In this, our second guest slot on Deanna’s program, during a week devoted to ‘smart’ meters on her show, we address ‘smart meter’ organizing strategies and successes in California, and the ‘Caught in the Radiation Pollution Cross-Fire Phenomenon.’
This is the potentially synergistic effects of chronic exposure to both ionizing (nuclear) radiation – like the on-going emissions from Fukushima – and non-ionizing (electro-magnetic) radiation – like from cell phones, antennas, cordless phones, wi-fi and ‘smart meters’- all of which can cause double-strand breaks in the DNA of humans and all other living things. Double strand DNA breaks mean more chance for mutation, cancer or cell death and have impacts across generations.
We’re talking about our genetic future here, folks – the biological real ‘bottom line.’
Our work on cross-over issues like nuclear and electromagnetic radiation pollution – as well as on food, water, medicine and energy issues – has brought us in contact with a growing number of new friends who self-identify as being on the ‘right,’ conservative or Tea Party members.
We find this delightful as we mutually agree to put aside knee-jerk reactions to some of the elements in our respective worldviews that don’t exactly jibe (to put it mildly) and focus together on the values, perspectives and objectives on which we CAN wholeheartedly agree. Anyway, how boring to only speak to those who think exactly alike and how exhilarating to expand perspectives in every direction.
[For an interview with Turner on The Integral-Political Imperative,click here.]
We are pleased to count friends of both the Tea Party and OWS persuasions who are uniting in their opposition to mandatory wireless ‘smart metering.’
We reckon whether you believe the ‘smart meter’ build-out is being imposed on the public by:
‘UN Agenda 21’ would-be globalizing elite rulers bent on depopulating the planet of ‘useless eaters’ in the name of ‘sustainability;’ or
Technocratic sociopaths bent on creating a ‘prison planet’ police state of total wireless Big Brother surveillance; or
Telecommunications profiteers bent on wringing a short-term take from a long-term string of ‘un-intended consequences.’ i.e., destruction of our public health and biospheric gene pool; or ….
Just one of the most idiotic, incompetent, ill-considered and irresponsible management and regulatory decisions in the history of corporately-captured governance,
…that our combined resistance is fertile.
Whatever your reason for seeing that the lemming-like rush over the wireless ‘smart’ cliff is actually The New Stupid, we think you’re on the right track.
The following ruling was posted 10/18/2011 by California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) Administrative Law Judge Amy C. Yip-Kikugawa [left] in the proceeding concerning ‘smart meter’ opt-out proposals. They are questions all responsible officials and concerned citizens should be asking. The PDF can be downloaded here.
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE’S RULING SEEKING CLARIFICATION
This Administrative Law Judge’s Ruling (Ruling) seeks clarification from Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E), San Diego Gas & Electric Company (SDG&E), Southern California Edison Company (SCE) and Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas) (collectively, the investor-owned utilities or IOUs) concerning the frequency and duration of radio frequency (RF) emissions from wireless smart meters.1 This clarification shall be filed by November 1, 2011.
On September 14, 2011, I held a combined workshop to consider alternatives for customers who wish to opt-out of a wireless smart meter. Representatives from the IOUs and the smart meter manufacturers2 were present to discuss the technological feasibility and costs of the various alternatives. During the workshop, there were various comments concerning the frequency and duration of the transmissions from the wireless smart meters. According to some parties, the wireless smart meters transmit data in short bursts throughout the day, with each burst lasting a few milliseconds. These parties state that, on average, the cumulative amount of time for the transmission would be 45 seconds a day. Other parties, however, state that while the transmission burst may only last a millisecond, the frequency of the transmission occurs so often that the transmission should be considered constant.
I want to make sure I fully understand this issue. Consequently, I am asking the IOUs to provide further clarification concerning the frequency and duration of the transmissions from the wireless meters and the associated RF emissions. PG&E, SDG&E, SCE and SoCalGas shall, therefore, respond to the following questions:
1. What is an average duration (in seconds) that a residential smart meter transmits in a 24 hour period?
a. How is this average computed or measured?
2. How many times in total (average and maximum) is a smart meter scheduled to transmit during a 24-hour period?
a. How many of those times (average and maximum) are to transmit electric usage information?
b. How many of those times (average and maximum) are for other purposes? What are those other purposes?
Please specify number of times (average and maximum) by type/category of transmission.
3. Under what scenarios does a meter transmit outside of the daily schedule, i.e., unscheduled transmission such as on-demand read, tamper/theft alert, last gasp, firmware
4. Typically, how much of the communication between the customer’s meter and the utility is unscheduled vs. scheduled?
5. Are there any other factors that go into determining duration and/or frequency of meter transmissions (e.g., if a meter can’t access the network when it’s trying to send data, type of a meter etc.)? If yes, please identify these factors.
