Another great video from Jerry Day, who offers his current advice on tackling utility smart meter problems. His advice- continue to refuse the meters, refuse the fee opt outs and keep detailed records of your health since installation. He encourages people to enforce the truth and stand up for our rights to safety in an environment of criminality.
Author: Admin
Understanding PG&E Smart Meter Opt-Out fees
In California you can now rid your home of a smart meter. That’s good news. However PG&E is imposing fees to do so. That’s the confusing news.
The facts about the FEES: Besides being arbitrary, punitive and likely illegal, they are INTERIM fees… What are INTERIM fees? They are a strategy designed to intimidate and confuse customers who don’t want smart meters.
The costs to opt out and who should pay are still being evaluated by the Public Utilities Commission. Hearings will be held within the next couple of months.
From a CPUC press release: “The costs are subject to adjustment upon conclusion of a second phase of this proceeding where issues concerning the actual costs associated with offering an analog opt-out option will be addressed.”
WHAT YOU CAN DO: If you have smart meters on your home-have PG&E replace them with analogs. Call (866-743-0263)
If you still have analog meters- DELAY TILL MAY. The final decision should be completed by then.
College project: 90 days without cell phone, social media
Jake Reilly, a college student gave up his cell phone and computer for 90 days. No texting, facebook, email, twitter etc. What he learned changed his life. He writes, “Everything was so much simpler, I had relationships with people, not profiles.”
“I had nothing but time on my hands.” “I was immeasurably more calm and peaceful.”
After doing it for 90 days, I didn’t want it to be over.” Here’s his video:
New report calls for protecting children and expecting mothers from cell phone radiation
Environment and Human Health, Inc. (EHHI) released a cell phone environmental report calling for tougher standards to regulate cellular technologies—especially for children and pregnant women.
EHHI reviewed hundreds of peer-reviewed studies that examined the potential health threats associated with cellular device use, along with the regulatory standards that have been adopted by the U.S. and other nations.
John Wargo, Ph.D., professor of Environmental Risk and Policy at Yale University and lead author of the report, said, “The scientific evidence is sufficiently robust showing that cellular devices pose significant health risks to children and pregnant women. The weight of the evidence supports stronger precautionary regulation by the federal government. The cellular industry should take immediate steps to reduce emission of electromagnetic radiation (EMR) from phones and avoid marketing their products to children.”
EHHI President Nancy Alderman said, “Children between the ages of 8-18 spend an average of 7.5 hours per day—nearly half their hours while awake—on smart phones, computers, televisions or other electronic devices. Exposures to electromagnetic radiation are increasing most rapidly among the youngest in our society, as service providers focus their advertising on children and educational markets.”
Dr. Hugh Taylor, coauthor of the report, summarized his concerns regarding neurological effects from cell phone radiation. “The human brain is especially susceptible to numerous environmental insults that can produce irreversible damage during critical periods of nervous system development between conception and full maturity. A number of peer-reviewed studies reported changes in the nervous systems of rats, mice and humans following exposure to cell phone radiation. These include diminished learning, diminished reaction time, decreased motor function, reduced memory accuracy, hyperactivity and diminished cognition.”
Taylor explained differences in exposure between children and adults, “The thinner skulls of young children permit cell phone radiation to penetrate brain tissues more deeply than occurs in adults. Devices stored in pants pockets while in standby mode can expose rapidly developing reproductive organs to radiofrequency energy. Storage in shirt pockets will increase exposure to breast tissues. Children’s and fetuses’ rapidly developing nervous systems, more rapid rates of cell division, longer potential lifetime exposure, and longer average use per day all heighten their risks of adverse health effects.”
Wargo cautioned, “Cell phones have enjoyed exceptional freedom from government oversight and control to protect against health and environmental hazards before cell phone devices are marketed. There are no enforceable standards to limit human exposure to cell phone radiation. While the U.S. does not require any regulations to restrict advertising or warnings against use of cellular devices by pregnant women or children, many other nations do.”
Nancy Alderman, president of EHHI, summarized the group’s recommendations. “The government must take greater responsibility for testing cellular technologies before they are marketed to assure their safety, their proper disposal and to educate the public about safe patterns of use.”
CPUC votes to allow PG&E to charge fees
Today the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) voted 4-0 to allow PG&E to charge customers $75 initial fee and $10 a month for restoring or retaining their analog meter- or $10 initial fee and $5 a month for CARE customers. Commissioner Florio was notably absent for the vote.
Everyone has paid for Smart Meters through rate hikes on our utility bills. So, if you still have the analog, not only do you not get a refund for the Smart Meter you will not use, but you have to pay to keep the analog meter you already have. Michael Peevey, who wrote the proposal justified the fees, calling it a “service”.
