[AKBLG Resolution for UBCM Union of BC Municipalities – Antennas – BCUC – BC Hydro Extortion Legacy Meter Opt Out Fees – Clayton Falls Hydroelectric Generating Station – Itron Smart Meters Fires / Safety – Small Cells / Microcells Public Right of Ways Sitings Fact Sheet / Talking Points – Telus | Bella Coola, BC – UK – Minnesota, USA]
1) An Electrical Engineer in the US, with whom I’ve been communicating, has taken the ITRON smeter apart and found it lacking in significant regards re. safety. One major one is that it is improperly fused. He provided this information which is of great significance in confirming that these indeed are fire hazards. ITRON advises not to install the meter where it could start a fire if it fails!!! This means it should not be on our homes. The Electrical Engineer charges that any utility that uses the ITRON meter ‘as is’, without proper fusing, is guilty of harmful negligence.
(click on photos to enlarge)
“The problem is meters and sockets are NOT known to be properly protected with the correct fuse.
The three safety instructions below were copied from page 9 of the ITRON manual and indirectly point out the problem. All electrical equipment is expected to fail eventually. The question is not “ does it create a hazard If it fails”; the question is “does it create a hazard when it fails”. The answer depends on the rating of the fuse protecting the meter and socket.
The third instruction is most fundamental. ITRON acknowledges that meters may fail in a manner that could cause death, injury, or fire. Two ways to accomplish this are to restrict access to the meter or to instantaneously remove power when the meter fails. The first instruction is to use fuses. The second instruction is to not use the meter a protective device – don’t rely on the remote switch as a safety feature.
- All voltage paths (measurement and auxiliary) must be fused.
- Do not use any meter functions or features for primary protection purposes.
- Do not install the meter where failure of the device could cause death, injury or release sufficient energy to start a fire.”
2) Minnesota group of cities is working to protect municipal rights re. microcells/small cells, maintaining the right to be involved in siting and the public right of ways. Groups need to organize in BC because Telus is installing these things NOW.
Here is a Fact Sheet which anyone fighting having these microcells put up in front of homes, with no public notification or approval, should read and share with the local Municipal Council:
3) On April 27, a resolution passed at the Association of Kootenay and Boundary Local Governments (AKBLG) Conference which will be presented to the Union of BC Municipalities Annual Meeting in September regarding microcells/small cells, asking for local governments to be consulted on the siting of these transmitters in their cities on the public property. I would ask that Councils across the province be presented with this or a similar resolution, or at least asking for the Council to support this resolution when it is presented at the UBCM. If people want to join together to figure out how best to do this, to work together on strategy, let me know and I will help get people in touch.
Send email to: firstname.lastname@example.org with “UBCM resolution” on the subject line.
Whereas public consultation on the placement of cell towers is mandated; and
Whereas new technology is moving away from these large towers to microcell transmitters which do not require local government or public consultation;
Therefore be it resolved that the AKBLG request the UBCM petition relevant provincial and federal governments to mandate consultation with the land use authorities and the public regarding microcell transmitter siting within 100 meters of residences, schools and hospitals.”
Breakdown of the Resolution:
- A federal regulatory loophole permits cellular antennas to be placed on existing structures like utility poles in Canada without public consultation or consent.
- There is a coordinated move by the telecommunications industry and the federal government to saturate our neighbourhoods with small cell, or microcell, transmitters.
- Local governments must lobby to regain the right to be consulted on the placement of small cells on their streets.
4) In the UK, people have a choice of supplies of electricity, and aren’t limited to a monopoly as we are. Perhaps millions of smeters in the UK will need to be replaced due to design flaws that cause problems when switching providers. It seems many utilities and meter manufacturers were in too big a rush to get these things in and didn’t ensure they were safe and did what they were supposed to do.
Millions of smart meters may need replacing due to IT blunder
“For the first time major energy suppliers have admitted that some of the 8 million “first generation” smart meters fitted in households are incompatible with a new nation al communications network, which links their systems to the devices.”
Sent: May 5, 2017
To: Complaints BCUC:EX <Complaints@bcuc.com>
Subject: BC Hydro Extortion and discrimination
Dear BCUC Complaints Department,
I am a BC Hydro customer living in the Bella Coola Valley. I never Opted-In to the “Smart Meter” program because of health and safety concerns, and still retain the safe and reliable long life CSA approved and fire resistant surge protected Analog (so called Legacy) meter. The local electricity grid is powered by the local Clayton Falls facility and is not connected to the main provincial grid. Why the BCUC was prevented by BC Government order from reviewing the Smart Meter Program (other than Tariff rate setting) becomes obvious seeing the profits made, and continuing to be made, by those promoting the AMI scenario.
As if this billion dollar ripoff of taxpayer funds was not enough, for a number of years I have been forced to pay the “extortion fee” of over $388/year to retain my analog meter and electricity supply, supposedly because there is an extra cost now required by BC Hydro to read my meter, whereas previous to the “smart meter” program this meter reading cost was included as part of the normal service and did not require a special extra fee. What really upsets me is that all the “smart” meters in this valley also require manual meter reading, yet only those still with analog meters get charged for the reading service. This is both discriminatory and extortionate no matter how BC Hydro tries to skirt the issue.
It is my understanding that the BCUC still retains the power to set and adjust the “Legacy Meter” fee. If this fee is really not a penalty in disguise but just a meter reading fee, why is the same fee not applied to every customer meter requiring a manual read (e.g. every meter in this valley)? I would suggest that the “Legacy Meter” fee be reviewed again by the BCUC and entirely eliminated as has been done by jurisdictions elsewhere. I do not think it fair or reasonable that those of us who still have the non-radiating long lasting and safe Analog meters should be discriminated against and charged an extra reading fee when so many “Smart??” meters also require manual reading.
Other concerns regarding the “smart” meter program include the fact the meters require never ending firmware updates, are a fire and health risk, have no surge protection, have short service life, require expensive IT support, expose the grid to hackers, charge customers for the extra power used by their transmitters, and are nothing but an overpriced surveillance device. Unfortunately, the BCUC emasculation by those in power prevented proper cost/benefit analysis and review prior to program approval. Let us hope that a newly elected government will return the BCUC to it’s original mandate rather than exclusion from large and expensive projects such as “smart” meters and Site C.
Your reply will be appreciated.
Director, Coalition to Stop Smart Meters
“Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.”
~ Aldous Huxley