Maine Court: Wireless Smart Meters Don’t Threaten Health

Maine Court: Wireless Smart Meters Don’t Threaten Health

1 hour ago

 

Maine’s highest court has upheld a decision that wireless smart meters pose no credible threat to the health and safety of customers.

The Maine Public Utilities Commission reached that conclusion in a 2014 report.

Smart meter opponents then asked the Maine Supreme Judicial Court to intervene, arguing that the PUC’s findings weren’t backed up by enough evidence.

But Agnes Gormley, senior counsel at the public advocate’s office, says the PUC spent more than two years reviewing the health and safety concerns.

“They reviewed a very large amount of evidence,” she says. “And we thought that their finding was supported by all that evidence. So we were glad that the law court upheld the commission’s decision.”

Ed Friedman, a smart meter opponent and the main plaintiff in the case, says he’s still reviewing the today’s high court ruling.

http://news.mpbn.net/post/maine-court-wireless-smart-meters-don-t-threaten-health#stream/0

Tell the UK gov’t why they need to halt the smart meter programme once and for all.

From: Take Back Your Power Date: Jan 26, 2016 2:13:01 PM Subject: Big news from UK – and how you can help (from anywhere)   

I wanted to quickly share this with you, from my friend across the pond, Mike Mitcham of StopSmartMeters! (UK).
It’s been a bad start to the year for the spin doctors at Smart Energy GB, with smart meters getting some well-deserved negative press (scroll down for the backstory).
Now, the UK Science and Technology Committee has launched a smart meter ‘evidence check’, and is asking for input from experts and public, until Friday.
So let’s respectfully but firmly tell the UK gov’t why they need to halt the smart meter programme once and for all. The deadline for comment is January 29 (this Friday).
Please take this 2-minute action, from any country: Here’s the link
Onward, Josh del Sol
* * *
The backstory in the UK – January news: Warning over a ‘ghastly mess’ in £11bn plan for smart meters – The Times “The Department of Energy and Climate Change has devised by far the most complex rollout in the world” “60 per cent of households with the meters were not using them only a year after installation.”
Not So Smart – The government should listen to criticism of its latest IT plan before it is too late – The Times “It is sensible to worry now.”
Could smart meters be used to spy on your home? Devices could be used to create ‘honeypot’ of data to sell onto marketing companies, privacy campaigners warn – Mail Online “Marketing firms are hoping to turn the information [smart meters] provide in to a steady stream of cash.”
See more from our friends at www.StopSmartMeters.org.uk.

Consumer Complaints Soar As Santa Fe Installs Smart Meters

Consumer Complaints Soar As Santa Fe Installs Smart Meters

Sara Jerome

By Sara Jerome
@sarmje

santafe

Santa Fe is hitting speed bumps as it begins to rely on new smart meters.

The city has logged more than two dozen written complaints at its Utility Billing Division over the last six months, beginning “about the same time the city started to replace defective meters with a new ‘smart’ meter-reading system,” the Santa Fe New Mexican reported.

The New Mexican first reported a rise in complaints over water bills in November.

“Nick Schiavo, the city’s public utilities director, said the Water Division was dealing with a spike in complaints, many of which were tied to the installation of the new water meters. The influx of complaints, plus a staffing shortage, created longer wait times on the phone, a problem that persists,” the report said.

Stanley Gairey is among the residents who filed a complaint. He received a $400 water bill, suggesting he used 2,700 gallons of water in a single day.

“Gairey, a 67-year-old Santa Fe native, called the city’s Water Division to get an explanation. Instead of getting an answer, however, all he got was an answering machine that repeated the same message, adding to his frustration,” the report said.

What does the city say?

Diana Catanach, the utility billing director, “said about half the complaints logged against the Water Division were valid. But many of the customers who complained that their bills were too high were responsible,” the report said. “Catanach said the Water Division saw a bump in complaints following newspaper reports about billing and other issues.”

She urged customers to be patient.

“I hate to put it this way, but a lot of times people will come in yelling and screaming at staff who are really trying to help them,” she said. “If they could just be patient with us, we certainly are willing to help reach resolution. I’d say 90 percent of our customers, if not more, leave happy.”

Santa Fe launched a smart meter overhaul last year, according to the Santa Fe Reporter:

The City of Santa Fe’s decision to replace its Firefly water-meter readers, installed just under 10 years ago and now largely known for their failings, aims to do more than provide the billing basics for how much water was used in a month. The [upgrade] is expected to cost $6 million for the equipment and installation of 36,000 meters, and an additional $2 million for service, software maintenance and cell tower space for signal transmission over the 10-year contract.

http://www.wateronline.com/doc/consumer-complaints-soar-installs-smart-meters-0001

Paula Orloff: Smart meters aren’t smart

THE UNION – Serving Western Nevada County, CA

Paula Orloff: Smart meters aren’t smart 

An article in The Union titled, “Smart Meters Aptly Named” was written by a PG&E representative with a long title. I have serious reservations.