6. What is the amount of RF emission at the source when a meter is transmitting data (instantaneous maximum peak level, averaged over 30 minutes)?
7. Does the amount of RF emission vary depending on duration of transmission/volume of data being sent? For example, are RF emissions higher when there is a larger volume of data to be transmitted?
8. Are there any other factors that impact the amount of RF emissions? If so, please identify the factor(s) and its impact on RF emissions.
9. Is there RF emission when the meter is not transmitting? If yes, what is the amount of RF emission?
10. Is there a difference in the amount of RF emissions for a wireless smart meter with the radio off and a smart meter with the radio out? If yes, what is that difference and how is it calculated?
11. Is there a difference in the amount of RF emissions for a wireless smart meter with the radio off and an analog meter? If yes, what is that difference and how is it calculated?
As part of their responses to the questions above, the IOUs shall identify
the individual who prepared the response to each question. The IOUs shall file
their responses to the questions listed above by November 1, 2011.
IT IS RULED that by November 1, 2011, Pacific Gas and Electric
Company, San Diego Gas & Electric Company, Southern California Edison
Company, and Southern California Gas Company shall file a response to the
questions concerning radio frequency emissions listed in this Ruling.
Dated October 18, 2011, at San Francisco, California.
/s/ AMY C. YIP-KIKUGAWA
Amy C. Yip-Kikugawa
Administrative Law Judge
As used in this Ruling, a wireless smart meter is a digital electric or gas meter that transmits customer usage data through radio transmission.
The smart meter manufacturer representatives were from ITRON, Silver Spring Networks, and Aclara.
To help keep EON’s work going, please check out all the support options on our Donation Page or you can also send a check made out to EON to EON, POB 1047, Bolinas, CA
Fukushima’s nuclear disaster is a nightmare. Ghostly releases of radioactivity haunt the Japanese countryside. Lives, once safe, are now beset by an ineffable scourge promising vile illness and death.
Large sectors of the population are accumulating significant levels of internal contamination, setting the stage for a public health tragedy.
A subtle increase in the number of miscarriages and fetal deaths will be the first manifestation that something is amiss. An elevated incidence of birth defects will begin in the Fall and continue into the indefinite future. Thyroid diseases, cardiac diseases and elevated rates of infant and childhood leukemia will follow. Over the next decade and beyond, cancer rates will soar.
Chernobyl was the harbinger of this heartbreaking scenario. It taught mankind the inescapable biological truths that emerge within populations internally contaminated by heightened levels of fission products. And yet, government and industry schemers attack these truths as unfounded scare-mongering. With cold indifference, they deny that Chernobyl was a mass casualty event. They turn a blind eye to a huge body of research and deviously proclaim that no evidence exists that more than a handful of people suffered harm from the Ukrainian disaster. They publish propaganda, draped in the guise of science, that dismisses the hazard of low levels of internal contamination. Believing their subterfuge to have been successful and intoxicated by their hubris, they are already positioning themselves to stage-manage the public’s perception of Fukushima.
Japan’s government, its Nuclear Safety Commission, and the Tokyo Electric Power Company have already demonstrated that they will do everything in their power to keep citizens ignorant of what is taking place. The emerging health crisis is scheduled to be erased. Following a time-tested blueprint worked out by prior radiation releases around the world, data relevant to assessing the medical impact of the accident will not be gathered. Radiation doses to the population will be woefully underestimated. The hazards associated with low levels of internal contamination will be obliterated from all discussions of risk. Academic journals that support the nuclear agenda will be flooded with bogus studies demonstrating that no health detriment was suffered by the population. The heightened incidence of childhood leukemia will be attributed to some as yet unidentified virus unleashed by population mixing following the evacuations caused by the tsunami. (This theory is currently in vogue to deny that the heightened incidence of leukemia among children under five years of age living nearby to nuclear reactors is radiation induced.) The birth defects will be summarily dismissed as impossible because the risk models upheld by the International Commission on Radiological Protection don’t predict them. The possibility that the models are fraudulently constructed escapes consideration. (See a Betrayal of Mankind by the Radiation Protection Agencies, available as a free download Here .)
