2016-01-29 A claim allowed in Penn. – smart meter making woman ill

  • Warnings about  wireless toys and gadgets being the portals by which hackers enter homes, spy, and steal data.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3420182/Hackers-target-baby-monitors-Warning-cybercriminals-spying-children-accessing-devices-networks-transmitting-noises-scare-them.html

 

  • A the website for parents of neurologically different or impaired children, which is run by the Assoc. for Comprehensive Neurotherapies  recently publishes an article about RF, and provides some interesting political history.  It’s titled “The Wonder–or Worry–of Wireless” and includes both a bit of history and precautionary steps parents can take.

http://latitudes.org/18-ways-to-limit-radiation-exposure/

 

  • A woman in Pennsylvania has charged that a Smart meter made her ill, and her claim is being allowed to go forward by the public utility board because she had medical info. to support it.

“Kreider’s complaint was different, the PUC said, because she said she could produce medical documentation showing that the electromagnetic radiation from the meter caused her to get sick. The meter violates the state’s public utility code requiring utilities to provide “safe and reasonable” service, she has maintained.

“To ignore claims relating to the safety of smart meters would be an abdication of our duties and responsibilities under . . . the code,” the PUC said in its order Thursday.

http://www.philly.com/philly/business/energy/20160129_PUC_allows_hearing_for_woman_who_says_Peco_smart_meter_made_her_sick.html#TKKQXi8dKYvT0T07.99

 

  • Clarification (really a correction) re. item #6 last night about the hack-athon. I mis-spoke when I said the computer could be hacked even if turned off. The computer was hacked when it wasn’t hooked into anything that could have transmitted data, wifi, Ethernet cable, etc.  Sorry – my lack of technical nerdiness is showing.

 

  • Hydro One, just like BC Hydro and Fortis, are installing or have installed smart meters on homes where they knew the wireless remote connections would result in the smart meters not working in any of the ways that were promoted: no meter reading, no remote disconnect, no outage info, etc. But these meters will continue to be fire hazards, hacking risks, and will irradiate people. Why weren’t these people allowed to keep their safe, reliable, and cheap analogs. This would have saved BC Hydro $555 per meter.

http://www.northumberlandtoday.com/2016/01/28/letter-informs-cold-springs-home-owner-of-change-to-smart-meter

 

  • Quebec Hydro wants to be able to put smart meters as close as 1 meter from a propane tank. These smart meters spark when the remote disconnect switch is activated. I believe that in BC a regulation requires a 3 meter distance between the wireless smart meter and the tank.

http://welcome.hydroquebec.com/question/405/53679126-what-is-the-latest-information-on-the-smart-meters-and-propane-tanks

 

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

Letters:

 

Mr. Shadrack’s letter was in the Jan. 15 update but I’ve copied it below for reference.

From: X
Sent: January 27, 2016 4:26 PM
To: Andy Shadrack <ashadra@telus.net>
Cc: Complaints BCUC:EX <Complaints@bcuc.com>; bchydroregulatorygroup@bchydro.com; electricity.regulatory.affairs@fortisbc.com;

Subject: Re: BC Hydro Must Replace 88,000 Smart Meters and Install 5,000 that will work in rural areas

Dear Mr. Wruck,

I must agree with Mr. Shadrack. It makes little sense for Hydro to continue to bill those remote customers for opting out where Hydro has now proven for themselves smart meters do not work. Customers who opted out can simple reverse their decisions and opt in. What will Hydro’s response be then? Will Hydro install a smart meter just to later remove it because it does not work? This approach would seem foolish and a waste of taxpayers money. A more rational approach is obviously required here and keeping ones head in the sand is what caused this problem in the first place. There was ample evidence of smart meters not working especially in remote areas but rather than take a rational approach Hydro choose to be obstinate to the extreme and ignore the evidence.

Your reply to Mr. Shadrack simply quoted the opt in/out policy of Hydro prior to the recent evidence and demonstrates little or no intelligent thought concerning the problem at hand. Nor did you answer his concerns.

Mr. Shadrack has put forth the time and effort to become knowledgeable about the smart meter program and has posed very thoughtful questions/concerns not just here but throughout the process. By simply quoting the Hydro opt in/out policy which did not answer his concerns or questions demonstrates either a lack of knowledge on your part or a lack of proper consideration and thought such to be both disrespectful and condescending.

I am continually appalled at the condescending attitude which permeates your response and Hydro in general.

Mr. Shadrack and all taxpayers who support Hydro and your salary deserve better, much better. How about you now consider Mr Shadrack’s recent email and provide a thoughtful and intelligent response which addresses his very reasonable questions/concerns. One that demonstrates Hydro is just not another bloated and wasteful corporation which has completely lost touch with its intended purpose which was to serve the taxpaying public. 

Sincerely,

X

———————-

From: Andy Shadrack [ mailto:ashadra@telus.net]
Sent: January 14, 2016 12:46 PM
To: Commission Secretary BCUC:EX <Commission.Secretary@bcuc.com>
Cc: bchydroregulatorygroup@bchydro.com; electricity.regulatory.affairs@fortisbc.com;

Subject: Hydro One abandons 36,000 rural smart meter connections in Ontario

Kaslo

Thursday January 14th

Commission Secretary. British Columbia Utilities Commission

I write with regard the recent decision by Hydro One in Ontario to abandon smart meter service to some 36,000 rural customers (see two recent newspaper articles below), to ask how BCUC is monitoring and reviewing the experience of BC Hydro and FortisBC smart meter customers in remote and rural BC.

I have been advised by a number of residential customers of both BC Hydro and FortisBC that they are now being billed for manual reading of meters because they chose to either retain their analog meter and/or chose to have their smart meter turned off, while neighbours who have smart meters are having their smart meters read manually free of charge (ie Johnson’s Landing), because the smart meter network cannot reach these remote and rural communities and customers.

It seems neither reasonable nor consistent from a “postage stamp” point of view to charge any customer for the manual reading of their meter if the smart meter network cannot reach them and they cannot partake in this smart network as proposed to the Commission.

I look forward to a reply on this anomaly at your earliest convenience.

Respectfully submitted,
Andy Shadrack

Astonishing: Hydro One pulling plug on 36,000 rural smart meters after years of complaints
*********************************

Newsletter prepared by Sharon Noble

“The world is a dangerous place, not because of those who do evil, but because of those who look on and do nothing.”   Albert Einstein

Einstein - World Dangerous Place