.

Smart Meter Nightmare #2: San Diego Man Sick From Bank of Meters

A San Diego man falls ill after a bank of smart meters is installed on his apartment. He has suffered for nearly one year, without help from SDG&E to remove them, even with a doctor's note.

The following is a letter from Steve, a young man who lives in an apartment right next to four of San Diego Gas & Electric's radiation-emitting smart meters. He and his doctors say these meters are making him very ill. His letter, photo, and documents are provided herein with Steve's permission.

Steve shared his story with me after we were introduced through the EMF Safety Network in Northern CA, when I asked to contact other San Diegans who were ill from these terrible devices. , SDG&E seemed to show zero concern for Steve's health complaints.

Unlike other utiltiies around the nation, they didn't make a single effort to remove the offending smart meters. In fact, SDG&E has not installed them for people with pre-existing health conditions that precluded installation - but once on, they won't remove them even if the medical condition gets very serious, or one develops.

This is shocking treatment by a company that advertises itself as consumer-friendly, and there is no reason I can fathom for this, as it is definitely not true that the meters are mandatory. SDG&E has only been authorized to install them, which is a long way from mandatory. This behavior makes no sense if a person is ill and the meters, especially with a doctor confirming it, are ruining a person's health or places his life in danger.

In fact, the CPUC and SDG&E's conduct is absurd and warrants an investigation. No one would normally think that harming someone is acceptable, directly, or indirectly. But see what you think. This is Steve's letter to us, and then we'll show you the SDG&E letters, which are just like what I received, at right, in Media - Documents, pages 1 and 2.

Do you know that Governor Jerry Brown will not answer questions about the people sick and begging for help from these smart meters? Neither will any politicians except local ones, in 46 municipalities, to date, where smart meter installations have been criminalized, banned, or an opt-out requested.

We'd like to hear your commentary on this question, especially: "Do you think that a customer be treated like this by our state government agencies or  ANY company, particularly if the customer has health issues already and a note from his doctor?" Are you surprised?

-------------------------

"To Whomever it may concern,                                                                   November 10, 2010

 

On September 29, 2010 at least 4 Smart Meters were installed on my apartment building on the wall just below my Unit. That very day I woke up with a swollen wrist for absolutely no physical reason. I opened my front door and found the notice that the Smart Meters were installed.

My wrist and hand swelled so badly that I had to get a cortisone shot. Then, I got sick with sinus problems and a respiratory attack. One occurred after the other, and both conditions are still with me 3 weeks later. I have never been sick for more than one week in my entire life. I have heart palpitations and an erratic heart beat, along with insomnia. The latest affliction since the Meters were installed is Phantosmia, which I have never had before and will not go away.

I am EMF sensitive and these Smart Meters are ruining my health, my living conditions, and my life. We are being bombarded with Microwave EMF from these Meters from all directions without our knowledge or consent. Since I am EMF sensitive I have chosen to never use WiFi or any other wireless technology in my apartment. With these Smart Meters I have no say in the matter and I am being slowly tortured by SDGE and the CPUC. This is an outrageous intrusion into our lives and a danger to the health of everyone in San Diego and wherever these Meters operate. Those of us who are EMF sensitive have an early warning system built in and we know what these meters are doing to our health. Those who aren’t as sensitive or may not realize that they are will not realize that the Meters their utility forced upon them are making them ill and even slowly killing them.

Rest assured that word is getting out about the dangers of these Meters. I am requesting that the Meters attached to my building get replaced by the old Analogue Meters so I can get my life back. If you care about the health of all of our citizens you will see to it that the Smart Meters all get replaced by the old Analogue Meters.

Please realize that the Smart Meters aren’t smart at all and that a mistake has been made. This decision can be reversed before any more damage is done.

 

Sincerely,

 

Steven G.

San Diego, CA 92109"

-----------------------------

Steve has been suffering now for nearly exactly a year. We can only imagine how hard that has been for him, with the symptoms described above. I can imagine it well, as and he has four.