What about the people who asked, or had signs posted stating to not have a Smart Meter, but were forced to have them? What about banks of meters, neighbors meters, the saturation of our communities with pulsed radiation, no investigation on public health and environmental impacts, no investigation on smart meter fires or meters exploding…not even a cost evaluation of the fees?!? The fees are arbitrary, punitive, unfair and amount to extortion. The fees also discriminate against people for medical reasons and are therefore illegal.
For the millions of people who have been forced to have Smart Meters in California now you can legally have Smart Meters removed, and analogs restored. For those people who have seen outrageous billing increases, are offended by privacy infringement, or are so sickened from the radiation pulses, they are eager to have the analog meters back. The initial fees will be less to have PG&E restore the meters, than for you to buy an analog and hire an electrician. If you can afford it, take advantage of this opportunity, but be very careful if they require you to sign any paperwork. PG&E may try to use this opportunity to indemnify themselves of harm. To continue to pay $10 or $5 a month for a meter reader is another matter. You can deduct that portion of your bill in protest. The San Jose Mercury News reported you can call PG&E’s Smart Meter hotline (1-866-743-0263) to schedule Smart Meter removal.
For those on the delay list, or who still have analog meters, you will be receiving notice from PG&E to pay the fees, or else get a Smart Meter. Continue to refuse the Smart Meters and the fees and demand fairness. The opt out proceeding will be continued to evaluate cost and community wide opt-out.
REMINDER: Wed Feb 1- CPUC meeting 9 am San Francisco
Tomorrow the California Public Utilities Commission will vote on President Peeveys PG&E Smart Meter opt out proposed decision that charges customers a $75 initial fee and $10 a month, or $10 initial fee and $5 a month for CARE customers to retain, or restore an analog meter.
Peevey’s proposed decision is half baked. The Commissioners need to bring intelligence, compassion and respect to their decision making, rather than vote with good old boy politics. Please attend this important meeting.
Wed. Feb 1, 9 am 505 Van Ness Ave. San Francisco
Arrive by 8:45 to sign up to speak to the Commission on item 28. Shortly after public comments the Commission will address the issue and vote on it.
American Academy of Environmental Medicine calls for a halt to wireless smart meters
The American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) has adopted a resolution calling for a halt to wireless smart meters.
The text of the resolution is below. (link to AAEM Resolution on letterhead)
This represents the first national physician’s group to look in-depth at wireless health risks; and to advise the public and decision-makers about preventative public health actions that are necessary.
Cindy Sage
Sage Associates
January 19, 2012
Proposed Decision of Commissioner Peevey (Mailed 1/22/2012) BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA On the proposed decision 11-03-014
Dear Commissioners:
The Board of the American Academy of Environmental Medicine opposes the installation of wireless “smart meters” in homes and schools based on a scientific assessment of the current medical literature (references available on request). Chronic exposure to wireless radiofrequency radiation is a preventable environmental hazard that is sufficiently well documented to warrant immediate preventative public health action.
As representatives of physician specialists in the field of environmental medicine, we have an obligation to urge precaution when sufficient scientific and medical evidence suggests health risks which can potentially affect large populations. The literature raises serious concern regarding the levels of radio frequency (RF – 3 KHz – 300 GHz) or extremely low frequency (ELF – o- 300 Hz) exposures produced by “smart meters” to warrant an immediate and complete moratorium on their use and deployment until further study can be performed. The board of the American Board of Environmental Medicine wishes to point out that existing FCC guidelines for RF safety that have been used to justify installation of “smart meters” only look at thermal tissue damage and are obsolete, since many modern studies show metabolic and genomic damage from RF and ELF exposures below the level of intensity which heats tissues. The FCC guidelines are therefore inadequate for use in establishing public health standards. More modern literature shows medically and biologically significant effects of RF and ELF at lower energy densities. These effects accumulate over time, which is an important consideration given the chronic nature of exposure from “smart meters”. The current medical literature raises credible questions about genetic and cellular effects, hormonal effects, male fertility, blood/brain barrier damage and increased risk of certain types of cancers from RF or ELF levels similar to those emitted from “smart meters”. Children are placed at particular risk for altered brain development, and impaired learning and behavior. Further EMF/RF adds synergistic effects to the damage observed from a range of toxic chemicals. Given the widespread, chronic and essentially inescapable ELF/RF exposure of everyone living near a “smart meter”, the Board of the American Academy of Environmental Medicine finds it unacceptable from a public health standpoint to implement this technology until these serious medical concerns are resolved. We consider a moratorium on installation of wireless “smart meters” to be an issue of the highest importance.
The Board of the American Academy of Environmental Medicine also wishes to note that the US NIEHS National Toxicology Program in 1999 cited radiofrequency radiation as a potential carcinogen. Existing safety limits for pulsed RF were termed “not protective of public health” by the Radiofrequency Interagency Working Group (a federal interagency working group including the FDA, FCC, OSHA, the EPA and others). Emissions given off by “smart meters” have been classified by the World Health Organization International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) as a Possible Human Carcinogen.
