2016-01-05 Michigan considering ultimate tactic — loss of essential service (water)

  • A city in Michigan is considering a bill which would allow water to be shut off if people refuse a Smart meter. How can such a draconian step be justified? What is so vital about these devices and getting 3 (electricity, gas and water) on every home that lives can be put at risk and rights to a safe, healthy life be disregarded?

http://www.mlive.com/news/bay-city/index.ssf/2016/01/no_smart_meter_in_bay_city_cou.html

 

  • There are people who suffer from sensitivities other than or in addition to electromagnetic radiation. One major one is chemical sensitivity. Both of these fall in the general category of environmental sensitivities.

“After being struck down by the condition referred to as Environmental Illness, the photographer discovered a subculture of fellow sufferers leading remote, difficult lives.”

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/7dc239c8-a900-11e5-9700-2b669a5aeb83.html

(if you have trouble getting the article to come in, copy the quote above and paste it into a Google search.

 

  • You can register for a free “wellness summit” which will include Magda Havas who is an expert on electromagnetic radiation. No date for her presentation is readily available but might be upon registering.

http://winterofwellness.com/

 

  • A member found this very interesting, short document written by Larry Blackhall, a former Navy Officer in Advanced Electronic Warfare. Click on “Document” to read it.
Avian Flu from Radiation?

Larry Blackhall presented at a meeting about the Avian Flu Chicken issue in the Abbotsford BC area in 2005.

He worked for years at the navy stations near Mission BC and Aldergrove BC, where large antennas broadcasting emf radiation are located close to local farms.

“A catastrophic intersection of two normally beneficial technologies. EM Radiation and Chick Production.”  is his summary at the top of his presentation PDF.

 Since 2005,  similar events have taken place again.

http://emrabc.ca/?p=5515

 

  • In the UK, there continues to be warning that benefits do not justify the costs, and now those concerns include the extremely short lifespan which is 5-7 years! Note the price per meter. It is still far lower than the $555 that we have to pay for BC Hydro’s smeters. We’re still  #1….

Not So Smart – The government should listen to criticism of its latest IT plan before it is too late – The Times – January 03, 2016:
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/leaders/article4655702.ece

(The entire article is not available without subscription so the article is below the “Letters” section.)

Energy smart meters are an £11bn disaster, warns expert by Robin Pagnamenta – The Times – January 03, 2016:
(previously titled: Warning over a ‘ghastly mess’ in £11bn plan for smart meters by Robin Pagnamenta – The Times – January 03, 2016:

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/business/industries/utilities/article4655613.ece

(This article in its entirety is below.)

**************************

Letters:

From a member to Linda.larson.mla@leg.bc.ca

Linda Larson,

If you have absorbed anything about politics as an MLA you might understand that Health Canada & the BCUC sway according to more factors than only safety.  With experience you might admit that they are under enormous pressure from wealthy corporations. In this type of democracy, ‘danger’ can also be defined by economic factors, not by the purely physical reality. Do you understand how issues such as this are evaluated yet ?

Microwave radiation emitting devices are presently a powerful economic force in North America & beyond.  Similar to (what for just one of many examples) the cigarette industry was and somewhat continues to be today. Health Canada does not have the power to eliminate all things which are dangerous to humans in Canada immediately. Is this fact not yet obvious to you Linda Larson and if so why try in your recent email to suggest otherwise ?

The Underwriters Laboratory (an agency that certifies electronics) now acknowledges that smart meters have design flaws which raise serious concerns about being fire hazards. As well, UL states that utilities and manufacturers know about this. So, are you thus saying that someone must (due to a smart meter fire) sacrifice their home or life ‘in this riding’ before you acquire sufficient concern to call for precautionary action ?

Here is a link to photos of some fires and melted Smart Meters in British Columbia;

http://emrabc.ca/?p=5723

http://www.metlabs.com/blog/meters/new-ul-2735-electric-utility-meter-standard-ensures-safety-and-performance/

__________________________________________________________________________

Not So Smart – The government should listen to criticism of its latest IT plan before it is too late – The Times – January 03, 2016:
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/leaders/article4655702.ece

Ever since the collapse of the £20 billion NHS effort to digitize every patient’s medical records, it has been sensible to worry whenever government takes responsibility for a multibillion-pound IT project.  It is sensible to worry now.

“Smart” meters that measure gas and electricity consumption every half an hour are scheduled to be installed in every household in the country, with the bulk of the work starting later this year.  The total cost of the programme is put at £11 billion, to be met by consumers in a levy added to their energy bills and spread over at least five years.  The Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) claims that the long-term savings will amount to nearly twice as much.  If so, the project will have been a costly gamble but one worth taking in the end.

The signs are, however, that the risks may eclipse any reward.  As we report today, a leading expert on Britain’s energy supply has written to the energy secretary and the chancellor to warn that the meters being installed have much shorter lifespans than those they are replacing, that the system adopted for installing them is the most complicated adopted by any country in the world, and that the cost per household is so inflated that Britons will be paying nearly four times as much as Italians for a comparable system.

