For some years I have been on the outside looking in, so to speak. A remote sort of observer with no inspiration to get excited. Unlike many other issues in which I am also an observer but passionate about such things as lies by governments and authorities regarding 9/11, AGW, global financial crisis and associated activities involving murder, mayhem and injustices, and more and more lies.
Suddenly, in the mail arrives a letter of intent stating – we are going to install a smart meter on your property next week. Now I am actually within and part of a scenario which is also arguably part of the world-wide movement to keep the public in “their place” and control their lives and very existence.
An extreme viewpoint?, yes but it seems to be very close to exactly that – serious control over the pricing and uses of electrical energy, remote control of our lives, almost.
Is there a question of choice? Absolutely not! To deny access to your own property to equipment installers is against some law which I am still researching. Normally free and welcome access is made to meter readers and fault service technicians without hesitation, rancour or argument.
But, in this case, all over the world there are disputes about the safety and control issues of smart meters. In some countries, they have been subject of reversal of “laws” allowing reversions to the old electro-mechanical devices. To say the least, the jury is out regarding the need, intrusion of privacy and safety issues of the smart meter.
However, here in Victoria, Australia, we are blindly going full-speed ahead with the forceful installation in all residences and small businesses, based on government edicts and mandates on the electrical distributors to install at almost any cost.
Why is this so? A proven inept government? An agenda from ‘on high’? Some real practical reasons? (I didn’t put that first because I am biassed), a vendetta against Ken McMurtrie? just joking, why is this a world-wide mandate? Why indeed!
There are several distinct issues:
- Reason(s) for updating the technology.
- Capabilities of the meters.
- EMF radiation and health.
- Civil Liberties, individual’s rights and sanctity of the private home.
- Paths for public to pursue justice.
Added 9th May 2013: On radiation –
All the individual areas are of concern and hopefully will be dealt with. There is so little detailed, reliable information about one of the factors, the emission pattern from a meter – peak levels, duration and frequency (how often) so I am seeking clarification. We learn about pulses as distinct from continuous radiation, where the peaks can be very high but during testing and reporting, become averaged out and confused by factoring in duty cycles.
There are conflicting reports about numbers of transmissions per day, ability of meters to interact with other meters, actual output power levels, local area networking and hub stations, etc., all of which influence the potential dangers. Too many unknowns!
There is argument about assessing health risk safe levels based on cell heating and a 6 minute time constant, the basis for the Australian safe levels, and direct damage without heating from the RF energy which is arguably probable at much lower power density levels.
This comment ref http://www.menstuff.org/issues/byissue/smartmeter.html introduces the pulsing aspect.
There also are safety issues, like known cases of the smart meter failing and starting a fire, or exploding. Also, in a recent official filing PG&E confirmed that its smart meters can damage customers’ sensitive electronics. And the new meter is effectively a remote control device in charge of your house or business, allowing PG&E the option of unilaterally rationing or cutting power to a property when the corporation deems it useful for THEIR purpose.
But by far the most dangerous aspect is the way these wireless meters put our health at risk! This kind of microwave pulsing works differently than more-continuous cell phone radiation, and it’s much more dangerous. Many scientific studies have verified that this type particularly affects the brain, nervous system and hormones, disrupting the functioning of many body systems and causing very serious leakage of our blood-brain barrier, and that low-power broadcasts (such as from these meters) are even more damaging than higher-power ones. Typical acute symptoms include migraine headaches, insomnia, exhaustion, forgetfulness and confusion, tinnitus, tingling, nausea and vomiting, constant thirst, heart palpitations and increased blood pressure, limbic system disturbances such as severe depression or anxiety or crying jags, etc.–and a general reduction from prior levels of functionality. For some, the nervous and endocrine systems go into hyper-arousal (as with severe stress), ultimately leading to the collapse known as “burnout”. Careful scientific research has proven that cumulative exposure to this type of radiation also causes more and more DNA breaks, which—if experienced frequently enough—have the potential to be a factor in ultimately causing cancer. Our risk of developing serious symptoms (often referred to as “electrical sensitivity”) increases the longer our chronic exposure to this radiation continues—and, with the smart meter system fully in place, there will be no place to escape it night or day. Children, pregnant women, the elderly, and those with pre-existing health problems are particularly vulnerable.
