of leak detection systems). It took years. I’m currently in the eighth year of court and regulatory proceedings (as an expert witness) in a series of cases in which major oil companies, usually my clients, are on the other side. They don’t go down easily.
The major technical difficulty with Ms. Justus’ claims about the health hazard posed by smart meters is her failure to address the low intensity level anyone not holding his ear up to the smart meter would receive. The World Health Organization’s report she references doesn’t mention smart meters. It talks about dirty electricity and poor power quality.
What happened to Ms. Justus’ precautionary principle of If there’s a possibility of harm, don’t do it, is that the principle is useless. If we followed it we would never go swimming… never drive a car… never let our children have a pet… never go outside… I’ll stop there, before I fall into Ms. Justus’ trap of large numbers.
Here’s my related principle: When your constraints overlap, you have no place left to live!
Ms. Justus might have a case on the cost of smart meters. Mr. Meier didn’t substantiate his assertion that the increased cost leveled out after a couple of months. This is an issue where LPEA does have the resources and the expertise. They should nail down the cost effect, present the data, and leave no room for anyone to say they’ve hidden the truth.
Jerry L. Modisette, PhD