1) A different petition. This one aimed at the WHO and the head of the EMF Project [http://www.who.int/peh-emf/project/en/] who has long been affiliated with the industry, prepared by Olga Sheean. Olga once worked in the UN and this petition will be presented to some significant officials. The WHO has shown itself to not be science based when it comes to EMF/EMR – and it’s time this changed. Please sign and help get as many signatures as possible from friends and family all over the world.
– Your e-mail address will NOT be shared with WHO or anyone else. It will be kept on file for use only if I’m challenged by WHO on the legitimacy of the names provided.
– Your name/e-mail address will not be added to my mailing list, but you may sign up separately if you wish to receive updates from me on the vote and other EMR/EHS-related info.
– The call to action is on my website and is not connected to any other social change/petition platform, so you will not receive any other requests to support a cause or sign a petition.
– This is a chance for us to collectively have an impact, letting the World Health Organization know that we no longer recognize its authority or respect its unscientific, industry-driven decisions regarding the worldwide harm being caused by wireless radiation.
Feedback and comments are welcome.
If anyone would like to submit a comment about their personal situation (one short paragraph), they are welcome to e-mail it to me and I will include it in the WHO document, using their initials or whatever ID they wish to provide.
2) A very interesting trailer of a documentary. Includes info about clothing that shields from EMR.
3) Dr. Joel Moskowitz has generously shared slides from a recent lecture on “Wireless Radiation Risks and Public Health”. I hope you will share with those who do not know or believe that wireless radiation is a major danger.
4) Many people are asking questions and expressing interest in learning more about going off the grid, primarily to leave BC Hydro and FortisBC. Please send me information that you learn that might help others. Here are some links that one of the members has gathered:
– “Solar Electricity Basics” by Dan Chiras – http://www.backwoodssolar.com/solar-electricity-basics
– Sunshine Works – http://www.sunshineworks.com/zero-energy-off-grid-house.htm
– Wholesale Solar – http://www.wholesalesolar.com/products.folder/systems-folder/OffGridPackages.html
(Off-grid solar electric power systems, complete solar power packages) & http://www.wholesalesolar.com/batteries.html & http://www.wholesalesolar.com/contact.php
5) Re. the article about high hydro bills in Ontario, and Wynne’s acknowledgement of mistakes, this from someone just back from a visit with family. This is what we have to look forward to from BC Hydro and FortisBC. It’s not a matter of “if”, only “when”. This sort of billing hits the most vulnerable the hardest: those with small families, the disabled, the elderly, all of whom are home all day and must use electricity during the peak hours for cooking, heating, cooling.
This story is fully a repeat performance of the BC Hydro “edition”.
Looks like the OEB has also been skipped by regarding jurisdictional “disregard” as has the BCUC when it comes to the private energy producers or IPP’s.
I was just in Ontario for a family visit, and had a chance to see first hand the pricing regime;
7pm to 7 am is about 7 and 1/2 cents per kWh
7 am to 3 pm is a whopping 18 and 1/2 cents per kWh
3pm-7pm is 12 and 1/2 cents per kWh
[see graph below effective May 01, 2016]
There is a great deal of anger in the under current of people in general I found.
I also found it interesting that people don’t always “know’ the pricing regime they are paying for.
What they do know is that the price at the end of the month is a shock for most.
And if TOU billing isn’t bad enough, look at this poor fellow’s experience over the weekend when the power was out. His smeter reported that he used even more electricity than usual – and Hydro One’s response is that “they will check the meter for accuracy” (no doubt charge for it), and reassures him that the accuracy test is always right.
6) From an Electrical Engineer in the USA who has inspected the ITRON Centron Openway smart meter, and concluded that it is too dangerous to have on his home.
“I for the most part have concluded that going off grid is the only real solution.
Solar system of 8KW with a Salt Water battery system and a Diesel Generator with enough fuel capacity to run for a full week. Solar inverters do create “Dirty Electricity” but I know how to mitigate that situation with Toroids. It is much easier to mitigate the situation when the current is low versus a 200 amp AC circuit.
Once I get the system in place and running properly then I will disconnect from DTE. I currently have an Analog meter and will not give it up until they physically disconnect me at the pole. Based on my analysis I will never let an ITRON meter on my home. Besides all the heath issues, it is a major fire hazard. If I am forced to have a meter due to letter of occupancy issues with the local zoning board I will mount it exterior to the home with a power disconnect both coming into the meter and out of the meter. I am not paying the utility to run their meter. I may turn it on once a month for about an hour just to retain the service and remain compliant.
The utilities are beginning to make it virtually impossible to tie into their grid to sell back to them.
It is my only hope that some of these utility executives begin to die from their own devices. Only then will they have a change of heart. In the meantime I consider them devils and filled with evil.”
Sent: November 23, 2016
Cc: Bellringer, Carol <firstname.lastname@example.org>; Dix, Adrian <email@example.com>; Horgan, John <firstname.lastname@example.org>; McRae, Don <don.mcrae.MLA@leg.bc.ca>; Ross, Laurel <email@example.com>
Subject: formal complaint re BCUC decision
Dear Mr. Wruck,
I fully understand the limitations placed on the BCUC regarding the Meter Choices Program by the Clean Energy Act and more specifically by Direction No. 4 (2013). However, my complaint is about the BCUC itself and the consequences of its Decision on the Application for Approval of Charges Related to the Meter Choice Program, dated April 25, 2014.