The transmitting smart meters also typically add additional high frequencies directly onto home and building wiring. This additional high-frequency load is then re-radiated throughout the interior space. Scientific studies are finding that such high frequencies on building wiring are related to a host of health problems, similar to those described above. The Precautionary Principle—which says “Better safe than sorry”–is official policy in parts of the Bay Area; “better safe than sorry” should mean no wireless meters until it’s been independently proven that long-term exposure to them is safe.
Added 10 May 2013: (Information Sources and My Story) Revised 15th May.
RF Radiation Assessment California/US – Sage Reports [See section below for information]
Briefly, my story so far: Actions taken, communications made & received.
Letter from United Energy foreshadowing meter installation.
Follow up from UE, letter giving installation date window.
Letter to UE advising nil consent to a smart meter.
Installed keyed cupboard lock on meter box door, also sign “Please NO Smart Meter“.
Reply from Jemena advising installation compulsory and would proceed.
“All smart meters being installed in Victoria are safe, Health authorities around the world, including ARPANSA and the World Health Organization, have examined the scientific evidence regarding possible health effects and, using prescribed exposure limits, concluded that the weight of evidence does not demonstrate the existence of health effects.”
“Minister Michael O’Brien says smart meters are compulsory and those who do not allow them to be fitted risk being cut off from the supply grid. Minister O’Brien says any customer who wishes to remain connected is required to allow electricity companies to install smart meters. He also says anyone refusing to have a smart meter installed is breaking the law.”
Letter to Ombudsman EWOV requesting help with dispute.
Reply from Jemena re costs – installation, added to everyone’s bills smart meter or not, no changes to energy rates – safety, radiation testing shows very low levels, well below official safety levels. [revised 15th May]
Reply from EWOV absolving themselves from jurisdiction due to government policy being involved.” click here. Please refer to Fact Sheet 10: Smart electricity meters”
Letter to EWOV criticising their inability to help and lack of information.
Reply from EWOV “EWOV is unable to investigate complaints pertaining to Government directives and rollouts. If you are dissatisfied with the installation of Advanced Meters, you are able to lodge a complaint by contacting your Local Member of Parliament.”
Another letter to EWOV saying I understood their situation but the overall scenario is far from satisfactory, in contrast to Australia’s” land of the young and free” and a fair go, and akin to China, Russia or the modern USA.
Contact made with local member but he is unavailable until current parliament sitting over. [Draft letter in progress].
15th May: All quiet on the ‘Eastern Front’ (House Porch!) 2nd week of threatened installation 2 week period.
Investigating availability and pricing of appropriate RF EMF meter to enable monitoring of local radiation levels. Regardless of whether I have to accede to a meter, I can check radiation from neighbours etc. Local suppliers a possibility but nearly $400 for a unit. Looking at ebay and wondering if I am savvy enough to buy the correct type at about $150.
Considering whether to tell installers to “STICK” meter, up the power pole over the road. 🙂 . Seriously, it would be far enough away for me to feel more comfortable, Nobody needs to read it physically, I believe they supply a remote wireless reader to customers. And there are serious radiation dangers to someone close enough to read a meter. (See Sage Report section below).
20th May: Still no approach from the impending installers, haven’t seen any one “suspicious” in the neighbourhood” :-). Bit much to expect they have decided to leave me alone. Their window was from 6th t0 17th May, but I guess that wasn’t necessarily fixed.
I would certainly like to think that they are actually giving the situation some serious thought, especially if they were reading my blog and “educating” themselves!!
Spent hours on the internet researching mainly the health issues resulting in a couple of posts (below) and a published page ” How Smart Meters Affect Your Body “. Much the same as below but neat and tidy.
After trouble with Paypal system had to abandon a purchase from one supplier but have now committed to a RF meter for $140 instead of $110. Looking forward to that. Can check existing radiation levels from our cell phones and wi-fi equpment and the neighbourhood if neighbours get smart meters.
Thanks again for all your comments and information.
[Obviously updating the post regularly together with publishing and commenting on reader comments makes the post a bit disjointed. OTOH the post would be very premature if not upgraded and the comments would become even more disjointed, I think.]
Readers please have a look at the current commentary from Steve for some really good information.
