Dr. Carpenter states,“We have evidence…that exposure to radiofrequency radiation…increases the risk of cancer, increases damage to the nervous system, causes electrosensitivity, has adverse reproductive effects and a variety of other effects on different organ systems. There is no justification for the statement that Smart Meters have no adverse health effects. “
Dr. Carpenter further advises, “An informed person should demand that they be allowed to keep their analog meter”
(For those of you already Smart Metered, demand to have the analog meter restored, call your your utility and your state public utility commission)
BIG THANKS to Dr. Carpenter and to Maine’s Smart Meter Safety Coalition who “recently caught up with Dr. David Carpenter, a Harvard Medical School-trained physician who headed up the New York State Dept. of Public Health for 18 years before becoming Dean of the School of Public Health at the University of Albany, where he currently directs the Institute for Health and the Environment” (www.smartmetersafety.com)
Good Morning Mr. Peevey. George Orwell had you and the industry you purport to regulate beat by 62 years. His book Nineteen Eighty-Four was published in 1949. If you haven’t read it, you really should. If you read it in high school or college, you may want to pick it up and read it again. It told of the future you are creating for yourself and us, your wife, your children and their children. You are leaving behind a legacy of terror Mr. Peevey.
The decisions you’re making now are probably the most crucial decisions you’ve ever made when it comes to how they will affect the lives of not only this generation, but the lives of generations to come. Albert Einstein said “It has become appalling obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity.” Such is the case here and I’d like you to take a hard look at that irrespective of the expectations of an industry to which you’ve become Godfather.
Besides being President of the CPUC, you’re a husband and father of three children and a grandfather and I’m sure that means a lot to you. I’m not prying but I am curious to learn a little about the man behind the desk.
I’m speaking to Michael Peevey the father and Grandpa. I’d like you to consider what kind of world you’re leaving behind for those you love. It’s hard to believe that in your heart of hearts given what you know and the facts that surround you, that you would commit your loved ones and the good people of California, indeed the fine people of this country to a faulted technology fraught with hazards.
According to medical reports such as the physician’s peer review of the California Council on Science and Technology on the health impacts of Smart Meters, these devices have been found to cause brain tumors, tinnitus, acoustic neuromas, childhood leukemia, neurodegenerative diseases, DNA damage and cognitive impairment. Smart Meter radiation slows motor skills, reduces learning ability, heats body tissue, lowers the immune system and does damage to the blood-brain barrier that prevents toxins from entering the brain. Even if only half of this were true, what kind of a Grandpa would protect an industry that shows such little regard for public health and safety?
At the CPUC meeting March 24th, PG&E and their attorneys took over 75 pages to say Show Me the Money. Oh they said it in legalize, the language of champions but let’s be completely honest Mr. Peevey. It’s about the money. Money is driving this; the agenda, this rollout, this rush to deploy. This skullduggery. It’s about money and greed and power.
Not green power but the power that’s wielded over a citizenry stripped of its rights and that you would see buried to meet deadlines and increase corporate profits while leaving us in the rubble of PG&E’s twisted machinations. It’s about how our money finds its way in to a utility company’s pockets which should come as no surprise to anyone because what isn’t about money these days whether it’s lobbying money or laundered money or campaign funding or pork barrels or bailouts? It is and always has been about the money.
It’s hard to believe that you would defend an industry that pretends to be green but is green only as in the color of money. Is there anything that you, the Smart Grid Industry, the CPUC and PG&E would NOT do for money Mr. Peevey?
Any good salesman or politician can tell you that if you want to sell something, give it a good name like Smart and make it the “green” thing to do. Don’t get me wrong. I’m as environmentally conscious as the next one but the Smart Grid movement is not about going green or conserving energy or reducing greenhouse gas emissions or saving Polar Bears. It’s about raising rates, increasing profits and selling the data it collects. The utility companies aren’t doing this for your health or for the environment.
We hear a lot of talk these days about the need for transparency as if it’s so hard to see through what’s going on so I’ll just come right to the bottom line. Mr. Peevey this is your chance of a lifetime if you take it to be a real hero for your children and their children, for California and for America. You will either be remembered as the man who set fire to our freedom and watched it burn or who ran in to the burning building and carried us out.
Today the EMF Safety Network filed a CPUC protest to PG&E’s Smart Meter opt-out proposal. In addition Network is requesting reassignment of the Administrative Law Judge , Timothy Sullivan. Sullivan was the judge who parroted PG&E’s unsubstantiated safety claims and proposed dismissing our original CPUC application.