The Commission has the obligation to see that all customers of BC Hydro are treated fairly. Although the Decision itself may have been deemed fair when it was made, its consequences three years later are patently not fair, and I hold the BCUC responsible for correcting this.
The approved charges, summarized in Table 4.3 on page 51 of the Decision, assumed a total of 10,000 participants in the Meter Choices Program, evenly split between those who chose radio-off smart meters and those who chose to retain their legacy meters. The approved initial operating costs for servicing an assumed 5,000 radio-off meters amounted to $989,658 annually, which when divided by 5,000 and then by 12 months gave a monthly charge of $16.49. The approved operating costs for servicing an assumed 5,000 legacy meters added up to $1,690,778 annually, which when divided by 5,000 and then by 12 months came to a monthly charge of $28.18.
Capital costs of $3.52 monthly were added to the charge for radio-off meters, bring the total to $20.01 (rounded to $20.00). Monthly capital costs of $5.25, reduced by $1.03 for deferred capital costs, were added to the monthly charge for legacy meters, bring the total to $32.40.
These charges ($20.00 monthly for radio-off meters and $32.40 monthly for legacy meters) have been collected since December 2, 2013. Assuming 5,000 radio-off meter customers and 5,000 legacy meter customers, the annual amount approved by the BCUC for radio-off and legacy meter fees under the Meter Choices Program would have been $1,200,000 ($20.00 x 5,000 x 12 months) plus $1,944,000 ($32.40 x 5,000 x 12 months), or a total of $3,144,000 per year. As of November 2, 2016 the Meter Choices Program has been in place for three years, making the total amount approved for collection by BC Hydro three times this amount, or $9,432,000.
However, the amount actually collected by BC Hydro in radio-off and legacy meter fees in the past 36 months far exceeds this amount. In the first place, when the Meter Choices Program began in December 2013, approximately 60,000 BC Hydro customers indicated a choice to keep their legacy meters, and only a few hundred chose a radio-off meter. After the BCUC’s Decision of April 25, 2016 set the monthly fee for legacy meters only slightly lower than the extremely high estimated fees, approximately 20,000 customers still chose to retain their legacy meters. But the other approximately 40,000 customers who dropped out of the program had in good faith paid the interim fees monthly, starting December 2, 2013 (when the Meter Choices Program went into effect) and ending approximately May 2, 2014 (shortly after the actual fees were approved on April 25, 2014). The fees actually collected from these 40,000 or so customers over five months total approximately $6,480.000 ($32.40 x 40,000 x five months).
Through attrition (moving house, changing the name on the account, not being able to afford the monthly legacy fees, having their meter accuracy seals expire and there being no replacement legacy meters), the remaining 20,000 or so BC Hydro customers retaining legacy meters has steadily dwindled. However, according to the Hon. Bill Bennett, as of April 11, 2016 there were still 12,761 customers with a legacy meter and an additional 661 with radio-off meters. Assuming the numbers have not changed since then, they alone add up to $14,884,430 paid by legacy meter customers over the last 36 months (12,761 x $32.40 x 36 months), plus another $475,920 paid by radio-off customers (661 x $20.00 x 36 months) for a total of $15,360,350.
This total amount actually collected over the last 36 months does not include the large number of people who paid the legacy fees for many, many months but for whatever reason now have a no-charge smart meter. If 15,000 people paid legacy meter fees for most of the past three years, the figure would be closer to $18,000,000. When the amount collected from the 40,000 customers who dropped out of the program after the first five months ($6,480,000) is added in, the total collected by BC Hydro over the last three years is between $21,840,000 and $24,480,000.
This is approximately two and one-half times the amount estimated and approved by the BCUC for annual operating and capital costs of the Meter Choices Program. Customers participating in the program are and have been discriminated against by being charged fees far in excess of the most generous estimated costs. This is contrary to the mandate of the BCUC, which states that all customers shall be treated fairly and equally. I would like answers to these questions:
- Now that the Meter Choices Program has been in place for three years and the actual annual costs are known, what were those actual costs for each year?
2. How did each year’s actual annual costs correspond with the number of legacy meters and radio-off meters then in service?
3. How do the actual annual costs for each of the past three years compare with the estimated annual costs approved by the BCUC in 2014?
4. What exactly has BC Hydro done with the many millions it has collected in legacy and radio-off fees to date? It is the job of the BCUC to demand that every penny be accounted for.
5. What has BC Hydro done with the fees collected in excess of the costs of the Meter Choices Program? All citizens of BC – the owners of BC Hydro – have the right to know this.
I hereby formally request the BCUC to ask BC Hydro to produce verified figures for its annual costs over the last three years for (a) meter reading, (b) theft detection, (c) IT maintenance, (d) expired meter seals, (e) account processing and TTO, and (f) capital costs of the Meter Choices Program; and to give a detailed accounting of the disposition of collected fees exceeding the actual costs of the Meter Choices Program. Since BC Hydro is a Crown Corporation owned by the people of BC, I also formally request that these figures be made public.