Privacy International & the Electronic Frontier Foundation Raise Concerns About Privacy Implications of Smart Meters

Privacy International (PI) and the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) filed an amicus brief in the case of Naperville Smart Meter Awareness v. City of Naperville before the United States Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit.

PI and EFF argue that usage data from smart electricity meters differs quantitatively and qualitatively from analog electricity meters, revealing intimate details regarding a person’s private in-home activities.

PI and EFF argue that an Illinois District Court’s decision that there is no reasonable expectation of privacy in aggregate electrical usage data, regardless of whether the data is collected by a smart meter or analog meter, is flawed and that the Court’s decision should be reversed.

Patterns generated by smart meter data can be used to infer how many individuals reside in a home as well as their activities, habits, and rhythms of movement, including when they leave their home and when they go to sleep.

Smart meter data can even reveal which appliances are functioning at a given time, allowing one to infer, for example, when residents consume meals, take showers, watch TV, and use exercise equipment.

Privacy International Legal Officer Scarlet Kim said: “The transition from analog meters to smart meters — from a single monthly reading of energy usage to thousands of data points per month — transforms a blunt record of kilowatts consumed into a deeply personal snapshot of a person’s life. The data protection and privacy implications of collecting this data are not confined to Illinois but resonate around the world.”

Electronic Frontier Foundation Staff Attorney Jamie Williams said: “The lower court made false assumptions about how smart meter technology works, and its decision is a threat to the privacy of the 57 million and counting American homes with this new technology.”

For more information: https://smartgridawareness.org/2017/02/28/privacy-advocacy-groups-amicus-brief-on-smart-meters/

Nerve disrupting frequencies radiating from “smart” meters

Warren Woodward:  Everyone knows that wireless “smart” meters communicate via microwaves. What was unknown until now is that additional frequencies are transmitted in the 2 to 50 kilohertz range. Numerous studies have shown repeatedly that those very same frequencies disrupt the human nervous system. Indeed, “nerve block” is the phrase used in the studies to describe what occurs.

The studies are not controversial. In others words, there are no studies that show otherwise. Nerve block induced by frequencies in the 2 to 50 kilohertz range is an established fact. The studies that show this nerve block are all from reputable sources including the epitome of “establishment” science when it comes to electricity, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers.

So the demonstration you will see in the video is groundbreaking, or more accurately, “smart” meter breaking.

Unless they cease, desist, and bring down the wireless “smart” grid at once, “smart” meter manufacturers and the utilities that use them are going to be facing massive liability and personal injury lawsuits because, unlike the microwave radiation that anti-“smart” meter advocates have been calling attention to for years, there is no scientific dispute regarding the biological effects of 2 to 50 kilohertz frequencies.

Additionally, state utility regulators and public health departments will need to actually do their jobs which always used to include protecting the public and promoting public health and safety.

Lastly, the U.S. Department of Energy will have to bring an immediate halt to the promotion and subsidization of the wireless “smart” grid.

Every day of delay will bring greater liability for the aforementioned corporations and agencies and the individuals involved. It’s one thing to act in ignorance, quite another not to act once knowledge is received.

To everyone reading, send this video to your utilities, your state utility regulators, your state health departments, and to hungry lawyers everywhere. Links to studies https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NTSejgsjTcnerve-block-frequenciesrev1

 

 

Smart meter health problems compared

SMARTeffects-v2-100Thanks to Ronald Powell Ph,D for placing two reviews of smart meter health impacts side by side.  He compares the EMF Safety Network Survey results (USA 2011 ) to an Australian peer reviewed study by Dr. Frederica Lamech (AUS 2014).  The results are astoundingly similar, especially when you account for the different methods for gathering the raw data. Network’s survey was distributed online with boxes of symptoms to check off, and Dr. Lamech’s study tallied written responses.

Symptoms after Exposure to Smart Meter Radiation

Structure Report: Smart meter conflict of interest and cover up

www.briannarelle.com

Emails between utility giant PG&E and the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) expose conflict of interest and cover up of skyrocketing smart meter bills.  The consultant the CPUC hired in 2010 to investigate the complaints, Structure, had worked for PG&E for the previous five years, and was not “independent” (as claimed in CPUC and PG&E’s misrepresentations).  CPUC President Peevey knew the results of Structure’s investigation long before it was complete, and shared that information with PG&E.  CPUC’s Peevey was aware smart meters were overcharging through personal experience.

The coordinated propaganda campaign between the CPUC, PG&E and marketing firms that resulted in the smart meter deployment couldn’t tolerate news such as the fact that 500,000 smart meters were at risk for overcharging in hot weather.  Peevey’s own bill doubled when a smart meter was installed on his vacation home, causing  him to joke about making The Sea Ranch a smart meter free zone.

The CPUC and PG&E used the Structure report to cover up smart meter problems, and to defend the deployment at the customers’ expense.  These emails suggest that returning to the tried and true analog meters is a viable remedy to avoid future skyrocketing utility costs, and that observant meter readers are a cost-effective way to ensure public and environmental safety.