From the Protest Conclusion:
“PG&E’s application is an inadequate solution to serious Smart Meter
problems that the Commission and California utilities have failed to address. It is
wrong to require ratepayers to pay to escape from threats to their health and
ensure safety in their own homes. PG&E’s proposed charges will be an unfair
burden and will harm ratepayers.
The Commission should first order a Smart Meter moratorium, then modify
PG&E’s requested relief to provide ratepayers safe and reliable utility service at
reasonable rates. The Commission should schedule evidentiary hearings on
contested issues. Network intends to participate in the hearings. The Commission
should order PG&E to allow ratepayers to keep their analog meters or restore
analog meters at no additional cost. Ratepayers should not have to bear the
financial burden for the failure of the Smart Meter program.
In a recent Federal Communications Commission(FCC) letter to Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey, Julias Knapp, the FCC Chief of Office of Engineering and Technology, responds to an inquiry from the EMF Safety Network. The letter downplays the need for FCC oversight and regulation of their own installation RF safety conditions stating, “The grants of equipment authorization routinely list the four conditions cited by EMF [Safety Network] for the broad class of transmitters that include most Smart Meters….adherence to those conditions is not necessarily required for Smart Meters to achieve compliance with our RF exposure guidelines….the utility is responsible for ensuring compliance with any installation conditions listed on the grant of equipment authorization .”
In addition the FCC falsely claims, “the devices 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…”
See the following video about Smart Meter radiation. Listen to the clicks to see how often the meters are transmitting, and compare that to the FCC claims.
The California Council on Science and Technology (CCST)Health Impacts of Radio Frequency From Smart Metersfinal report was released on March 31, 2011. The California Department of Public Health (CDPH) comments challenged the CCST, stating, “CDPH suggests further review of the literature on non-thermal effects, which is complicated and controversial, but does not support a claim of no non-thermal health effects from radio frequency electromagnetic fields.”
CDPH also provided the following links to documents regarding the controversy over Smart Meter (radio frequency radiation-RF) safety:
Daniel Hirsch, Professor of Nuclear Policy at University of California at Santa Cruz talks to Josh Hart of Stop Smart Meters! He explains that the whole body cumulative radiation exposure from Smart Meters is 100X more than cell phone exposure. He also states that the Smart Meter deployment “is a large experiment on a very large population”. More: http://stopsmartmeters.org/2011/04/20/daniel-hirsch-on-ccsts-fuzzy-math/
Glasser: PG&E crossing the line on SmartMeters
Written by Howard Glasser
Wednesday, 13 April 2011
I’d be interested to know where a public utility company or state regulatory agency could be found guilty of breaching public trust, committing fraud, violating consumer rights and inappropriate and unethical conduct that falls short of the business standards most agencies and businesses are otherwise held to when it has deliberately manipulated and misled the print and broadcast media resulting in a misinformed general public.
No matter how sheltered the California Public Utilities Commission may be, does this excuse it from abiding by the law where its actions would otherwise be judged as criminal?
Here of some examples of Pacific Gas & Electric’s inexcusable transgressions where they have violated the public’s sacred trust:
1. Pointing media to the PG&E Web site which had stated that 39,000 SmartMeters had been installed in Lake County when at that point in time, only 2,500 meters had actually been installed.
2. Declaring a “delay installation” list that customers can be placed on through the PG&E SmartMeter phone line and then ignoring the list and not enforcing it when it comes to SmartMeter installations.
3. Leading the public to believe that an opt-out position would be considered or provided down the line for those customers who choose to opt-out while concurrently beefing up installations of SmartMeters so that by the time this provision was there, it would be moot since the entire deployment would be considered “mission accomplished.” That’s a shell game.
Regardless of the code that the CPUC cites as its operating guidelines, it’s clear that the CPUC is using its mandate as a shield to defend the commission against allegations that could hold water in court.
In matters where it can be shown that the public trust, health and welfare are disregarded and a state regulatory agency yields to industry’s demands while ignoring the people that it is chartered with protecting, I would think that the law provides recourse against such abuses of power.
No matter what the circumstances, the CPUC cannot hold itself above the law and where ethical and legal lines have been crossed, they should be held accountable to the people of California.
Howard Glasser lives in Kelseyville, Calif.
First printed in the Lake County News: Wed April 13 http://lakeconews.com/content/view/19220/927/