Smart meters waste power

Heres a video showing how a smart meter is still using power even though the home is vacant, about to be demolished, and the wiring to the home is cut off.

This entry was posted in Hall of Shame, smart meters and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to Smart meters waste power

  1. Sharon says:

    It would seem that the homeowner is paying for the meter to gather and transmit signals from other meters. In essence, we are paying for the utility to get the signals. What a deal!

  2. Peter says:

    The homeowner shouldn’t be billed. Unless the meter’s kwh reading is going up you shouldn’t be charged anything. It’s just drawing power off Hydro’s pole lines.

    However, the power consumption issue grid-wide is no joke. Multiply 2 million smart meters by 4 watts (apprx power consumption) and province-wide you have 8 million watts of energy use. That translates to 8000 kwh. At $0.10/kwh it works out to $800/hr. $19,200 per day. $595, 200 per month. $7,008,000.00 per year that comes out of our pockets somehow. This does not include Hydro’s smart grid infrastructure power use such as high power meter collectors on every block and a miriad of computer servers needed to collect the data, networking hardware, etc.

  3. ian Thomas says:

    Has a value been determined as to how much the operation of the meter costs and it’s hydro consumption during non usage of power by the home owner ? Is the home owner charged for this consumption ?
    How often is the meter brodcasting information and is it being used as a relay station for other smart meters ?
    BC Hydro says they get the info only twice a day. But the smart meter dosn’t know when those times are so it brodcasts 24/7 with an EMF that is strong and harmfull to human tissue. Cell phone manufacturers give warnings of their product not to leave them on a bed side tables ,now when a hydro meter base is out side bedroom walls where the base is less than 3 ft from the bed ,what is the home-owner to do, to protect them selves from the EMF and at who’s cost as they have been forced to take these meters ? BC Hydro has got a lot of answering to do and judges have to be found that have not been bought by corporation thinking , and do the job they are paid for protecting justice for all including the individuals from money greedy corporations !

  4. admin says:

    In California, PG&E said they pay for the network transmissions, however basically the customer pays for everything. If they aren’t individually charged for the transmissions, they are charged in rate hikes as the cost of service overall goes up. Has BC Hydro supplied honest answers about how their smart meter system works? I assume its a mesh network- and repeating data from other meters- and if so it is likely similar to PG&E’s admission that one meter can transmit up to 190,000 times a day.

  5. Rampage_Rick says:

    Not sure what you’re trying to prove here. The fact that the electric panel is dismantled has no bearing on the operation of the meter. The power runs from Pole > Meter > Panel.

    The real dangerous part is the fact that the power is still turned on with the panel ripped apart like that. Instead of complaining about a non-existant issue, how about calling BC Hydro to report a real-life danger?

  6. Brian Lougheed says:

    I am getting prepared for cut off should that happen so far not been charged extra fees

  7. Mia says:

    Industry and corporations everywhere uses military grade whole electrical system suppressors.
    In a home the better quality ones are installed right after the meter before the wires enters the electrical panel.
    People who use them for residential applications report an end to insomnia as well as a vast improvement in health along with noticeably lower bills and reversal of premature burn out of appliances, electronics and LED lightbulbs, etc.
    So then, why wouldn’t residential customers in North America do the same thing as industry already does, and use one of these devices?
    Sweden offers whole house filters or suppressors to residential customers free of charge, but only for anyone who reports experiencing negative effects from smart meters.
    Why wouldn’t even those who don’t feel such effects buy, install and take advantage of the benefits of a whole house suppressor, if only to lower bills, to save their appliances and electronics from premature wear, and possibly to undermine data collection and protect privacy? You do not have to feel health impacts in order to reverse health impacts. Better safe than sorry.
    In fact, wouldn’t whole house suppressors be equally important to use even for an off grid applicaiton using an inverter?
    Wouldn’t a high quality military grade whole house suppressor smooth out the sine wave, stop the total harmonic distortion caused by the smart grid and the smart meter, clean up the transients, and eliminate the DNA shredding spikes now being used to increase charges to the customer?
    Wouldn’t such a suppressor reverse negative health effects caused by the SMPS massive spikes?
    Wouldn’t the use of a whole house suppressor as good as eliminate smart pulses and smart surges delivered into the home via the transmission lines?
    Wouldn’t such a move not only be legal but effectively undermine the whole process?
    Maybe even data mining might become impossible with a smoothed sine wave with little to no pulses.
    Wouldn’t a suppressor end over billing for this method of delivery via transmission lines and in effect defeat the whole purpose of the smart gird, the use of pulses to make trillion$?
    Wouldn’t a high end military grade suppressor designed to address everything from lightening down to minimal ultra low emfs prevent damage to electronics and appliances?
    Wouldn’t the addition of a carbon shield all around the meter on both sides of the meter wall then absorb and neutralize the method of delivery prior to its arrival at the suppressor?
    Why is no one reporting doing this?
    I personally know people who got better as a direct result of doing this.
    What is stopping people from buying if not a high end one then at very least a half decent short term one for a couple of hundred dollars at home depot?