READ MORE:  http://emfsafetynetwork.org/smart-meters/structure-report-smart-meter-conflict-of-interest-and-cover-up/

CPUC approves extortion smart meter fees

What really happened at Peevey’s last CPUC meeting

Screen shot 2014-12-22 at 12.23.22 PM
Peevey’s last meeting: Reading of names and smart meter victim complaints the CPUC is ignoring.

IMG_5384Before noon on Dec.18, a Bay City News reporter published  a rare media account of Peevey’s last meeting at the CPUC titled “San Bruno blast: PUC’s Peevey presides over final meeting, receiving scorn and praise”.  During untimed public comments 30 speakers droned on with accolades for his twelve years at the CPUC, one calling him the “greenest Commissioner”.  After a couple hours the scorn began.  21 speakers had signed up to speak, most on smart meters.  Robert Ernst read the names and smart meter complaints told to the CPUC judge at public hearings. (see video below)

Within hours the news article covering the scorn was censored, and almost all mention of smart meter opposition inside the CPUC meeting was removed. Here’s what was taken out:

“Armed police guarded the meeting, which at one point was interrupted by shouts when it appeared that Peevey intended to adjourn the meeting before all members of the public had a chance to speak.

“Be quiet,” Peevey told those who were shouting. Eventually, Peevey decided to continue the meeting through lunch and speakers continued to offer comments.

Numerous people offered opposition to the controversial PG&E smart meter program.

Robert Ernst of San Rafael offered Peevey “a dark rose for dark times” that he claimed smart meters pose for California. People held up signs that read “Listen to the Smart Meter injured.

“The PUC is clearly a captured  agency, working on behalf of, and in collusion with, the utility it is supposed to be regulating,” said Sandi Maurer.”

IMG_5344IMG_5352Prior to the meeting we met on the steps of the CPUC in protest. The grim reaper held a wireless kills sign, black roses were handed out and a smart meter victims coffin was raised.

 

IMG_5367_2_2

The alternate smart meter decision is APPROVED

After a lunch break, the CPUC approved Peevey’s alternate decision, which charges opt out fees of $75 initial fee and $10 a month ($10 and $5 for low income) for no more than three years. The decision excluded health and safety and disallowed community and business opt out. The Commissioners did not discuss it, only offered gratuities to those involved.

Thanks to everyone who coordinated the actions and participated, and to Steve Zeltzer for the following video:

Listen to CPUC Commissioners talk about the smart meter opt out proposed decisions

On December 4, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) discussed the proposed decision and alternate proposed decision for the smart meter opt out proceedings.  The first three minutes President Peevey describes the proposals and the new change which allows estimated billing and bi-monthly meter reading to reduce costs. [It seems the cost savings will only benefit  the utilities, as the opt out fees are still $75/10].

Commissioner Florio suggested local communities should be able to vote on community opt out from smart meters, stating “the Commission can and should honor that [vote]”. He says, “If Fairfax and Sebastopol and a few other places want to be smart meter free zones I don’t think we should override that democratic will of the people in those communities.” He went on to say, “If there are a few small communities that choose to that would be a place where people who really have a problem with the smart meters could live and conduct their lives.”

President Peevey promptly rebukes Florio’s suggestions stating” Seems to me that doing that would only fester and foster and promote more debate and anguish over this issue.” Peevey goes on to decry the voting process, calling it “the height of lack of democracy” and “extremely undemocratic”.

Commissioner Picker, a former SMUD director claims only 50 people opted out in Sacramento, and many of those vocal against smart meters came up from Davis. He referred to community opt out as“bad public policy, bad public health, bad financial planning…unless they [communities] are just  going to divorce themselves from the rest of the states’ grid and get rid of all their sources of fugitive EMF and they’re going to figure out how to compensate the rest of us for their additional contributions in terms of air quality impacts.”

Commissioner Sandoval was concerned  about people who want a smart meter, and her greater concern is about all the smart meter emissions (she calls “last gasps”) that have nothing to do with energy usage, saying, “they are a source of RF emissions that have no value”. She’s wiling to move forward with approving the proposed decisions, but maybe come back to this if “certain issues arise“.

Peevey mocks the City of Sebastopol saying “[Sebastopol] is a nuclear free zone, and I guess that means that there’s not a single electron from Diablo Canyon that ever crosses the boundary into Sebastopol, it’s a wi-fi free zone downtown, and it would like to ban smart meters and on and on and on”.

Peevey states he’s received the brunt of the negative comments and claims to have been sympathetic in many ways to people. He says PG&E should have handled the issue in a different way, “They [PG&E] chose not to, THAT’S LIFE.”

The vote was moved to December 18, which is Peevey’s last meeting before he retires and the day we plan to hold a press conference and demonstration at the CPUC.