Steve further writes, in a letter to another publication:


"The only purpose of these Meters is to get rid of the Meter readers and to be able to watch everything we do and control it. Not only are the Meters dangerous to our health they also leave us open to hacking into the electrical grid. of all the
boneheaded, dangerous, willfully harmful and disgusting things our Government
has done this almost tops the polluting of our food supply with GMO's.
You can write to Ted Reguly, the head of the Smart Meter program for SDGE, but
he will reply with a cold blooded indifference to our health. We should all get
together and file a class action lawsuit against SDGE and CPUC."

----------------------------------------------

Perhaps some of our Readers are attorneys or other professionals who would also like to respond. People are suffering by the many thousands, in our area alone, and without help. This is unprecedented, and is not something we should tolerate - or what kind of country will we have? No better than Libya has been, if ordinary citizens - or anyone - can endure unrelenting, torturous harm from utility devices paid for in part by our government, attached to our homes - with no safe place to escape.

Note: The US DOE and Congress never said wireless had to be used. In fact, they said that consumers should have a choice in the matter, and not to be heavy-handed about barging into people's homes with new smart meters (which again, were not specified to be wireless). It was the California CPUC that approved wireless after the CA utlities requested to use it. That is where the trouble began and continues to fester.

To watch an interview Steve gave last winter to Jeanne Rawdin, of San Diego Insider, click here.

Visit www.electrosmogprevention.org and www.smartmeterdangers.org for more info.

Open Letter to the La Mesa City Council: Tell SDG&E to Stop the Smart Meters - 29 Comments

Living Nightmare: How SDG&E Smart Meter Led to Headaches, Hearing Loss
- 99 comments


Message for SDG&E: Allow Opt-outs from Smart Meters - 6 comments  

--------------------------------------

Forcing Smart Meters on Citizens in Santa Cruz County, this Week:

http://stopsmartmeters.org/2011/08/20/account-of-forced-%E2%80%98smart%E2%80%99-meter-installation-in-santa-cruz-county/

-----------------------------------------------------

THE FOLLOWING FEDERAL AND STATE LAWS PROVE THAT WE DO NOT HAVE TO HAVE SMART METERS ON OUR HOMES, DESPITE STATEMENTS TO THE CONTRARY BY THE CPUC AND SDG&E, IN WRITING AND ORALLY.

CITIZENS SHOULD DEMAND, OF SDG&E AND CPUC TO SEE THE LAWS THAT SHOW THEY MUST HAVE WIRELESS METERS ON THEIR HOMES. (THOSE LAWS DON'T EXIST.)

Federal Smart Grid Laws and Policies

1. Smart Grid not required for states or utilities, only to be considered, according to this Federal Law, part of the Energy Act of 2007. Must demonstrate societal benefit (and making people ill is not a benefit to society). Utilities not required to participate, they must only show they have considered the benefits of the smart grid, including societal benefit. (SB) -------------------------------------------------------

Click here: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_cong_bills&docid=f:h6enr.txt.pdf   page 25 - Title XIII: Smart Grid 

Click here: http://www.nist.gov/smartgrid/upload/EISA-Energy-bill-110-140-TITLE-XIII.pdf   SEC. 1307. STATE CONSIDERATION OF SMART GRID.
(a) Section 111(d) of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of
1978 (16 U.S.C. 2621(d)) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
`(16) CONSIDERATION OF SMART GRID INVESTMENTS-
`(A) IN GENERAL- Each State shall consider
requiring that, prior to undertaking investments in
nonadvanced grid technologies, an electric utility of
the State demonstrate to the State that the electric
utility considered an investment in a qualified smart
grid system based on appropriate factors, including--
`(i) total costs;
`(ii) cost-effectiveness;
`(iii) improved reliability;
`(iv) security;
`(v) system performance; and
`(vi) societal benefit.
`(B) RATE RECOVERY- Each

2. CEP NOTE: WIRELESS IS CLEARLY A LOCAL DECISION AND A CHOICE, ACCORDING TO NIST = National Institute of Standards and Technology - EISA specified that NIST come up with standards and guidelines ------------------------------    

http://collaborate.nist.gov/twiki-sggrid/bin/view/SmartGrid/PAP02Wireless   Click here: PAP02Wireless < SmartGrid < TWiki   Decision making on Wireless technologies remains a local decision. This requires the industry to understand the techniques and tools available in these guidelines.

