Just Say No to Big Brother’s Smart Meters by Orlean Koehle
children’s health. It used to be government’s responsibility to provide for the safety of their citizens. That no longer seems to be the case.
Mary Beth Brangan – “The assertion of safety that PG&E is making is based on the assumption that the Smart Meters comply with FCC guidelines in every case. But the FCC guidelines are irrelevant and obsolete. They don’t apply to non-thermal effects – only to what would cook your tissue. But even those obsolete and inadequate FCC guidelines are being violated in many real life circumstances where there are multiple or banks of meters and where children have access to them.”
Merideth MCCarthy, a nutrition counselor: Many people are coming to her for help who are EMF sensitive. She thinks a second “Silent Spring” is going to come because of the smart meters and telecommunication.
Glenn Chase – former professor, worked at a naval post. He said that non-ionizing radiation causes cell damage. What the FCC and PG&E are saying about smart meters is based on invalid science.
Jennifer Delaney from Santa Rosa: “I have spoken to people that say their PG&E bill has gone way up to $400.00 and even $950.00 after they have had their smart meter installed. I also know of people whose health has been greatly impacted, for example: headaches, nausea, not being able to sleep at night, losing weight; some have not been able to hold a job; some believe the radiation is leading to cancer. There is a lower sperm count, and it seems to greatly affect autistic children. Smart Meters definitely harm people.
I think the name "Smart Meter" should be changed to “dangerous meter and expensive, control meter!”
Claudia Vick: “We need to listen to those who have EMF sensitivity. They are like the canaries in the coal mine, warning us about what lies ahead for all of us. Take some leadership. Please support a public hearing on Smart Meters.
The Final Vote: In spite of all the pleading testimonials that the Commission heard from people who were obviously suffering with dire health effects, they voted 4 to 1, to adopt the motion by PG&E and dismissed the request by the EMF Safety Network. They gave as their reasons, the FCC has ruled that the Smart Meters are safe, that “the RF emissions are only 1/6,000th of the Federal health standard at a distance of 10 feet and far below the RF emissions of many commonly used devices.” The report said they would not reopen their prior Smart Meter decisions, and “the proceeding is therefore closed.” The lone no vote was by Nancy Ryan. She said that she is aware of the many benefits. Smart Meters will reduce greenhouse gases. Many people will benefit from knowing how their homes use electricity. But the main reason she was voting no was that she thinks that they should wait for the scientific report to come out. And she is concerned about the privacy concerns. Many think that she was chosen to be the token no vote, just to make us feel a little better. I also found out from a member of EMF Safety Network, Mary Beth Brandon, that she and
many of their group have met personally with the CPUC Commissioners in private meetings where the Commissioners saw graphs and so much scientific information showing how harmful the Smart Meters are, and yet they have blind eyes to what they see and still continue to vote the way they do. Some believe this is all about money. There is much money in the Smart Meters that will be
made by PG&E and the other utility companies. With the information coming to them remotely of each household’s usage, they won’t have to pay for meter readers anymore. There is also much money to be made by the manufacturers of the new appliances requiring RF chips inside, and if some people are correct, the energy usage data being collected by the Smart Meters could be sold 33
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164 |
Page 165