The author of this analysis is Alex Henney, a former director of London Electricity who advised the Thatcher government on electricity privatisation and has spent more than three decades in the industry.  He deserves a hearing.  It is not too late to learn from the mistakes of previous IT fiascos and correct any that could doom this one.

In principle smart meters are a worthwhile investment and an essential companion technology to the smart grid.  By measuring household usage every 30 minutes and transmitting it to suppliers they give consumers the information they need to economise if they want to – for instance by leaving power-intensive tasks until off-peak hours.  They should enable suppliers to charge for what is used rather than force customers to make inflated up-front payments based on estimates.  They should, finally, enable gas and power wholesalers to match supply more evenly to fluctuating consumer demand and to the input to the power grid from renewable energy sources, which is as variable as the wind.

In practice the scheme as currently envisaged could founder on cost, reliability and complexity.  Ministers put the cost per meter at £214.50.  If the savings for users were substantial this might be acceptable, but British Gas admits that those it has already installed are saving customers £26 a year, meaning that the meters will take nearly a decade to pay for themselves.  There is no guarantee that they will last this long, or that a switch of supplier will not entail the installation of a new meter.  Most worryingly, responsibility for installing 53 million meters has been handed to energy suppliers notorious for poor customer service rather than the operators of Britain’s energy infrastructure – National Grid and UK Power Networks.

The solution is not to scrap smart meters.  Fewer than 4 per cent of the 53 million have so far been installed.  The DECC should pause, simplify the rollout and ensure that meter manufacturers are not the only ones likely to profit.  To press ahead regardless would be, quite simply, dumb.

************************************************

Energy smart meters are an £11bn disaster, warns expert by Robin Pagnamenta – The Times – January 03, 2016:
(previously titled: Warning over a ‘ghastly mess’ in £11bn plan for smart meters by Robin Pagnamenta – The Times – January 03, 2016: – http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/business/industries/utilities/article4655613.ece )

An £11bn project to install more than 50 million smart electricity and gas meters in homes is a “ghastly mess” that will not work, according to a leading figure in the energy sector.

Alex Henney has written to Amber Rudd, the energy secretary, warning that the rollout, due to start this year, is a disaster in the making.

Mr. Henney, who advised a previous Conservative government on the privatisation of the electricity market and is a former director of London Electricity, said that at best the scheme would be regarded as a waste of money.

In his letter, seen by The Times, he wrote “At worst the system will not work, as per the NHS patient records system; at best it will suffer from extensive errors and glitches and will be regarded as an expensive waste of money.  The only beneficiaries will be the meter manufacturers.”

Mr. Henney, a 34-year veteran of Britain’s electricity industry and the author of three books on the subject, said that the government’s plans were fundamentally flawed.

The rollout of smart meters between now and 2020 is set to be the biggest UK IT project for a generation, with the cost to be met by customers. The meters will measure electricity and gas consumption every 30 minutes to help householders cut emissions and make savings on their bills.

The Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) puts the cost per household of installation at £214.50.  This will be passed on to customers through a levy on their bills.

Ministers claim that, as well as putting an end to unreliable estimated bills, the scheme will encourage households to use less energy by, for example, running appliances at off-peak hours.  The government claims that families will save £18.5 billion over 20 years.

However, recent evidence suggests that this figure is unrealistic. Data from Ovo Energy suggest that more than 60 per cent of households with the meters were not using them only a year after installation.  British Gas, which has installed two million meters, has admitted that they save consumers 2 per cent on average – or £26 a year.

Mr. Henney claims that, in principle, smart meters can offer benefits.  However, he says that civil servants have devised a complex and expensive system in which meters are rolled out by energy suppliers rather than by the local operators, such as National Grid and UK Power Networks, which run the distribution networks.

“The Department of Energy and Climate Change has devised by far the most complex rollout in the world,” he wrote in the letter, which was sent last month to George Osborne and to Oliver Letwin, a cabinet member and a confidant of the prime minister, as well as to Ms Rudd.

The system means that the meters are not being installed on a street-by-street basis at relatively low cost, Mr. Henney said.  Suppliers’ adoption of different meters adds to the cost, as does a central coordinating body to administer the technology and transmit readings to suppliers, he added.

A spokeswoman for the DECC said: “Smart meters will bring an end to estimated bills, make switching suppliers faster and give bill payers more control of their energy use.  Smart meters are a platform for a smarter energy system that will bring our energy infrastructure into the digital age.”
**********************

Newsletter prepared by Sharon Noble

A:  Free radicals damage DNA
B: Non-ionizing radiation creates free radicals.
C: Therefore, non-ionizing radiation can damage DNA
DAMAGED DNA  CAN LEAD TO CANCER.

 Free Radical damages DNA