To be continued. (20 May 2013)
Information worth a look:
The SAGE REPORT: [added 15th May]
Referenced above, it is a very detailed document with a wealth of information. It is about the Californian scene and how closely that relates to Victoria Aus., remains to be seen.
The main issue that stands out in my perception from it is that taking the word of our authorities, and indeed their stated reference for “proving” safety, are to be seriously questioned.
Firstly, they detail how smart meters work. Again this is Australia, but we are all apparently being “managed” by a global force to achieve their desired agenda so although it is not wise to be adamant about the California scenario being exactly representative, it is clearly wise to be very observant and cautious.
The main safety issue is the use of averaging and duty cycles to reduce peak power densities to what appear to be safe for human consumption. Then it also states:
“Hondou et al (2006) establishes that power densities 1000 times to 2000 times higher than the power density predictions from computer modeling (that does not account properly for reflections) can be found in daily living situations. Power density may not fall off with distance as predicted by formulas using limited reflection factors. The RF hot spots created by reflection can significantly increase RF exposures to the public, even above current public safety limits.”
“Peak Power Limits
In addition to time-averaged public safety limits that require RF exposures to be time-averaged over a 30 minute time period, the FCC also addresses peak power exposures. The FCC refers back to the ANSI/IEEE C95.1-1992 standard to define what peak power limits are.
The ANSI/IEEE C95.1-1999 standard defines peak power density as “the maximum instantaneous power density occurring when power is transmitted.” (p. 4) Thus, there is a second method to test FCC compliance that is not being assessed in any FCC Grants of Authorization.
“Note that although the FCC did not explicitly adopt limits for peak power density, guidance on these types of exposures can be found in Section 4.4 of the ANSI/IEEE C95.1-1992 standard.”
Page 10, OET 65
The ANSI/IEEE limit for peak power to which the FCC refers is:
“For exposures in uncontrolled environments, the peak value of the mean squared field strengths should not exceed 20 times the square of the allowed spatially averaged values (Table 2) at frequencies below 300 MHz, or the equivalent power density of 4 mW/cm2 for f between 300 MHz and 6 GHz”.
“The peak power exposure limit is 4000 uW/cm2 for all smart meter frequencies (all transmitting antennas) for any instantaneous RF exposure of 4 milliwatts/cm2 (4 mW/cm2) or higher which equals 4000 microwatts/cm2 (uW/cm2).”
“*Note: This leaves unanswered what instantaneous peak power is permissible from smart meters. The level must be below 4000 uW/cm2. This report shows clearly that smart meters can create instantaneous peak power exposures where the face (eyes) and body (testes) are going to be in close proximity to smart meter RF pulses. RF levels at and above 4000 uW/cm2 are likely to occur if a person puts their face close to the smart meter to read data in real time. The digital readout of the smart meter requires close inspection, particularly where there is glare or bright sunlight, or low lighting conditions. Further, some smart meters are installed inside buildings within inches of occupied space, virtually guaranteeing exposures that may violate peak power limits. Violations of peak power limits are likely in these circumstances where there is proximity within about 6” and highly reflective surfaces or metallic objects. The eyes and testes are not adequately protected by the 4000 uW/cm2 peak power limit, and in the cases described above, may be more vulnerable to damage (Appendix C for further discussion).”
Sorry, this is extremely technical but the gist of the issues should be evident even if the details are not clear.
Peak power densities are important and tend to be neglected by the authorities.
Tissue or cell damage from radiation is not necessarily taken into account because it is independent of thermal heating effects which are the criteria used by Australia.
Eyes and testes (presumably also ovaries) are known to be more sensitive to radiation damage but seem to be left out of specified general limits (when in fact they should be the defining criteria for safe levels).
Hot spots of radiation can be several times higher in power than where they may source or be measured.
In practice what this all means is that is almost certainly dangerous to get close enough to a meter to read it! Measurements should be made everywhere a person might be situated, not just some trial locations and distances.
Meter readings close to the source are not necessarily meaningful if the meter is reading electrical energy, (in the near field, closer than 3 wavelengths, I believe).
