Home

Massachusetts: Epidemiology needed on SMART meters

1 Comment

PLEASE DISTRIBUTE WIDELY: SIGN THE LETTER AND EMAIL

Many Massachusetts residents have a wireless electric meter already installed on their home, and are unaware that the meters transmit 24.7.365.

This is a 3 1/2 minute video of the microwave radio frequency pulses from a wireless utility meter in Eversource territory (formerly NStar).

If you ask the company, they will tell you that you do not have a ‘smart’ meter.

It would be possible to do epidemiological research to determine if adverse health effects including heart attacks, SIDS, neurological conditions, fertility challenges, autoimmune illness, sleep disorders, and other conditions coincided with the installation and activation of these meters on homes. Cancer is not the only concern associated with radio frequency exposure.
Epidemiology is needed due to lack of informed consent, lack of premarket safety testing, and lack of investigation of health complaints.
There are no research studies indicating that the meters are safe.
The company does not offer an opt out for medically vulnerable residents.
The MA Department of Public Utilities will open a proceeding soon in MA regarding smart meters.
Please see the update below about a new Massachusetts bill regarding EMF.
Even if you are not an MA resident, you can play a part.

 

—————————————————————————————————————————————–

Commonwealth of Massachusetts
Statement in Support of:

S. 2431 Resolve relative to disclosure of radio frequency notifications

S.107 An Act relative to disclosure of radiofrequency notifications 

S.108 An Act relative to the safe use of handheld devices by children

Submitted By: (Name), (City, State, Country if other than U.S.) on (Date)

Submitted To: Joint Committee on Ways and Means

Continue here….

Advertisements

Public Regulation Commission rejects a smart meter installation program by PNM

Leave a comment

From Staff ReportsPublished 10:37 a.m. MT April 18, 2018

Smart meter pilot program requested from PNM by the time of the next energy efficiency filing in 2020

The New Mexico Public Regulation Commission unanimously rejected the Public Service Company of New Mexico’s proposal to install Advanced Metering Infrastructure , called smart meters, citing rate increases, an excessive opt-out fee and layoffs as deal breakers.

“After several hearings, I felt the program was clearly not in the best interest of the public,” Commission Chairman Sandy Jones, who represents District 5, said. “I held public meetings in Silver City and Deming and many of my constituents agreed.”

Following three separate hearings held over the course of almost two and a half years, the commissioners concurred that the proposed AMI program did not fairly balance the interests of investors and ratepayers or promote the public interest.

According to a release from the PRC, the commissioners determined the AMI program failed to take advantage of possible energy efficiency measures, identify sufficient operational benefits, or provide meaningful opt-out opportunities. Especially significant was a concern that the lifetime costs to ratepayers would exceed savings in contrast with the benefits shareholders would reap.

More

New Mexico stops smart Meters!

3 Comments

Arthur Firstenberg of the Cellular Phone Task Force in New Mexico:

Today we won a victory in the fight against radiation in New Mexico. The Public Regulation Commission has denied PNM’s application for Smart Meters. “The plan presented in the Application does not provide a net public benefit and it does not promote the public interest,” wrote the Commission.
The Commission accepted the Hearing Examiner’s recommended decision without alteration. It ruled that:
• PNM did not demonstrate that smart meters will save money.
• PNM did not demonstrate that smart meters will produce energy efficiency.
• PNM did not show that customers want smart meters.
• PNM did not evaluate alternatives.
• PNM did not say how it would protect customer data privacy.
• Cybersecurity issues need to be addressed.
• 125 good, high-paying jobs would be lost.
• Proposed opt-out fees were unreasonable.
• There was insufficient public input.
• There was insufficient response by PNM to public objections.
EVIDENCE ABOUT HEALTH EFFECTS was discussed at length. “Customers who have strong feelings about the
health effects of the meters should be allowed to protect their stated health concerns without a
prohibitively high cost.”

More

UTILITY BELT: THE DANGERS OF SMART METERS

Leave a comment

here is still no federal mandate for Smart meters….it is NOT an opt out program….it is an OPT IN….you must be offered and accept the offer of the meter or request one. Not one politician nor city or county official that I know of has ever read the PERPA regulations on Smart Meters. OR maybe they did read them and decided the $$ was just too good and ignored them.

Smart Meter News

Eluxe MagazineARTICLES MAGAZINE

UTILITY BELT: THE DANGERS OF SMART METERS

By Jody McCutcheon

Technology’s purpose is to increase our standard of living. Yet sometimes we’re so enamoured by the convenience or pleasure a new product offers that we overlook its risks. Or perhaps the risk may not be immediately apparent, or worse yet – authorities tell us there’s no danger until it’s too late: think tanning beds, asbestos, tobacco, thalidomide. Everything was great with those products…until it wasn’t. Which brings us to wireless smart meters (for simplicity’s sake, let’s just call them smart meters).

