- Fortis is advertising. People need to get flyers out with the truth. Fortis is telling people they do not need to be home – that the meter exchange can occur with the power still on. This has caused many fires and failures with Hydro meters. Please, alert people to this.
- Conflicts of interest have influenced major industries and scientific research. Money has power, and corporations control the media, the universities, and many politicians. One prime example of industry buying scientists is Exponent – the “product defense” company to which the BCUC and our provincial health officials defer. Scientists, through threats, fear, or greed, sell their credentials to the highest bidder, and market/support dangerous products.
The cancer “business” has a record of being very influenced (controlled?) by the industries both guilty of producing cancer-causing products and by the industries that benefit from selling cancer drugs (sometimes these industries are interwined). (google Sam Epstein for more info.) Here is a chance to see a film about one major cancer center, Sloan-Kettering, and how conflicts of interest have worked against the researchers and patients.
“With this background in mind, it should come as no surprise to learn that Sugiura’s findings did not please his employer. What goes on inside the laboratories is generally of little interest to board members. It is assumed that, whatever it is, it will result in a new patented drug that will keep the cash flow moving in their direction. They were slow to pick up on the implications of Sugiura’s work, but when they did, all hell broke loose in the board room. If a cure for cancer were to be found in an extract from the lowly apricot seed, it would be a terrible economic blow to the cancer-drug industry.”
- A Nokia Chief of Technology believes his exposure to RF radiation led to his MS and disability at a young age.
- Some really good points that we should be arguing, especially the fact that our data is being gathered and shared via the mesh grid with other homes and businesses – wherever the data is sent to be forwarded to the collector. Who gave Hydro/Fortis permission to give our personal data to anyone else, and who gave them permission to use our homes as commercial centres for gathering and transmitting data from other homes that they need to do business??
- For those interested in other twists by Hydro, Bill Bennett and this govt re. Site C, Erik Andersen has written a very interesting series of emails. (see below in Letters)
- Canada’s democracy is being threatened by both the Federal and Provincial govts. Recently a new ruling forbade groups like ours from fund-raising through our emails. This is how they will stop our fighting legally – without funds you can’t find. Then Clark advocates for a Societies Act which will allow anyone to charge a group with not acting in the public interest – lawsuit!! And now the Feds are threatening small groups with special audits. Our free speech and our right to complain about what is happening in BC and in Canada is being taken from us.
- $$meter plan put on hold in Ireland due to recent cost-benefit analysis which showed no benefits – in fact, potentially a cost greater than benefits.
From: “Dennis and Sharon Noble” <firstname.lastname@example.org
To: “John Horgan. Leader NDP” <John.Horgan.MLA@leg.bc.ca, “adrian dix mla” <email@example.com
Cc: “Andrew’ ‘Weaver.MLA” <Andrew.Weaver.MLA@leg.bc.ca, “Elizabeth May” <Elizabeth.May@parl.gc.ca, “Alex – Riding 1 Atamanenko” <Atamaa1@parl.gc.ca, “randall garrison” <firstname.lastname@example.org, “Jane Jae Kyung’ ‘Shin.MLA” <Jane.Shin.MLA@leg.bc.ca, “Maurine’ ‘Karagianis.MLA” <Maurine.Karagianis.MLA@leg.bc.ca
Sent: Friday, October 17, 2014 5:02:49 PM
Subject: A charge of discrimination against BC Hydro
Dear John and Mr. Dix,
I believe this is an issue that the NDP should be happy to stand behind. There are many thousands of people (20,000 according to Hydro’s figures, but we suspect this figure is really much higher) who are fighting to keep their analogs for various reasons, all of which are justified by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. They include seniors on fixed incomes, the disabled, and many young families trying to make ends meet.
Bill Bennett and the liberals do not believe they have to answer questions or to justify this discriminatory practice. The costs do not justify these fees, which can only be considered extortive and punitive.
We desperately need your voice to be heard, supporting our efforts to end this practice.
From: Dennis and Sharon Noble [mailto:email@example.com]
Sent: October 11, 2014 9:42 AM
To: Bill Bennett (firstname.lastname@example.org); ‘email@example.com‘
Cc: Christy Clark (firstname.lastname@example.org); ‘email@example.com‘; John Horgan. Leader NDP; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org‘; Patrick Wruck; David Beers (email@example.com)
Subject: A charge of discrimination against BC Hydro
Dear Mr. Bennett,
I have written to you several times about the discrimination that is taking place with regard to fees and rates charged to BC Hydro customers, and have yet to receive any response. Below are some of them.
Are you aware, Sir, that, according to information provided to me through a Freedom of Information request to BC Hydro, as of January 1, 2014 66,587 smart meters were being read manually. As of September 1, 2014 45,457 smart meters still are being read manually – for no additional fee.
The many thousands of people who are paying legacy fees deserve an explanation for this discrimination, Mr. Bennett. We deserve to know the rationale behind your decision to allow this to occur and to continue.
Bcc. All MLAs
From Erik Andersen, Please read from the bottom up
For the last 6-8 years we have constantly listened to the fairy tale that BC is in short supply of in-province generated electricity. Confounding BCH in that period has been no real increase in demand and in fact a reduction by large industrials.
BCH has a 4th category of in-province (domestic) customers it captions as “Others”. Because “Others” is described by BCH as domestic it must get included when they craft a forecast which we know is the signal they use to go looking for new IPPs and Site C.
For almost 10 years the reported sales to “Others” has been around 2,300 GWhrs per year or about 5% of total domestic sales.