  ----------------------------------

Click here: PAP02Wireless < SmartGrid < TWiki

Where:

Wireless can be used in field environments across the Smart Grid including generation plants, transmission systems, substations, distribution systems, and customer premises communications. The choice of wireless or non-wireless, as well as type of wireless must be made with knowledge of the appropriate use of the technology.

CEP Note: we'd have to say that in CA, the utilities have done a very, very poor job, as the technology is making people ill.

-----------------------------

3. US DOE (DEPT OF ENERGY) Smart Grid RFI

(see attached Media - Documents)
Titled “Addressing Policy and Logistical Challenges to Smart Grid Implementation” Submitted by the Demand Response and Smart Grid Coalition (DRSG)
November 1, 2010  

p. 11  However, we note that even though universal participation is not necessary, universal access to demand response opportunities (e.g., ubiquitous HAN-enabled smart meters) is appropriate, for reasons of network connectivity and equity  

p. 13 Moreover, what role do factors like the trust, consumer control, and civic participation play in shaping consumer participation in demand response, time-varying pricing, and energy efficiency programs?


Trust, consumer control, and civic participation are all important factors in these programs. Consumers have a high level of trust in information from their utilities; it is important to maintain this trust and take advantage of it in
providing new data and programs to consumers.  

p.16

12. What are the implications of these insights for determining which tasks are best automated and which should be subject to consumer control?
The key point is that consumers should be making the determinations of which tasks are best automated or left to manual control; regulators should enable the infrastructure but allow consumers to decide. For those customers who choose to automate, simplicity in establishing settings and defaults is paramount, and the easier the better and the more effective.  

p.17 That said, it is important to state that the key to achievement of a smart grid and the widespread adoption of smart grid practices is to not treat all customers the same and to not expect that all customers will want the same thing or accept the same thing.  

p.21 How does the notion that only some customers might opt-in to consumer-facing smart grid programs affect the costs and benefits of AMI deployments?
Universal participation in smart grid programs, such as demand response, is not required to make smart meters useful, as these devices provide important benefits besides enabling demand response (e.g., operational savings from reduced meter reading, field collection, and outage detection and management costs). In fact, it is widely-recognized that neoclassical supply-and-demand economics reveals that demand response from even a subset of consumer benefits all consumers by reducing high marginal electricity prices, in addition to the even larger cost savings in the long-run associated with deferred and/or avoided peak capacity infrastructure. However, we note that even though universal participation is not necessary, universal access to demand response opportunities (e.g., ubiquitous HAN-enabled smart meters) is appropriate, for reasons of network connectivity and equity.  

p. 26

23. How should regulators address customer segments that might not use smart grid technologies?
We encourage engagement and education to make non-participating customers aware of the opportunities to become involved in smart grid programs, but advise that such outreach be conducted with a light hand.
Universal participation in smart grid programs, such as demand response, is not required to make smart meters useful, as these devices provide important benefits besides enabling demand response that do not require customer interaction (e.g., operational savings from reduced meter reading, field collection, and outage detection and management costs). In fact, it is widely-recognized that neoclassical supply-and-demand economics reveals that demand response, from even a subset of consumers, benefits all consumers by reducing high marginal electricity prices, in addition to the even larger cost savings in the long-run associated with deferred and/or avoided peak capacity infrastructure. However, we note that even though universal participation is not necessary, universal access to demand response opportunities (e.g., ubiquitous HAN-enabled smart meters) is appropriate, for reasons of network connectivity and equity.   Dan Delurey
President
Demand Response and Smart Grid Coalition
Dan.delurey@drsgcoalition.org
202-296-1640

------------
CA State Law:

CEP Note: The utilities and CPUC are required to implement the law that makes the smart grid a standard in CA (not mandatory, but a general standard), requires safety for customers (and workers). It was designed to be implemented incrementally and studied (we are being experimented on as a result). But despite early indications of many health problems, the smart meters were continued to be installed by SDG&E and PG&E, with SCE trailing behind. It is CEP's position that SDG&E's smart meters are not safe and therefore not in compliance with state law.

1. Senate Bill No. 17 (Smart Grid Law in CA)
CHAPTER 327
An act to add Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 8360) to Division
4.1 of the Public Utilities Code, relating to electricity.
[Approved by Governor October 11, 2009. Filed with
Secretary of State October 11, 2009.]   Click here: http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/sen/sb_0001-0050/sb_17_bill_20091011_chaptered.pdf   8363. This chapter shall be implemented in a manner that does not
compromise customer
or worker safety or the integrity or reliability of the
electrical transmission and distribution system in this state.

