Category: Commentary

PG&E supports analog meter option

In Reply Comments sent to the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) today PG&E declared its support of an analog meter option.  “PG&E supports approval of an analog meter option, in addition to the non-communicating radio-off option, in response to customers’ and parties’ continued requests for an analog meter alternative in Opening Comments, as well as in customers’ direct communications to PG&E and the Commission.”

“PG&E has received the very clear message that some customers will only be satisfied with an analog meter option.”

This is a major concession from PG&E.  However, we still need the CPUC to hear loud and clear that we need:

  • a no cost analog opt-out, no initial or monthly fees
  • meters co-located in banks banned and restored to analogs
  • immediate restoration of analog meters for people suffering  health impacts
  • evidentiary hearings and investigation into RF health impacts
  • Community wide opt-outs and safe zones

It will be up to the Commission to decide what they do with PG&E’s concession and whether or not they will include an analog option, and whether or not that will apply to utilities statewide.

Listen to a short radio interview with Sandi Maurer from KSRO news.

PG&E cuts power for Smart Meter refusal

This week PG&E has cut power to at least four homes for customers who removed Smart Meters and restored the analog utility meter. Bianca in Santa Cruz county told KSBW news that she restored the analog because her children, who’s bedroom is near the utility meter, were suffering from headaches and bloody noses since the Smart Meter was installed.

Accusing Diane of Calaveras County of tampering, PG&E workers turned off this grandmothers electricity on Monday shortly after noon. Diane removed the Smart Meter and restored the analog meter because she was having sleeping problems, heart palpitations and tinnitus. When PG&E arrived she called the sheriff who told her PG&E was supposed to show her the work orders and PG&E refused to show her any work orders.

California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) President Michael Peevey told a PG&E customer that he could have an analog meter back at the Commission business meeting on September 22, 2011.  EMF Safety Network lawyer Rose Zoia sent the following letter to PG&E in response.

Santa Cruz Supervisors recently grilled PG&E representative Wendy Sarsfield about PG&E’s actions calling them unbelievable and unacceptable. (see video)

PG&E Rep. “As soon as we can replace with a Smart Meter, the power will be restored.”

Supervisor: ” So you’re holding them hostage in order to make the point.”

PG&E Rep. ” This situation is because of the public safety issue that’s involved.”

Supervisor:” Its just a couple of weeks before the holidays. I would seriously hope that PG&E would take another look at their policy.

Supervisor:'”This can’t be right that we can have a public utility refusing utility service to somebody who wants service, who will pay for service, who’s wiling to have an analog meter. I am having trouble believing that that is actually a legal position for PG&E to take.”

With  the recent release of Jerry Days’ video Replacing a Smart Meter and the threat of more customers removing Smart Meters in California its likely this recent show of force by PG&E is an attempt to intimidate and quash the peoples movement to restore analog meters.  In a recent SF Chronicle article PG&E spokesperson Jeff Smith admitted, “If this dangerous practice is allowed to continue without some sort of consequence, other people could do the same thing, and that’s what we’re trying to deter.”

 

Opt-out OUTRAGE!

Today the President of the California the Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), Michael Peevey issued a Proposed Decision on what to do with the thousands of complaints against the (dumb, too smart, not smart, spy, murder, dirty, hazardous, merd, smeter)  microwave computer utility meters that companies are stealthily installing with support from government and environmentalists.

The CPUC, whose mission is to provide safe and reliable utility service at reasonable rates, and regulate the utilities has once again rubber stamped PG&E’s demands. Peevey’s proposed decision says we must pay $90 upfront and $15 a month for a “radio off” meter. Analog meters are not included.  The fees are an obvious punishment, and likely illegal.

What can we do about this outrage in California?  Here’s an idea: We can REFUSE to pay. Deduct it from the utility bill in protest.

Here’s what others think about the concept of opt-out:

“We should not have to pay for NO CHANGE in electric service. We don’t pay for not getting cable. We don’t pay for not getting satellite. We don’t pay for gas if we don’t use gas appliances. What the heck is going on when we have to pay MORE for something we don’t want, don’t need, won’t use and can’t get out of. When the vacuum salesman comes to the door, and I don’t want to buy a vacuum, I don’t buy it and he doesn’t get into my wallet.” Anonymous survey comment

Just removing the meter from our home I don’t think will restore the peace and freedom from harm. As you know with all the homes having the meters on them, the amount of radiation is substantial. I don’t think I am overstating this. I am beginning to think they are trying to do a slow kill, so we don’t wake up to it. It is interesting that some of us have a super sensitivity to the radiation while others no less being slowly harmed by it are clueless because they don’t sense anything. CMC, Riverside County CA

“These folks are way better organized than the power industry, they are creating converts every day and they’re not going to stop with a puny opt-out option.” Phil Carson, Editor-in-chief, Intelligent Utility Daily

Dr. Slesin: Cell phone study safety claims: “bias run amuck”

From Dr. Louis Slesin,

The latest analysis of the tumor risks among cell phone users in Denmark and the accompanying editorial brings to mind the old saying: “Trust your mother, but cut the cards.”