How is TRUTH to gain ascendancy when blocked by this institutionalized matrix of deceit? What agency can possibly take the lead to accurately document the full scope of the disaster, identify its victims and those at risk, and publish trustworthy public health information? Who is going to take responsibility to protect the children? To wait for the government to come to the rescue is naive. The history of radiation accidents testifies that governments routinely betray their citizens in deference to their nuclear weapons program and the nuclear industry. No, only one alternative is open to the people of Japan. They must become proactive. They must seize the initiative and wrest control from government and industry of the “perception” of the catastrophe….
More than 200 people are blockading a nuclear power station in protest at plans to build new reactors at the site.
Members of several anti-nuclear groups who are part of the Stop New Nuclear alliance say they are barring access to Hinkley Point power station in Somerset in protest against EDF Energy’s plans to renew the site with two new reactors.
The new reactors at Hinkley would be the first of eight new nuclear power stations to be built in the UK.
Stop New Nuclear spokesman Andreas Speck said: ”This is the start of a new movement. We intend this day to be a celebration of resistance against the Government and EDF Energy’s plans to spearhead the construction of eight new nuclear power plants around the UK.
‘This is blockade shows that people who understand the true dangers of nuclear power are prepared to use civil disobedience to get their voice heard.
”The Government has hoodwinked the public into believing that we need nuclear power to keep the lights on. But this is totally untrue.”…
Five-hour meeting about lessons learned from Japan’s Fukushima nuclear-plant emergency is occasionally interrupted by critics who don’t believe the speakers’ claims that a similar event is unlikely here and that local plans are adequate.
By FRED SWEGLES / THE ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER
After more than five hours of testimony at a meeting Tuesday night in San Clemente about lessons for the San Onofre nuclear power plant from Japan’s nuclear-plant meltdown in March, a few things were clear:
• Federal regulators believe a similar sequence of events is unlikely here but are recommending that U.S. nuclear power plants reevaluate and, if necessary, upgrade their ability to withstand earthquakes, tsunamis, flooding, prolonged power failures and other emergency scenarios.
Article Tab: san-family-clemente-plant
Doug Beacom of San Diego, carrying a girl he described as a family member, holds up a sign against a backdrop of other signs at Tuesday night’s San Clemente meeting on lessons learned from Japan’s Fukushima nuclear-plant emergency.
Fred Swegles, The Orange County Register
• Southern California Edison believes its San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station 2½ miles south of San Clemente is much better designed to withstand a crippling earthquake and tsunami than the Fukushima plant that was devastated in March by Japan’s magnitude 9.0 earthquake and subsequent tsunami. But Edison, in response to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission initiatives, already is reevaluating the protections built into San Onofre.
• The Interjurisdictional Planning Committee, a group including Edison and several government agencies that would take charge if a San Onofre emergency ever triggers a regional evacuation, believes it’s possible to evacuate a 10-mile radius around San Onofre with coordinated plans in place.
• Many of the 200 or so people who attended Tuesday night’s meeting didn’t buy any of that.
“We have to live with the possibility that we may be the next Fukushima with hot radioactive particles contaminating our families and homes, our ocean, our crops, our schools and playgrounds, our water supply and whatever else the plume encounters as it drifts across the entire country,” said Gary Headrick, leader of the environmental group San Clemente Green.
To help keep EON’s work going, please check out all the support options on our Donation Page or you can also send a check made out to EON to EON, POB 1047, Bolinas, CA
The Wireless/Wall Street Connection – PushBack Furthers
We’re off to Washington, DC to cover the WIRELESS SAFETY SUMMIT. Capitol Hill United Methodist Church, Washington, DC, October 5 & 6, 2011,https://www.centerforsaferwireless.org/Wireless-Safety-Summit.php
Photo: Delegates voting against wireless meters at the Union of B.C. Municipalities Convention
Meanwhile, here’s our latest digest of recent wireless and democracy issues as multiple cities join the Occupy Wall Street movement – wirelessness, witlessness, Wall Street – what’s the connection?:
By Jeff Nagel – BC Local News – CloverdaleReporter.com
Published: September 30, 2011 1:00 PM
Updated: September 30, 2011 1:53 PM
The campaign to derail B.C. Hydro’s rollout of wireless smart meters got a boost from mayors and councillors at the Union of B.C. Municipalities convention Friday.
Delegates voted 55 per cent to support a moratorium on the mandatory installation of smart meters until major issues can be resolved.
“There is an important element of personal choice,” Colwood Coun. Judith Cullington said. “Some people are sensitive to this radiation and only a small amount affects them.”
The Mayors and Councillors of the Canadian Union of British Columbia Municipalities voted for a moratorium on Smart Meters in their province. It was noted that “Some people are sensitive to this radiation and only a small amount affects them.”