2. CPUC analyzes the above law and takes a position on smart grid and smart metering:

Item 60 (8434)
379517
STATE OF CALIFORNIA Public Utilities Commission
San Francisco
M e m o r a n d u m
Date: April 7, 2009
To: The Commission
(Meeting of April 16, 2009)
From: Pamela Loomis, Director
Office of Governmental Affairs (OGA) — Sacramento
Subject: SB 17 (Padilla) – Electricity: Smart Grid Systems.
As Introduced: December 1, 2008
LEGISLATIVE SUBCOMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: SUPPORT WITH
AMENDMENTS  

CEP Note: The three IOU's include SDG&E, PG&E, and SCE. Helpful sections, below:   1. Section 8360 of SB17 requires that the plan be safe. That is the basis of CEP's Consoliated Protest to the three IOU deployment plans. (see Media docs)  2. This bill reveals that it - SB17 - requires IOU's deploy smart grid plans, when federal law only requires consideration of doing so. The state law is not based on federal mandate to choose smart grid, but CPUC tells us that it is a federal mandate.   3. Each IOU is authorized to deploy AMI (smart) meters (not required to, for every household). Again, misinformation coming from the CPUC and utilities. It is quite apparent that each utility could authorize optouts according to this bill, does not need permission to do otherwise, authorized does not mean required. THERE IS NO LAW THAT REQUIRES EVERYONE HAVE A SMART METER.   

Click here: http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/word_pdf/REPORT/99434.pdf  

p. 3  

Publicly-owned Utilities: The bill directs publicly-owned utilities (POUs) with more than 100,000 service connections to develop a Smart Grid deployment plan by July 2011 consistent with federal law. SB 17’s requirement that POUs be compliant only with federal law could be interpreted to mean that they only consider Smart Grid
investments, and not be required to actually deploy any Smart Grid infrastructure.
IOU plans must be deployed and also be consistent with Section 8360 of SB 17. (note by CEP: this section requires it be safe)
Section 8360 establishes as state policy the modernization of the electric grid and
provides ten objectives of the Smart Grid such as the integration of renewable power, incorporation of demand-side resources, and deployment of cost-effective technologies to increase efficiency, security and reliability.  

p. 3  

Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) proceedings: In 2004, the CPUC directed the
three largest IOUs to submit AMI business cases along with full deployment proposals for the purpose of advancing the CPUC’s policy to expand demand response in the state. The AMI proceedings are now final, with each IOU being given the authorization to deploy smart meters throughout their territories. The deployment of smart meters is expected to be complete by 2012.

This post is contributed by a community member. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Patch Media Corporation. Everyone is welcome to submit a post to Patch. If you'd like to post a blog, go here to get started.