The Sage Report is also the source of an interesting assessment about establishing safe levels:
Department of Neuroscience
Experimental Dermatology Unit
Scientists Urge Halt of Wireless Rollout and Call for New Safety Standards: Warning Issued on Risks to Children and Pregnant Women
Scientists who study radiofrequency radiation from wireless technologies have issued a scientific statement warning that exposures may be harming the development of children at levels now commonly found in the environment. Pregnant women are cautioned to avoid using wireless devices themselves and distance themselves from other users.
The Seletun Scientific Statement has now been published in Reviews on Environmental Health (2010; 25: 307-317). The article recommends that lower limits be established for electromagnetic fields and wireless exposures, based on scientific studies reporting health impacts at much lower exposure levels. Many researchers now believe the existing safety limits are inadequate to protect public health because they do not consider prolonged exposure to lower emission levels that are now widespread.
“Current US and ICNIRP standards for radiofrequency and microwave radiation from wireless technologies are entirely inadequate. They never were intended to address the kind of exposures from wireless devices that now affect over 4 billion people.”
(Olle Johansson, professor, The Experimental Dermatology Unit, Department of Neuroscience, Karolinska Institute, and The Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden)
The combined effect of cell phones, cordless phones, cell towers, WI-FI and wireless internet place billions of people around the world at risk for cancer, neurological disease and reproductive and developmental impairments.
“We are already seeing increases in health problems such as cancer and neurobehavioural impairments, even though these wireless technologies are fairly new in the last decades or so for the general public. This finding suggests that the exposures are already too high to protect people from health harm. Evidence suggests there are special risks for persons with occupational exposures to RF/MW as well as ELF.”
(Elihu Richter, assoc. professor, Unit of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Hebrew University-Hadassah School of Medicine, Jerusalem, Israel)
Safety standards also ignore the developing fetus, and young children who are more affected.
“Pregnant women and children of all ages should avoid using cell and cordless phones given the health effects we are seeing already.”
(Yuri Grigoriev, professor, Dr of Med Sci, Chairman of Russian National Committee on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection, Moscow, Russian Federation)
Many countries are promoting wireless communications on a community-wide scale for energy management and conservation. The SmartGrid concept could require every home to have a wireless electric and gas meter in place of their existing meters. If implemented, it will greatly increase the intensity of new wireless emissions in homes, schools and every other building that uses electricity and gas.
“WI-FI routers, DECT phones and other wireless devices like baby monitors produce radio frequency emissions that will affect millions of people and babies in their homes, and should be halted until other, less harmful options are investigated.”
(Lukas Margaritis, professor, Department of Cell Biology and Biophysics,?Faculty of Biology,?University of Athens, Athens, Greece)
The Scientific Panel urges a halt to the rollout of new wireless technologies, especially those that cause exposures for pregnant women and for children.
“New, biologically-based exposure limits are crucial to guide new technology development toward solutions that are not harmful to health. The global rollout of wireless technologies has outpaced both health studies and calls for more restrictive public safety limits.”
(Cindy Sage, co-editor of The Bioinitiative Report, MA, Sage Associates,?Santa Barbara, CA, USA)
Copies of the Seletun Scientific Statement [Fragopoulou A, Grigoriev Y, Johansson O, Margaritis LH, Morgan L, Richter E, Sage C. “Scientific panel on electromagnetic field health risks: Consensus points, recommendations, and rationales. Scientific Meeting: Seletun, Norway, November 17-21, 2009”, Rev Environ Health 2010; 25: 307-317] can be obtained from the Karolinska Institute. Contact: Prof. Olle Johansson.
We are correct and wise to be wary. (Ken)
18th May: Some health issues information lifted from the “StopSmartMeters” website:
PLUS from utube: Shown here for assessment, this is a draft post, so bear with me, please.
- Ofgem-certified ‘Smart’ Meter HACKED: “Homes, office buildings, entire neighbours at risk” (oneworldchronicle.com)
- Can Jemena be accused of intimidating and threatening their customers?
- Chicago attorney sues ComEd for delay in smart meter deployment (utilitiesretail.energy-business-review.com)
- Smart Meters – Big Brother In The Home (rinf.com)
- Who controls the [Smart Meter] ‘off’ switch? ~ Prof. Ross Anderson, Cambridge University (oneworldchronicle.com)
- Smart meter protests step up – La Trobe Valley Express (stopsmartmeters.com.au)
- UK Smart Meter Project Delayed Until Autumn 2015 (geeky-gadgets.com)