Hence, we call for:
• An immediate moratorium on “smart meter” installation until these serious public
health issues are resolved. Continuing with their installation would be extremely
irresponsible.
• Modify the revised proposed decision to include hearings on health impact in the
second proceedings, along with cost evaluation and community wide opt-out.
• Provide immediate relief to those requesting it and restore the analog meters.
Members of the Board
American Academy of Environmental Medicine
Admin note: The American Academy of Environmental Medicine, founded in 1965, is an international association of physicians and other professionals which “provides research and education in the recognition, treatment and prevention of illnesses induced by exposures to biological and chemical agents encountered in air, food and water.”
Top public health official report: Smart Meters DO pose a health risk!
Santa Cruz County, CA Board of Supervisors directed its public health officer to prepare an analysis of the research on the health effects of Smart Meters in December 2011. Poki Stewart Namkung, M.D. M.P.H., prepared this report: Health Risks Associated With SmartMeters which recognizes:
- Smart Meters transmit pulsed radiation (RF) 24/7
- There are evidence-based health risks of RF
- RF exposure can be cumulative and additive
- The massive increase in RF public exposures since the mid-1990’s
- The controversy between independent and industry science, including lack of funding for independent research
- Evidence to support an Electrical Sensitivity (EHS) diagnosis
- The public health issue is that Smart Meters are involuntary RF exposures
- FCC thermal guidelines are irrelevant for non-thermal public exposures.
- The lack of relevant safety standards for chronic pulsed RF
The report summary calls for more government vigilance towards involuntary RF public exposures because, “…governmental agencies are the only defense against such involuntary exposure.”
The report also provides examples of strategies to reduce RF including minimize cell and cordless phone use, use speakerphone when possible, use wired internet connections, avoid setting a laptop on your lap, and more.
Excerpts: “The public health issue of concern in regard to SmartMeters is the involuntary exposure of individuals and households to electromagnetic field (EMF) radiation.”
“There are numerous situations in which the distance between the SmartMeters and humans is less than three feet on an ongoing basis, e.g. a SmartMeter mounted on the external wall to a bedroom with the bed placed adjacent to that mounting next to the internal wall. ”
“…SmartMeters emit frequencies almost continuously, day and night, seven days a week.”
“… exposure is additive and consumers may have already increased their exposures to radiofrequency radiation in the home through the voluntary use of wireless devices …It would be impossible to know how close a consumer might be to their limit, making uncertainty with the installation of a mandatory SmartMeter. ”
“… all available, peer-reviewed, scientific research data can be extrapolated to apply to SmartMeters, taking into consideration the magnitude and the intensity of the exposure.”
“Since the mid-1990’s the use of cellular and wireless devices has increased exponentially exposing the public to massively increased levels of RF.”
” It must be noted that there is little basic science funding for this type of research and it is largely funded by industry.”
“…most research carried out by independent non-government or non-industry affiliated researchers suggests potentially serious effects from many non-ionizing radiation exposures, research funded by industry and some governments seems to cast doubt on the potential for harm.”
“Despite this controversy, evidence is accumulating on the results of exposure to RF at non-thermal levels including increased permeability of the blood-brain barrier in the head (Eberhardt, 2008), harmful effects on sperm, double strand breaks in DNA which could lead to cancer genesis (Phillips, 2011), stress gene activation indicating an exposure to a toxin (Blank, 2011), and alterations in brain glucose metabolism (Volkow, 2011). ”
“Currently, research has demonstrated objective evidence to support the EHS diagnosis…”
“Meeting the current FCC guidelines only assures that one should not have heat damage from SmartMeter exposure. It says nothing about safety from the risk of many chronic diseases that the public is most concerned about such as cancer, miscarriage, birth defects, semen quality, autoimmune diseases, etc. Therefore, when it comes to nonthermal effects of RF, FCC guidelines are irrelevant and cannot be used for any claims of SmartMeter safety unless heat damage is involved (Li, 2011). ”
“There are no current, relevant public safety standards for pulsed RF involving chronic exposure of the public, nor of sensitive populations, nor of people with metal and medical implants that can be affected both by localized heating and by electromagnetic interference (EMI) for medical wireless implanted devices.”
“Many other countries have significantly lower RF/MW exposure standards ranging from 0.001 to 50 ~W/cm2 as compared with the US guideline of 200-1 000 ~W/cm2”
“In summary, there is no scientific data to determine if there is a safe RF exposure level regarding its non-thermal effects.”
This is an excellent report and a must read for all public policy decision makers, and especially utility regulators. Many thanks to Dr. Stewart Namkung, the Santa Cruz Supervisors and to the EMF educators in their area! Please circulate!