  8. admin says:

    Can you recommend a whole house suppressor – post a link? Thanks.

  9. Fred says:

    Installing a CSA/UL approved suppressor to remove the dirty electricity? This is not in the electrical code and why do we have to remodel our homes because BCH bought the cheapest Smart Grid parts they could find. CHEAP? BCH has spent 3BILLION dollars and the cost to us is increasing higher every day.
    As for the HYDRO BOT, Is there anybody in BC Hydro smart enough to do a remote disconnect when the customers stops their service? Remember a smart meter can disconnect your power remotely when you are in arrears, but it doesn’t know when it overheats and burns down your home. WHY IS THAT?
    A smart meter is so STUPID, it doesn’t even know when the bad guys use an electrical bypass to steal power. WHY IS THAT?
    Where is the meter reader that could find these dangerous electrical conditions? Now us and our first responder are at risk of DYING. WHY IS THAT?

  10. mike says:

    The meter is use a very small amount of power from the power lines that is taken BEFORE the CTs (current transformers) in the meter. Only enery that passes throught the CTs is registered and billed to the customer.

    Since there is nothing connected to the service, there is no current through the CTs.

    The energy used to operate the meter is not registered in the meter. The amount of current used by the meter is typically less than 100ma, or 12w and is on the pre-billing side of the meter connection.

  11. admin says:

    Sent from Amy O’Hair:

    The following is my calculation about what energy is being wasted by the over-kill levels of RF signal that SMs pump out, regardless of signal needed to connect to mesh network. If they could have feedback mechanism similar to what all cellphones have to save battery, to cut signal strength to suit actual connectivity data, then total energy use by SMs could be cut, as well as RF exposure by people in homes and workplaces and public places.

    These calculations are based on assumption of no change in the level of “chatter” — which itself is a great wastage of energy. This is a kind of numeric sketch, and surely has error, but a start. Anyone who would cut the numbers differently, please reply.

    Average number of pulses = 10,000 / day
    duration of each pulse = 0.3 seconds (300 milliseconds)
    therefore amount of time / day that transmitter is emitting = 3,000 seconds = 50 minutes

    Round this up to one hour to make things easy.
    Transmitter power is 1 watt. (Silver Spring Networks/PGE model)
    Therefore each meter uses 1 watt-hour per day to transmit.

    Let’s say the majority of SMs could operate on a tiny fraction of this power, in that transmission distances (like a few inches to the next meter in a bank, or 25 feet to the next house) are small, and the signal does not need to be anywhere near this strong. The difference on a cell phone between an excellent connection and a weak signal can be 100-fold or more in RF radiation. I’m assuming a conservative 10-fold average difference for SMs.

    To continue: Total amount of electricity used by (my guess) 50,000,000 pge smart meters x 1 WH/day each = 50,000,000 WH/day = 50 gigawatt-hours/day.

    If the signal were responsive to connectivity, then perhaps 90% of this is wastage. That’s 45 gigawatt-hours/day irradiating people for no good reason. Admittedly CA uses 200,000 gigawatt-hours a day, but still nothing to sneeze at.

    If the mesh-network chatter were reduced, then this would also very substantially reduce the total energy used. As per PGE’s own docs, only 6 of those pulses per day are the user’s usage data.

    And if both these things were done, then the human RF radiation exposure would also greatly be reduced.

    This of course is not a real solution for those who sleep or work or live next to meters, and people who are sensitive, and children, and so on, IMHO, but in terms of public health harm reduction and energy conservation, it might help.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

seven − 3 =

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>