PG&E claim: Nearly 99 percent of our customers have upgraded to Smart Meters.

Response: I question that number from PG&E which has been under investigation for collusion with CPUC. Also, it costs to opt out of smart metering. It’s free to get a smart meter. If the costs were reversed, how many would choose a smart meter? Further, in California over 50 local governments have passed ordinances opposing the Smart Meter program. There’s only one catch: CPUC in cahoots with the private utilities has authority to override local governments.

PG&E claim: Smart meters are the foundation for our modern energy grid.

Response: Former CPUC President Loretta Lynch at the 2015 Wireless, Technology and Public Health Summit in Mountain View stated that the “smart grid” and “smart meters” are a “lucrative boondoggle” that the CPUC approved, and the CPUC has become a “rouge agency” essentially controlled by corporations. A November 2012 report published by the National Institute for Science, Law and Public Policy in DC states, “ … Billions of dollars in federal subsidies for “smart” utility meters have been misspent on meter technology that will not lead to energy sustainability or contribute to the possibility of a more efficient and responsive electricity grid. A similar conclusion comes from Massachusetts’ largest electrical utility NStar: ”An advance Metering System (smart meters) is not a ‘basic technology platform’ … to realize all the benefits of grid modernization.”

Many studies discuss the 24/7 bursts of radiation that smart meters emit. According to Daniel Hirsch, Professor of Nuclear Policy at University of California Santa Cruz, these intense millisecond bursts produce severe biological effects.

PG&E Claim: Smart meters have several energy/money saving advantages.

Response: PG&E’s energy savings phone and computer messages have some helpful pointers, but not one requires smart meters. Further, in two personal calls, PG&E representatives stated the special Smart Rate savings are limited only to days over 97 degrees. If a customer chooses the “Smart” Rate program, his bill is reduced to only 2.4 cents per KWh before and after the peak hours of 2 to 7 p.m. However, if the customer uses electricity during peak hours on those hot days, they are charged 60 cents per KWh! compared to 16 to 30 cents per KWh depending usage tier.

PG&E claim: “Independent and leading international health experts have tested and determined this technology is safe. For example, the technology in Smart Meters is the same as the technology in WiFi routers, baby monitors and garage door openers.”

Response: A group of 40 international experts rebutted claims of no increase of cancer from exposure to low intensity EMFs (electromagnetic fields ) “In fact only a few such studies … reported no elevations of cancer, and most were funded by the wireless industry (from “Smart Meters, Correcting the Gross Misinformation” by Dr. David Carpenter, July 11, 2012). Among the proliferation of research on wireless technology in the past decade is the BioInitiative Report prepared by 29 scientists from 10 countries, carried out independent of governments and industry organizations. The 2012 update discusses the content and implication of 1800 new studies. According to an overview of the report by co-editor, Cindy Sage, “There is more evidence in 2012 that such exposures (to wireless technologies) damage DNA, interfere with DNA repair, and are hazardous to the nervous system.

Many studies discuss the 24/7 bursts of radiation that smart meters emit. According to Daniel Hirsch, professor of Nuclear Policy at University of California Santa Cruz, these intense millisecond bursts produce severe biological effects. Cindy Sage (Bioinitiative Report) explains, “If you think of a strobe light or a laser in the eyes, it is intermittent but powerfully disabling … Signals may be short bursts of RF (depending on the meter and how utilities choose to operate) but … it is a continual 24/7 battering of the body with cellular insults.” Especially if your bed is on the other side of a smart meter, if you live close to a bank of meters as in apartments, or if your smart meter acts as a neighborhood data collection, those pulsating bursts are more potent and frequent.

We have been guinea pigs for wireless technology for about 20 years with the widespread advent of cell phones, cordless phones, WiFi computers and smart meters, most connected to high power transmitting cell towers. Nonindustry sources have hundreds of studies calling for safety measures or reduction of wireless technology.

Among numerous resources are Public Health SOS by Camilla Rees and Magda Havas, 2009 video, “Take Back Your Power,” by Josh Del Sol (2014); and website, http://www.stopsmartmeters.com.

Paula Orloff lives in Nevada City.

http://www.theunion.com/opinion/columns/19538601-113/paula-orloff-smart-meters-arent-smart