There are other intelligent places in the world who look at the facts and advocate a humane approach when considering the effects of technology on large populations
Here, Dr. Maret is interviewed by ElectromagneticHealth.org founder Camilla Rees, MBA on the biological effects of electromagnetic fields. He offers especially valuable perspective given he has both an extensive medical background and a background in electrical engineering and biomedical engineering.
Cell tower plan still sparks anger
Bellier said while heavy cellphone usage has been labelled as “possibly carcinogenic” by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, the term simply …
Smart Meters: not so smart an idea
Naples Daily News (blog)
By Vicki Crawford Not long ago Florida Power and Light sent out a notice to its customers of its plan to upgrade some equipment by replacing the analog electric meters with the new Smart Meters.
I just learned that the Union of BC Municipalities has just passed the motion to ask for a province wide moratorium on the smart meter program until a safe alternative is available. There are many problems with the program, and many of the councillors and mayors had concerns other than health – privacy, cost, lack of democratic process.
An amazing show of democracy. The govt. will try to ignore this vote, but they do it at their peril.
Bolinas Fire Board Aims to Apply the Precautionary Principle By James Heddle and Mary Beth Brangan – EON
After months of grueling work by Fire Board Member David Kimball, local elected official Don Smith, informed, concerned Bolinas citizens, and EON members, the Fire Board came to a conclusion about the proposed new cell antennas requested by AT&T.
(Photo: EON’s Mary Beth Brangan questions Bolinas Fire Board on AT&T antenna plan.}
At last Monday’s meeting the Fire Board voted unanimously to (1) become a co-applicant with AT&T to add three additional antennas, while (2) modifying their contract to include a measuring of the new baseline radiation level and then regular twice a year testing to make sure that antennas emit no more than10% radiation increase over that level.
FB Member David Kimball negotiated the contract amendment with AT&T that stipulates they test their emissions up to twice yearly. The Fire Board will decide when the radiation measurements will be taken. AT&T will hire the actual testing engineer.
Don Smith, a retired engineer and Member of the Bolinas Public Ulitlites District (BPUD) has worked diligently for months with the engineering particulars and has worked out a way of hopefully reducing RF exposure at Mesa Park.
Don’s proposal – for which he invites peer feedback – is an antenna arrangement in collaboration with AT&T that uses a more efficient antenna for part of the old GSM (G2) signal and tilts the antennas up further towards the horizon so that the radiation on the ground at Mesa Park locations should be reduced.
If Don’s plan is valid (and we sincerely hope it is) it represents a breakthrough: AT&T has agreed to modulate and adjust its RF emission patterns in response to public concerns about biological and health impacts and will have periodic testing of compliance.
With Don’s wholehearted cooperation, we’ve engaged another qualified professional to review his work. We hope Don’s approach will prove accurate and provide a model for other communities. We’ll report what we find out from the engineer’s report.
Our concern about adding more complex radiation from the new antennas from the UMTS signal (G#3) – it’s efficiency is gained by more pulsing that will cause more complex biological effects – is mixed with gratitude for the progress made by David and Don.
The result hopefully is a reduction of the ground radiation around the site where the fire house, playground, health clinic and ball fields are. Also hopefully, the negotiating by David Kimball will force AT&T to stay within 10% of the new radiation levels, that, according to Don’s calculations, should be lower than before.
Don Smith and the Fire Board also intend to investigate what Verizon’s antennas emit and if they too could be improved.
This work by Don and the Fire Board is an important and appreciated improvement, but not a panacea. Our continuing concern is that there’s not a strictly linear dose response with RF radiation. There are windows of extremely low exposure levels that cause biological effects. Studies show long term exposure to low levels is as harmful as short term exposure to high levels. This is not ‘fearmongering.’ This is fact.
Plus more levels of RF radiation continue to be added to public exposure further causing biologically complex signals from, among other sources, ‘smart’ meters.
In addition to our forced involuntary public exposures from cell towers and ‘smart’ meters, we hope more people become aware of how their personal choices of wireless devices affect them, such as cell phones, wi-fi routers left on all the time as well as cordless phones, which are like having cell phone antennas in your house.
We sincerely appreciate the time and effort the Fire Board and Don put into the resolution of this difficult situation. We understand that this has been a grueling effort by the Fire Board, especially since they are not as convinced as we are about the risk from RF radiation.
So despite being thrust into this unwanted position, the Fire Board has struck a Precautionary Principle compromise between community concern and what their attorney advised were their contract obligations.
Next week we’re off to cover a Summit on Wireless Safety in Washington, D.C. We’ll report back to you on the latest when we return.
Meanwhile, please check out our latest blog posts: