This story was covered by the Phoenix AZ Fox affiliate a couple of weeks ago. It was subsequently removed from their website for a while but is apparently back up now. The comparison between the levels of radiation from a smart meter and from a cell phone are fabricated nonsense, something we’ve come to expect from the utility industry. Thank you to Dr. David Carpenter for being outspoken about this issue and standing up for science and public health!
It seems that utility companies just can’t quit their microwave addiction. Unconfirmed, breaking news from San Diego indicates that ‘analog’ meters being offered to customers for sizeable fees as an ‘opt out’ are in fact still emitting microwave radiation. Sue Brinchman, the Director of the Center for Electrosmog Prevention– who has suffered from health effects from the smart meter on her wall, and was relieved when SDG&E was ordered to offer an ‘opt out’ to its customers- posted the video above and reports that her new “analog” meter is still emitting pulses of radiation.
We are receiving other similar reports from around the country. Residents must exercise due diligence. We repeat- DO NOT TRUST anything the utilities tell you regarding the safety or emissions of ANY new meters they wish to install on your home or business. The only way to verify that a meter is safe is to purchase an EMF analyzer yourself or to hire an independent expert. Even meters that appear to be safe may be hiding a transmitter that can make you sick. Sadly, any trust that the public had for the utility industry has been completely betrayed by the lies and the fabrications that have been used to sell the smart grid. Any analog meter accepted from the utility should be subjected to independent testing and analysis, and deconstruction. The burden to prove that any meter is safe should fall on the reckless utility industry itself rather than ratepayers.
We also have heard that RF is “leaking” onto household wiring and analog meters from adjacent smart meters and data collector unit antennas. A resident of Monterey CA writes:
I seem to remember taking readings with my RF Field Strength meter of both my electric and natural gas meters before Smart Meter deployment, and not getting anything.
This week, I went out and measured both meters. The electric meter is registering between .047 to .067 microW/cm2 against the glass, depending on how I orient the gauge.
However, the gas meter at the face is registering from approx. .719 to 1 microW/cm2. The various pipes read some high, and some lower — none as high as next to the part with the little wheels.
This is very strange and alarming. I’ve checked both meters, and don’t immediately see anything new or added, especially to the gas meter. I’m wondering if this is RF coming in on the gas lines, which I understand are made of black iron.
If you have RF gauges and have natural gas meters, would you please check them and see if you also get RF readings?”
Please write in and let us know if you measure any emissions from a meter that appears to be analog on the outside.
We were heartened to hear that the City of Ashland Oregon has approved a no-fee opt out, but unfortunately it appears that their “opt out” is a radio off digital meter- the kind with a switching mode power supply that has been associated with adverse health consequences. This is being referred to as a “scam meter.”
In California, Burbank, Glendale and Sacramento Municipal Utility District approved this kind of “option.” Las Virgenes Municipal Water District in Southern California is also now seeking to get approval for this kind of opt out. We believe Naperville, IL as well.
DANGER ALERT: More utilities and local governments may start approving or trying to approve this kind of BAD option! Be aware that they are trying to scam unaware customers. Meters that use BPL (broadband over power line) that utilities claim are “safer, wired versions” should also NOT be considered safe. When it comes to your utility, caveat emptor (buyer beware). Their word is no longer good.
Here is the letter Sue Brinchman wrote to her utility, exasperated at having paid her opt out fee and still being exposed.
Dear SDG&E,
I have received an Elster analog meter that is consistently showing RF emissions of from 0.048 up to 0.200 microwatts per cm2, measured by my TenMars Rf Field Meter (TM-195). This analog replaced the SDG&E smart meter just a little over a week ago. The purpose of using analogs is to avoid RF radiation – and the one I have been given has excessive RF. I note that in the Elster manual for this particular model it is possible to add a radio inside in the field. I am not sure (yet) of the source of the RF emitting from the analog, but I do know that I measured several others (both Elsters) and these did NOT emit the RF radiation like mine.
Therefore I request an ABB meter or GE, out of the box, no special “parts” ordered for mine, as I had been told on the phone was being done. I would like to see the Elster meter disassembled here to check it also for the source of the RF and for SDG&E to come out and test.
The gas “analog” meter also emits RF at the level of 0.035 microwatts per cm2. So does another identical model analog gas meter that another La Mesan has received. This is wrong, as RF is what we want to avoid. That same person’s electric meter, an Elster, measured 0.001 microwatts per cm2, two hundred times less than the one on my home. I still cannot use my bedroom, and this has gone on now for 1.5 years.
I want an analog that does not emit RF for electric AND gas, and the electric analog meter MUST be changed out promptly to the ABB or GE analogs, older models, that I understand people are also receiving. I am CCing Brad McLellan of Channel 10 News, Miriam Raftery of East County Magazine, Ken Stone, Regional Director of the Patch, and will be contacting Michael Turko as well as other media, and my attorney, Martin Homec. I am also Ccing the Administrative Law Judge, Amy Yip-Kikugawa. I understand that the electric meter may be a “hybrid” and I don’t want it.
I realize that I am a Party to the Opt-out Proceeding and have been informing the public about the dangers of smart meters and that SDG&E may not be pleased with that. BUT I do want to be treated equally well and receive a comparable analog meter with no RF’s. A true analog does not have this. I am very sensitive to RF radiation now that the smart meter exposure has occurred and I expect nothing but an analog without it for both gas and electric.
Lastly, I have been told (and had it confirmed by numerous people at SDG&E answering the phones) that I am only allowed to speak with the SDG&E director of the opt-out program, Tessa Howard, no one else is allowed to speak to me at SDG&E This was read from the computer screen. I object to that sort of discriminatory treatment. I wish to be treated according to the law and like any other customer. I am a senior, and a disabled person with multiple medical conditions, in addition, and cannot have my health nor rights continued to be stomped on.
I expect that this situation will be swiftly rectified. I would like to be called immediately to be informed about what actions SDG&E can do to replace these RF-emitting analog meters.
Sincerely,
Susan Brinchman
For whatever reason, utilities feel it is essential to expose as many people as possible to pulsed microwave radiation in their homes- if necessary by deception, subterfuge and trickery- even if someone is paying a hefty fee for the ‘privilege’ of opting out.
This audio of a meeting of the Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) did the rounds a few weeks back, but we wanted to highlight it as an example of the callous disregard of the utility industry for the medical requirements and safety of its customers. One Participant (a director of the utility?) is heard discussing the opt out fee that is being proposed:
“I think the 166 dollars up front will convince them they can really afford a lot of tin foil hats.” Another participant: “But they’re already wearing them.”
This is at about 1:10–to 1:15-and continues on for quite awhile.
We here at Stop Smart Meters! felt like this was pretty filthy and inhumane way to treat people who are communicating with the utility about their health. We contacted SMUD spokesman Chris Capra today and asked him if it was SMUD policy to ridicule its customers with disabilities. He expressed no regret or apology and told SSM! these comments were “made in response to those who have overreacted (to the deployment)” When asked whether he thought the World Health Organization (pdf) and American Association of Environmental Medicine were also overreacting, he stated that SMUD looks to the FCC for guidance on health-related matters. This, despite the fact that as we reported in March, the FCC does not have any medical professionals on staff.
The utility seems to be trying to make it look like they are being fair and sensitive to customers— while at the same time reducing the number of people who will opt out. This is yet more evidence that ‘opt out’ fees being charged by utilities are punitive in nature instead of actually reflecting any real cost incurred by a customer’s choice. These executives likely took economics in college, and are accustomed to using a demand response logic to suppress or increase demand for a particular product. Price goes up, fewer people will choose to buy a product. Price goes down- demand is stimulated. Never mind that this particular product someone is being forced to pay for is something they have always had for free- a living environment where they can choose how much carcinogenic radiation they want to be exposed to. That’s capitalism for you- charge people for what they have always had for free- pure water, exercise, even air.
What’s even more egregious is that the “opt out” being offered by SMUD is a “radio off” smart meter, a kind of meter implicated in health problems associated with the switching mode power supply common in digital meters and other electronic devices.
According to the tape, SMUD wants to “periodically” make price adjustments based on participation. They are, however, very concerned that social media and publicity will mean more people will want to opt out of smart meters. If that happens, they don’t want to lower the cost. So they want to set it up so that the cost can go up (only up) if fewer people actually opt out–but not go down. If for example a lot of people actually (via social media) were to get on board–then that would be “damaging to the project.” Of course the fact that no one was “offered the meters” as stipulated in the 2005 Federal Energy Act is conveniently left out of the discussion.
Their goal is clearly to kill the opt out. One of the SMUD staff even says–if it gets to a low enough number such as 90 people, then they will be moved to a smart meter:
“The remaining 90 customers must move to a smart meter or tell them they will increase it by quite a bit.”
Here’s another quote:
“(We’ve got to be) making sure we’re not making it too easy for customer to go along with the program–but not be responsive to customers who think. . .. this is a right balance $124.00 and $54.00 a month [!] is going to be very expensive for the vast majority of our customers. . .We’re willing to work with you. More than that money would look so cost prohibitive, would look like we’re not going to give them an option.”
Are these guys former tobacco company executives?
They discuss the letter that they plan to send out to customers. They want as much as possible to keep this “under the radar”(one actually used that phrase). So they will only send the information about the opt out to people already on the list. They say they will not advertise it on their web site.
They discuss how to handle this with the press/Sacramento Bee. One Participant:
“Smud adopts opt Out–working to have a neutral story–giving the messaging point we would discuss today. We would not communicate or discuss with the press the nuances of different rate options. We would simply be very direct and focused. This is our opt out policy (on lots of complicated issues been able to mitigate and neutralize the press. . .) Story would pretty much be a non story very quickly.”
Another:
“A bridging effort toward getting everyone on the smart meter grid. . .If someone feels trapped in their home, they may feel trapped in their home for a whole host of reasons.
The trapped discussion has to do with the fact that they are making this such a narrow opt out that someone will not be able to move to a different home if they are electrosensitive. Lovely.
More SMUG from SMUD:
“The program has a sunset clause–opt in prior to end of year–Closed after that.”
“After 9 months no new enrollments” [This is so the social media doesn’t get onto it. So they are making it available in a very small window period.]
What to do with recalcitrant customers who don’t want them to come onto their property or refuse (they will be using a lap top computer and an optical reader to read the radio off smart meter option.) (Turn off Power or call the Sheriff)
“under the radar.” “the less that’s said about this (opt out option) the better”
Eric Krause the SM project manager went on record saying:
“We don’t want to call all customers about the opt out (option) But only those who have already objected. We are not going to tell everybody”………”Our tactic is to target only the 2300 customers that refused. We want very limited communication and nothing on our (Smud.org) web site.”
This tape is both tragic and enlightening. Because SMUD is a public agency, their meetings are recorded and open to the public. If this is what utility directors are saying in public, we can only imagine what private utility corporations are saying behind closed doors.
Give it up for this new dynamic duo from Marina, CA. Who knew that Elvis Presley would be roused from the dead by the smart grid? Elvis and his partner Anna Log Meter give the utilities a run for their money. PG&E should never have stepped on these blue suede shoes.
USE OF THIS SITE DEPENDS ON AGREEMENT WITH OUR DISCLAIMER: This website is intended to help advance knowledge and contribute to public awareness. While all reasonable precautions have been taken to ensure the validity of the information given, no warranty is given of its accuracy. It is not intended to substitute for medical or legal advice nor as a final statement with regard to possible prevention and avoidance recommendations or potential biological effects. No liability is accepted by the authors for damages arising from its use or misuse and interpretation by others. All references to smart meters refer to digital, wireless and powerline carrier (PLC) devices, which may vary in their emissions and frequencies. All content on this site is copyrighted by StopSmartMeters.org unless otherwise indicated. Brief (max 3 sentences) excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to StopSmartMeters.org with appropriate and specific links to the original content. All other uses are prohibited, unless specific and written permission from StopSmartMeters.org is provided.