Heidi Bentz August 22, 2011 at 06:37 PM
Thank you for sharing your story, Steve. In our increasingly wireless society, it is becoming near impossible to avoid non-thermal radiation exposure. We need to continue to tell our stories and petition the powers that be to consider the effects of radiation from smart meters and cell phone tower installations. The rest of the industrialized world recognizes the risks such technology presents, and in time, our society will wake up to this truth. Till then, let's fight the fight.
Susan Brinchman August 22, 2011 at 08:00 PM
La Mesans for health and against smart meters - contact me at director@electrosmogprevention.org, Center for Electrosmog Prevention, a national nonprofit based in La Mesa, CA (Susan Brinchman)
Don Lambert. August 22, 2011 at 11:34 PM
The Constitution of California guarantees to every property owner the inalienable right to defend and protect his or her property against any incursion that might adversely affect safety and health. Because Smartmeters have been shown to adversely impact the health of some people, the suspicion on the part of any property owner that it might have long or short term adverse affects would be sufficient to refuse installation, under the Constitution. Here is the legal authority for the above assertion. At the constitutional level -- Constitutional property protections Article 1, Section 1 of the California Constitution states that all people have the inalienable rights to defending life and liberty, and acquiring and protecting property and safety.
Scott H. Kidwell August 23, 2011 at 02:10 AM
If one is truly ill from smart meters just take SDG&E to civil court and prove the case. Given that California has more lawyers than anywhere else there should be no shortage of attorney's willing to take the case on a contingency basis.
Susan Brinchman August 23, 2011 at 03:41 AM
Preventing Installations of Smart Meters 101: for those who don't have one yet People in many areas of CA are protecting their analog meters from being changed out to smart meters by chaining and locking them to the electric box, fencing them off with a locked gate, or building a box around them with just the face showing. Here is an example: http://stopsmartmeters.org/2011/03/01/defend-your-analog-meter/ (there are four parts to that article). http://stopsmartmeters.org/2011/04/28/defend-your-analog-meter-part-ii/ , http://stopsmartmeters.org/2011/05/11/defend-your-analog-meter-part-iii/ , http://stopsmartmeters.org/2011/08/15/defend-your-analog-meter-part-iv/ This is one way people stave off the installations. Some landlords build a locked cage around all the analog (older style) meters to protect their renters (so they don't have to move).
Susan Brinchman August 23, 2011 at 03:42 AM
There is one class action lawsuit going on now (for two years) and the judgement has been, so far, that CPUC has jurisdiction, not the civil courts, it is my understanding. The attorneys shy away from these types of cases, as issues like that make it unclear.
Susan Brinchman August 23, 2011 at 03:46 AM
Preventing Installations of Smart Meters 101: for those who don't have one yet People in many areas of CA are protecting their analog meters from being changed out to smart meters by chaining and locking them to the electric box, fencing them off with a locked gate, or building a box around them with just the face showing. Here is an example: http://stopsmartmeters.org/2011/03/01/defend-your-analog-meter/ (there are four parts to that article). http://stopsmartmeters.org/2011/04/28/defend-your-analog-meter-part-ii/ , http://stopsmartmeters.org/2011/05/11/defend-your-analog-meter-part-iii/ , http://stopsmartmeters.org/2011/08/15/defend-your-analog-meter-part-iv/ This is one way people stave off the installations. Some landlords build a locked cage around all the analog (older style) meters to protect their renters (so they don't have to move). Forcing Smart Meters on Citizens in Santa Cruz County, this Week: http://stopsmartmeters.org/2011/08/20/account-of-forced-%E2%80%98smart%E2%80%99-meter-installation-in-santa-cruz-county/
Scott H. Kidwell August 23, 2011 at 05:19 AM
If you are referring to the suit brought by the City and County of San Francisco that is indeed with the CPUC. That particular suit involves 33 (at least) complaints including billing errors. What I am suggesting is that if one person has more than anecdotal evidence or a simple statistical correlation proving a causal relationship between being within a certain distance of a particular smart meter for a certain time while it sends it's information via the alleged offending method and a particular ailment not otherwise suffered from other EMF issues surrounding the person, that may be a justified civil case because of a specific harm. Additionally, encouraging people to place makeshift and unlisted (unapproved) barriers on or around electric and gas meters, owned by the utility company, that prevent access for legal authorized service and emergency purposes is highly irresponsible and dangerous for obvious reasons.
Steven Golden August 23, 2011 at 05:28 AM
You're welcome. We need to find the energy to fight the power, because the power is no longer in the hands of the people. The corruption from the Feds is out of control and you can see it on the local level with CPUC, SDGE and the City Council approving fluoridation of our already pathetic water supply. Chloramines, fluoride, GMO's, radiating food, antibiotics and hormones in the food supply, etc. It's just sad what's become of this country.
Susan Brinchman August 23, 2011 at 05:39 AM