Essentially, these gadgets have replaced the meter-reader who used to come to our houses and read the utility meter. Smart meters provide technology that measures a house’s exact consumption of gas, electricity, even water, and sends that information back to the supplier by communicating with a central control system. It does this wirelessly, via radiofrequency (RF)…

View original post 1,295 more words

SMART METERS: No Federal Mandate (replay)

12 Comments

Marti Oakley (c)copyright 2011-18 All Rights Reserved

__________________________________________

This Standard would also allow utilities to recover from ratepayers any capital, operating expenditures, or other costs of the smart grid investment, including a reasonable rate-of-return. “

__________________________________________

THERE IS NO FEDERAL SECURITY MANDATE FOR SMART METERS, according to George W. Arnold the national coordinator for smart-grid interoperability at the National Institute of Standards and Technology. This agency of the U.S.  Department of Commerce is said not to be involved in regulations but is only tasked with promoting standards among industries.

While both the 2005 and 2007 faux energy bills were codified into public laws, NO part of them creates a federal law pertaining to individual consumers or dictating that the public must be forced to comply with provisions of SMART Grid.

Contrary to the bleating of manufacturers and utility talking heads,  who claim there is no “opt out”, the fact is you, the consumer must be offered the meter, or request a meter and “OPT IN”.  No one can be forced to comply with an unrevealed contract between private corporations, and to which you were never a party and had no knowledge of.

Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 :

An Energy Tax Package was under development in Congress for several years prior to 2008. In September 2008, the package was finally enacted into law via its inclusion in the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008. This tax package shifted tax liabilities from corporations who were already posting massive record profits, onto the public.

Section 1307 State Consideration of Smart Grid

Energy 2007, Page 6 :  This Section amends PURPA to create two additional PURPA Standards. (Note: Two new PURPA Standards are also created in Section 532.)

These standards are in the form of requirements on parties such as utilities to undertake certain actions. The standards are not directly prescriptive on these parties, however; it is up to state utility regulatory commissions, or the bodies that govern other types of utilities, to decide that the standards should be actually adopted by utilities subject to their jurisdiction.

The only direct mandate with PURPA standards is for the state or other jurisdictional body TO CONSIDER whether the new Standard should be implemented and to demonstrate that it has undertaken such consideration.  More

South Carolina Woman Arrested for Refusing Smart Meter

2 Comments

Letter Urging State Attorney General to Intervene

Press Release
For Immediate Release
Contact: E. Michelle Mancini • blufftonsc@icloud.com
Please email for phone number
Armed Officers Arrest and Jail Woman to Enforce “Smart” Meters
PALMETTO ELECTRIC GETS ARMED THUGS AT TAXPAYER EXPENSE TO FORCE THEIR POOR CHOICE OF METERS 
Bluffton, South Carolina, February 19, 2018 A Sheriff arrested and jailed a woman after she had a smart meter on her home changed to an analog meter due to health issues from the radiation. The arrest warrant for Elizabeth Michelle Mancini states that Palmetto Electric Cooperative, Inc., did not approve the meter, and could not read it.

More

The Really Weird World Of Smart Meters

1 Comment

Source:  Activist Post

By Catherine J. Frompovich

Probably when those who either question and/or oppose AMI Smart Meters thought the situation couldn’t get any more weird than it is regarding misinformation and lack of transparency about the so-called “consensus science” that dominates technology, medicine, pharmacology and vaccines, the makers of one high-profile Smart Meter, Landis+Gyr seemingly has outdone itself.

The website Blacklisted News featured an article titled “Smart Meter Company Landis+Gyr Now Using Copyright To Try To Hide Public Records.”  What happened to transparency, especially in high tech science?  Is there information they don’t want the public to know?

As some background information, back in 2016 L+G took some legal action, which was chronicled in the Tech Dirt article “’Smart Grid’ Company Demands MuckRock Turn Over Info On Anyone Who Might Have Seen Public Records Docs Involving It.”

Hmmm!

It would seem that L+G executives and legal department don’t understand the meaning of “public records” or they may be desperate to use legal harassment tactics to prevent information getting out that consumers and others have every legal right to know about products L+G manufactures and sells.

Enforcement tactics regrettably include consumers being forced—against their wills and by duress techniques, e.g., no AMI SM, no utility service to your home—by state laws, public utility commissions and utility companies to be placed on to homes, businesses and everywhere in between.  What is it that I’m not getting when AMI SMs are not mandated in the 2005 Energy Act [Public Law 109-58, The Energy Policy Act of 2005 §1252 Smart Metering], as that would be unconstitutional?

Furthermore, it’s a known principle in U.S. law that if a state law allows something, but federal law does not allow/permit it, then it’s illegal!  What happened at state levels mandating AMI SMs?  Clue: Check out the UN’s Agenda 21 and 2030 and why AMI SMs are an integral part of the global surveillance state!

READ THE REST OF THIS ARTICLE HERE.

Older Entries

%d bloggers like this: