1) In Illinois, in one community the Council is listening to the concerns of their residents and the utility appears to be listening to concerns about $$meters. Com Ed is a major utility in the state. Pressure is building there. Why can’t BC Hydro have the same concerns for us?
ComEd responded to Burr Ridge IL resolution:
Thank you for your recent letter regarding the Burr Ridge Village Board Resolution. I have been monitoring the activity in your Village closely over the past few months and, as a result, I am aware of the concerns raised by several Burr Ridge residents around digital metering.
As you know, our smart meter program is one of our most impactful grid modernization programs. We perceive these meters as the gateway to an energy future where two important shifts occur. First, consumers become empowered by data and digital technology to control costs while the data and technology work to create additional consumer choices. Second, these meters support a move to a far less carbon intensive energy system.
That said, I understand that our customers have concerns. We have worked hard to respond to these concerns, nonetheless we know neither the Village nor your residents are currently satisfied. We value our relationship with your Village and our customers, your residents. It is important to us that we work with you on a resolution that will respond to the concerns that have been raised.
As a result, we are currently exploring both technological options and regulatory paths that would respond to the concerns that have been raised about digital metering and we will proactively engage with you as we develop our plan.
President and CEO, ComEd
2) These European guidelines were circulated a while ago but then disappeared from the web. They are back, and are important.
“It is suspected that environmental conditions such as the increasing exposure of the population to electromagnetic fields (EMFs) play a causal role for EMF-related health effects (9–12), including exposure to radio-frequency radiation (RF), which emanates from, e.g. cordless phones (DECT), mobile phone base stations, and mobile phones (GSM, GPRS, UMTS, LTE), especially smartphones, data cards for laptop and notebook computers, wireless LAN (Wi-Fi), wireless and powerline communication-based smart meters, but also exposure to extremely low frequency (ELF) electric fields (EF) and magnetic fields (MF) including “dirty electricity”, which emanate from disturbances on electric wiring, power lines, electric devices, and other equipment. For the society and the medical community, all of this raises new challenges.”
3) From Magda Havas:
July 27, 2016. I am going to post a series of educational videos that I am producing on the ground current pollution problem we are experiencing not only in Ontario but in other provinces and in other countries, like the U.S. Most people are unaware of this form of electromagnetic pollution. However, it is getting worse and needs to be dealt with. Ground current is a problem not only in some rural areas but in urban areas as well. We have considerable information about how it affects livestock, especially dairy cows. It also affects people and non-agriculture animals.
If you are interested in learning more … please visit:
4) Dr. Olle Johansson’s presentation about microwave radiation and dementia is available for a short time for free at:
5) Several people have asked me if my statement last night was true, that after I provided Adrian Dix with information about fires, he said he didn’t believe me. Yes, it was and here is how it happened.
In 2014, I was starting to send fire reports and other information that I had obtained via Freedom of Information requests from places like the BC Safety Authority, the Attorney General and even BC Hydro itself to anyone who I thought could take action to bring this information to the Legislature, to help protect us from these dangerous fire hazards. High on my list was Adrian Dix who, I thought, was concerned about BC Hydro’s practices. In August, one of the MLAs, I think it was Jane Shin, suggested that Dix would like to meet with me to receive more info.
I spent at least 2 weeks putting all of the info I had at that time on a spreadsheet that would be easy for Dix to read, and I asked an engineer, one of a group who had studied the specs of the ITRON smeter and identified many design flaws that could lead to fires. Then I asked for an appointment. The engineer traveled some distance for the meeting.
When we got there, also attending were Jane Shin and Maurine Karagianis (my MLA) along with Dix. The engineer and I spent about 30 minutes going through our evidence which included evidence that BC Hydro was removing meters from the scene of fires and that no agency was tracking incidents. At the end of our presentation, I asked Dix for a response. He said, without missing a beat, that he didn’t believe a thing we had said and, with that, he left.
The engineer and I thought that under the circumstances, it was a remarkable dismissal.
The information I presented wasn’t my creation. It came from the various agencies. He didn’t believe the BC Authority. No, not our Adrian Dix. He didn’t believe the Attorney General. He didn’t believe the BC Fire Commissioner. He didn’t believe the BC Safety Authority. He didn’t even believe BC Hydro. Now, you’ve got to keep in mind, these sources weren’t volunteering this information. They were forced to release it by law. So the last thing they are going to do, under these circumstances, is lie because they know there are consequences.
So if Adrian Dix doesn’t believe the BC Authority, or the Attorney General, the BC Fire Commissioner, the BC Safety Authority or even BC Hydro, then who does he believe? He believes the “expert” Len Garis.
Who is Len Garis? He is the former head of the BC Fire Chief Association commissioned and paid by BC Hydro to write a report unsullied by evidence that would produce a contrary, discomforting conclusion. The evidence was there – I found it, and he could have, too. His conclusion, a real jump in logic, was that because there were fewer electrical fires REPORTED that smart meters were safe. This is what Adrian Dix chose to believe.
6) In Segment #18, BCUC makes assertions with no evidence to back them up. They say that the number of incidents is about the same with smeters as they were with analogs. How do they know? No one is tracking and I don’t know if they tracked analog fires. I have asked experts about fires caused by analogs and all have told me that fires caused by analogs are very rare because analogs do not run on electricity and they are made of non combustible material – glass and metal. We deserve evidence if we are to believe $$meters are as safe as analogs.
In The Parksville Qualicum Beach News:
= = =
RESPONSE TO “BCUC’s Staff Report on Smart Meter Fire Safety Concerns” Segment #18
KEY: Highlighted text is from Sharon Noble Non-highlighted text is the draft report as written by BCUC staff.
= = =
The evidence reviewed indicates the safety hazard associated with watthour meters has not materially increased with the introduction of smart meters in BC as further detailed below:
- Are there credible statistics on the number of fires attributed to analog meters over the 5-10 years prior to the smart meter installations?
- What evidence was used to make this assertion?
Comment: BCUC repeats several assertions in this Report based on a small population of data points. When an inadequate and statistically weak quantity of reliable data points are available, then it would be wise to state that, and not to make assertions based on an unrealistic data base.
1) Are smart meters compatible with the meter sockets into which they are plugged? Do smart meters have thinner blades than legacy meters?
The evidence reviewed suggests there are no issues with smart meter compatibility with the meter sockets. Smart meters installed in BC were designed to a standard that considers compatibility to the meter socket standard.
- What evidence was reviewed to reach this conclusion?
- Who made this determination? What were his qualifications?
- What standards were used since these were not certified and such determinations are left up to Hydro?
- Who has determined that the standards to which the meters were designed were adequate?
Comment: there is no documented Certification that the meters meet the Canadian Standard, and BC Hydro repeatedly states that they do not need to meet the Canadian Standards. BC Hydro should, in any event be able to demonstrate that their Quality Control and Quality Assurance procedures show that the meters do in fact have CSA documentation to that effect, and that the meters’ physical parameters consistently satisfy the Standards’ requirements and that the documentation has been verified by third-party engineers.
This standard specifies the thickness of the meter blades. If there was an issue with blade thickness or compatibility, it would be expected to affect all or a sizable portion of meters in a manufacturing lot and would result in a cluster of incidents in location or time. The incidents investigated appear randomly dispersed in time and location.
- There were incidents but without tracking how can the determination be made that they are random?
Director, Coalition to Stop Smart Meters
“An activist is someone who cannot help but fight for something. That person is not usually motivated by a need for power, or money, or fame, but in fact driven slightly mad by some injustice, some cruelty, some unfairness – So much so that he or she is compelled by some moral engine to act to make it better.”
~ Eve Ensler