Be warned: Before you believe what you are told by the Danish Cancer Society or the Karolinska Institute or what you read in the British Medical Journal, check out the facts for yourself.

As for IARC, there seems to be an internal dispute going on as to whether it should take seriously its own panel’s decision to designate cell phone radiation as a possible cancer agent. It’s not clear what side IARC Director Chris Wild is on.

Read our in-depth report on the latest example of bias run amuck on cell phones and tumors: http://www.microwavenews.com/DanishCohort.html

PG&E’s Big Confession

In April of 2010 the EMF Safety Network filed an application with the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) asking for hearings on health impacts, including “Smart” Meter radio frequency (RF) emissions data. We wrote:

“PG&E’s paltry, inconsistent and contradictory information on RF emissions from Smart Meters is unbelievable and at odds with other RF expert findings.  Several PG&E bulletins and spokespersons make varying claims on how often the Smart Meter electric meters transmit RF, anywhere from every hour to every 4 to 6 hours to 2% or 4% of the time.

We just wanted the facts, but the CPUC rubber stamped PG&E’s claims of RF safety and dismissed our application stating:

” All radio devices in PG&E’s Smart Meters are licensed or certified by the FCC and comply with all FCC requirements.”

“Smart Meters produce RF emissions far below the levels of many commonly used devices.”

PG&E provides information from Richard Tell Associates on their website titled, “Supplemental Report on An Analysis of Radiofrequency Fields Associated with Operation of the PG&E SmartMeter Program Upgrade System”  This report states Smart Meters transmit at 1 watt with 0 antennae gain. It claims:

The 1 watt transmitter is configured to transmit data approximately once every four hours back to the company so its duty cycle is very small (the actual data transmission duration during any four hour period will vary, however, depending on how often a particular meter transmitter acts as a repeater for other nearby meters).

From PG&E’s Smart Meter FAQ: SmartMeters™ utilize a low power (1 watt) wireless radio to send customer energy-usage information wirelessly to PG&E for data collection.….Do electric SmartMeters™ constantly emit RF? PG&E answers:

No. SmartMeters™ communicate intermittently, with each RF-signal typically lasting from 2 to 20 milliseconds. These intermittent signals total, on average, 45 seconds per day. For the other 23 hours and 59 minutes of the day, the meter is not transmitting any RF.

In a letter to Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey, the FCC writes, “the devices [Smart Meters] normally transmit for less than one second a few times a day and consumers are normally tens of feet or more from the meter face…”

All right, enough with the false claims! Just give us some real facts!  Recently CPUC administrative law judge Amy Yip-Kikugawa ordered all investor owned utilities (IOU’s ) to answer Smart Meter radio frequency (RF) questions. PG&E’s answers are an astounding confession!  Question 2: How many times in total (average and maximum) is a smart meter scheduled to transmit during a 24-hour period?

PG&E says the average number of RF pulses for the electric meter would be about 10,000, per meter, per day and the maximum number over 190,000.

90% of these pulses are for the mesh network maintenance (signals bouncing from homes) and only 6 pulses are for reading the meter data. This doesn’t include Home Area Network transmissions.

How about peak power figures?  The PG&E electric meter transmits at 900MHz with 1 watt of transmit power. It has an antennae gain 4.0 dBi for a peak level power of 2.5 watts.  That’s two and a half times more than their safety data stated.

The wireless gas meters transmit between 4 and 5 times a day at 132-794 mW.

Answers provided by San Diego Gas and Electric and So Cal Gas were similar, although PG&E electric meters appear to be five times stronger, just like Sage Associates found in their study.

Tampering defined

Many people are stuck with a  dumb utility meter they don’t want on their home.  They call their utility company and ask for the analog meter back and their request is denied.  Some people have taken matters into their own hands, bought an analog meter, hired an electrician and swapped the meter.  The question whether or not this is legal based on tampering laws has been questioned.  The EMF Safety Network hired environmental attorney Rose Zoia to investigate the legal risks of restoring analog meters.