In 2013 BCH reported sales to “Others” of 7,417 GWhrs which is about 5,000 GWhrs more than the regular amount for this category. In 2014 reported sales dropped back to the longer-term trend line, 2,558 GWhrs.
So the burning issue is where did the 5,000 GWhrs come from? It could have been bought in and then sold on to “Others” by BCH or more likely it was always there to be had from a combination of new IPP generation and/or the legacy dams. The point being here is that by coming up with 5,000 extra GWhrs in 2013 BCH has demonstrated that the generation from Site C is not needed.
The BCH forecasting is generally not too bad for the categories of residential and commercial customers. It is only in the categories of heavy industrial and “Others” their forecasting is rubbish. The narrowness of these customer group sizes makes forecasting for the last two more than a serious joke. In this case it looks like a $8 billion joke.
Sales to others in 2012 was reported to be $236 million. In 2013 it was $322 million and in 2014 it was $275 million.
To illustrate how volatile this category is here are the per MWhr revenue values. 2012 $103.73; 2013 $43.41; 2014 $107.51.
Volume and pricing/revenue values are anything but predictable in the latest few years. I have no idea who “Others” are except the Auditors indirectly suggested they are out of province customers. I asked the Auditors directly and they declined to identify who or where these folks are.
On Oct 18, 2014, at 3:43 PM, ERIK ANDERSEN wrote:
One point I did not mention but now hope the Peace Folks will is the blindingly obvious evidence from the BCH annual reports that BCH has a generating surplus and/or access to inexpensive power.
In Fiscal 2012 BCH reported sales to “Others” of 2,275 GWhrs at $103.73 per MWhr (If my math is correct). In fiscal 2013 reported sales to others was 7,417 GWhrs at a price of $43.41 per MWhr. Finally, in Fiscal 2014 sales were 2,558 GWhrs ( haven’t worked out the per MWhr yet but the numbers are on page 49 of the 2014 annual).
So you can see that in 2013 BCH somehow found an extra 5,000 GWhrs to sell to someone. That amount of new sales is about the equivalent of 125% of Site C projected productivity. This destroys the narrative that electricity from Site C is needed in BC as we already have that supply and more if the evidence of BCH sales is to be believed.
From: ERIK ANDERSEN
Sent: Friday, October 17, 2014 4:29 PM
Subject: Fwd: Site C
I know you have heard it all so I guess it is now all about the legacy you and your cabinet colleagues are willing to create. Thinking in terms of demand for electricity in BC, the reported record of sales by BC Hydro has flat-lined at about 50,000 GWhrs between 2008 and now. BC Hydro reports sales for four categories of customers.
Even with a 1.2% annual population growth, as estimated by BC Statistics, sales on a per capital basis are have been trending lower. It is a fact, long denied by the executives of BC Ferries, that higher rates cause demand to shrink. Known as price elasticity, customers start searching for ways to reduce consumption right up to the extremes of going off-grid or moving out of BC.
Light industrial and commercial customers are doing the same.
Large Industrial customers started reducing their demand in 2006 when the annual sales for this category was 16,428 GWhrs. By Fiscal 2014 reported sales were down to 13,994 GWhrs, a drop of about 14%.
Where reported annual sales go berserk is for the “Other” category. In 2006 sales to “Others” was reported to be 1,838 GWhrs with about 2,000 GWhrs being the annual total until 2013 when it spiked to 7,417 GWhrs only to crash in 2014 to 2,558 GWhrs. Until there is disclosure as who are the “Others” in BC , inclusion of this category, in making up any demand outlook, is irresponsible. The Auditor’s notes suggest that in fact sales to “others” are sales to customers outside of BC.
Creating a story about growing future demand for electricity is to engage in self-delusion. In-spite of BC Hydro spending billions and contracting for tens of billions more, over the period 2006 through to 2014, reported total domestic sales (including the dubious sales to “Others”) have been stubbornly stuck at 52/53,000 GWhrs. Growth in total revenues is only coming to BC Hydro by rate increases, not increases in demand.
There is a vast difference between need and want. Since there is no credible evidence of need for more electricity in BC, in the foreseeable future, Site C is only an expensive indulgence serving the interests of the construction industry but at a big cost to BC citizens who ultimately shoulder the financial liabilities of BC Hydro follies. It is ironic that all BC Hydro customers, other than residential, operate with limited liability status so they could care less if BC Hydro is crippled by excessive liabilities, yet they are the customers it seems the government listens to most closely.
Sincerely ; Erik Andersen
Agency: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)
Document Type: Nonrulemaking
Title: Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards: Vehicle-to-Vehicle (V2V) Communications
Document ID: NHTSA-2014-0022-0002
The dangers of EMF radiation from wireless devices are many and real.
The prestigious and respected American Academy of Environmental Medicine has made this an area of concern, and recently gave their highest award to Dr. Martin Pall of Washington State University for his research in this area.
Dr. Pall has explored how EMFs act via activation of voltage-gated calcium channels, and how EMF exposures can cause a physiological effects including cancer, oxidative stress and EHS.
In addition many physicians are discovering that their patients are experiencing difficulties because of EMF exposure, and Women’s College Hospital in Toronto has recently established a program to educate doctors about this threat, which some public health professionals call the greatest challenge to human health in the twenty-first century.
The United States should look to other countries whose standards regarding EMF exposures are much more demanding, and whose forward thinking should lead the way on this issue.
Wireless communications from light vehicles is a terrible, untested idea that will put millions of people at risk for the development of EHS.