Q: What is the definition of tampering with an electrical meter?

A: The California Penal Code states tamper “means to rearrange, injure, alter, interfere with, or otherwise prevent from performing a normal or customary function.” With respect to the provision of an utility, it is a misdemeanor to do (1) specified acts with the intent to obtain utility services without paying the full charge, or with the intent to enable another person to do so, or with the intent to deprive any utility of its full lawful charges for utility services. (2)

Those specified and prohibited acts include (1) diversion of utility services, (2) preventing any utility meter or other device used in determining the charge for utility services from accurately performing its measuring function by tampering or by any other means, (3) tampering with any property owned by or used by the utility to provide utility services, and (4) connecting or reconnecting with property owned or used by the utility to provide utility services without the authorization or consent of the utility.(3)

So, tampering is a misdemeanor crime which requires the specific intent to get the utility service for a lower cost than that charged by, among other things, preventing the utility meter from accurately measuring use by some means.

(1)§ 498, subd. (a)(6).

(2) Id., subd. (b); 18A Cal. Jur. 3d Criminal Law: Crimes Against Property

(August 2011), § 192.

(3) Ibid.

Q: Does replacement of a SmartMeter with an analog meter constitute tampering?

A: “The replacement of a SmartMeter with an analog meter should not constitute illegal tampering unless it is done with the intent to prevent the device from accurately measuring electrical use. Although the disconnection of the SmartMeter prevents it from recording electrical use, if such disconnection is not done with the intent to get lower electrical rates and a working analog meter that accurately records electrical use replaces the SmartMeter , the resident should be clear of any charges of tampering. “

So it seems as long as you are not attempting to steal electricity, swapping a meter would not be considering illegal based on tampering laws.

CPUC Smart Meter opt-out workshop follow up

PGEE Sue attended the meeting too

On September 14, the CPUC held a Smart Meter opt-out workshop to discuss the different technologies and opt out options.

The workshop was tightly run, with two armed guards posted at the entrance and many comments sent in, or questions posed were dismissed as being “beyond the scope” of the workshop.

The judge threatened to shut down the workshop when David Wilner challenged a utility vendor statement that the meters were only one watt. Later in the day the vendor announced that it is one watt with an antennae gain which effectively can double the radiated power.

  • SCE said they will now allow opt out and set up a delay list.
  • Silver Springs representative admitted that power line carrier (PLC) adds microwaves (RF) (aka dirty electricity) to the home’s wiring.
  • The truth about how Smart Meters transmit data finally has been publicly exposed and admitted by the utilities. Smart Meters “chatter” all day, all night long. PG&E said transmissions occur 6X a day, but the Silver Springs representative admitted the network needs to talk to itself to function well.
  • I pointed out according to an ITRON study the pulses could be as many as 2 per second, the rep did not consider that “constant” (as defined by the FCC). They time average the RF peak pulses, minimize the duty cycle (rather than 100%) and claim they only transmit for a minute or so a day. What do you think…is 2 pulses per second constant?
  • Jim Meadows who represented PG&E stated that if anyone was on the delay list and got a smart meter (SM) that PG&E would “make it right”.
  • Utilities stated that an analog cost $20 and a SM cost $100.
  • SM have a shelf life of 20 years according to ITRON and Silver Springs.
  • There was not a lot of support for fiber optics, telephone or wired meters.

The Judge said she will meet next with the “staff” (President Peevey and the energy division who are promoting SM) and we would be able to comment and reply comment to their decision. That likely means no evidentiary hearings, no cross examination, just a proposed decision followed by comments.

How radiation emissions of cell phone, microwave compare to ‘Smart’Meter


Amy O’Hair measures the radiation emitted by a cell phone, a microwave oven and two ‘Smart’ Meters in use. The results? The radiation pulses from the meters were stronger than both the microwave and the cell phone.

Here’s what PG&E claimed:
In response to the EMF Safety Network request for safety hearings, PG&E stated,

” Exposure to radio frequency energy from SmartMeter™ technology isconsiderably less than the exposure from other radio devices in widespread use.”

PG&E then listed many sources including cell phones, cordless phones, microwave ovens as examples of other radio devices in widespread use. Following this list they claim,

“These devices often involve more frequent radio transmission, emit radio frequency energy for longer periods of time and operate in closer proximity to humans, than PG&E SmartMeter™ devices.”

You can turn off the cell phone, and choose whether or not to use a microwave oven, but the meter is on all the time. Even if you turn off the power to your home, the meter will still be on. Thanks again Amy for this illustration.