Electromagnetic Fields: the Science on Human Health Effects With Ted Litovitz, Physicist and EMR Researcher, Catholic University, Washington, DC addresses Congressional staff 2001, produced 2007 Informational documentary VERY PERTINENT TO HELP US UNDERSTAND SOME OF THE MECHANISMS WHEREBY CHRONIC SMART METER EXPOSURES ARE PRODUCING HEALTH EFFECTS http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7498052433339986964&hl=en# Learn about the health effects of electromagnetic radiation, the relationship of biological effects to health effects, how EMR Can cause DNA breaks and cancers, how it can make strokes and heart attacks worse, its role in premature aging. (note how people are saying their young dogs have gone gray, as mine has) Dr. Litovitz explains how regular exposure to EMR has proven to be far worse than occasional exposures. Finally, he covers the topic of what must be considered before making laws that impact some negatively "for the greater good". Dr. Litovitz died in 2006, according to the video. I wonder what he might have thought of the terrible, sadistic EMR experiment called "smart grid" that is being forced on the American public today. Radiofrequency waves are electromagnetic fields (WHO) http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs193/en/index.html
Susan Brinchman August 23, 2011 at 06:07 AM
Smart meters emit more rf radiation than cell phones by two orders of magnitude http://www.smartmeterdangers.org/index.php/smart-meter-research/83-sm-worse-than-cellphones
Susan Brinchman August 23, 2011 at 06:22 AM
I am referring to the case: Pete Flores vs. PG&E filed Oct. 16, 2009, atty's Kirtland and Packard represent the plaintiff(s), El Segundo. I am told that this involves Bakersfield complainants. Regarding encouragement, I am educating people on what thousands of others have done to prevent smart meters from being installed. It is their choice. Freedom of speech. My particular opinion is that if I had known of that option, I sure would have used it, as it would have beat getting sick like this from the smart meters. Individual choice. It would be helpful to focus on the problem of the smart meters and the solution - removal of the wireless. That is precisely why an administrative law judge has ordered SDG&E to attend (even though they tried to get out of it) to discuss opt-out options. The meeting will be webcast via cpuc.ca.gov site.
Chris August 23, 2011 at 05:02 PM
Scott is incorrect about lawyers being willing to take things on contingency. When it is a big company with lots of resources most firms cannot continue the fight forever. Even in the case of Hinkley, CA , Erin Brockovich's employer had to bring in more legal firms and compromise with much less than the case was worth because it was going on so long and costing so much money. In case anyone forgets what utilities are about go watch the movie, "Erin Brockovich" again. That energy company told those folks that the toxic chemical was good for them. Funny thing when utilities talk about their RF radiation producing smart meters they tell us that they are good for us too. They say this even though the World Health Organization says RF radiation is a type 2B carcinogen. Smells of Hinkley, CA on a bigger scale.
Sheryl Sutterfield August 23, 2011 at 07:32 PM
Ever since having 14 smart meters installed in the utility room that is attached to my condo, I have been experiencing problems with sleep, whereas I never did previously, severe agitation, a feeling of electrical current going up the side of my body, and a lack of concentration. Also symptoms I had prior to the smart meters being installed due to fibromyalgia have worsened since the installation. My neighbors also have been complaining that they just don't feel well and that they have no energy and have a lack of concentration, and feel "out of it" and don't know why. There is no other reason other than the smart meters for people who were otherwise healthy before the meters to suddenly not feeling well, or for people who did have health problems to suddenly have them worsen. I believe these meters are a health hazard and need to be removed!!
Susan Brinchman August 25, 2011 at 05:27 PM
Bottomline, for all, SDG&E has been ordered to attend a Smart Meter Opt-0ut Workshop by two CPUC Administrative Law Judges in a row, to discuss the ways that people can opt-out of having a smart meter on their homes. SDG&E will be attending that meeting on Sept. 14th, at the CPUC Public Auditorium. The meeting is public and will be carried online, live, and archived afterward. Verification of these facts may be found on www,CPUC.ca.gov under Calendar for Sept. The reason all three major utilities are being ordered into this meeting is because there has been such an enormous uproar all over the state about the health effects and privacy issues to do with smart meters. When counties feel compelled to criminalize the installation of these meters, after their attorneys have examined the facts, we are talking "serious". If you don't want a smart meter on your home that emits what scientists and doctors (including the CA Dept of Health) warn is at the very least, potentially harmful, pulsed, rf radiation; if you don't want to take a chance with your health and privacy; if you are experiencing health effects that you feel may be related to the smart meters on your home; if you don't have a smart meter and don't want one ... go to the CPUC site above and file a complaint immediately. Complain to SDG&E, also, in writing, and send our nonprofit a copy. Attend the meeting or consider supporting CEP's Proposal (see docs above). We want the wireless GONE. www.electrosmogprevention.org
Don Lambert. August 25, 2011 at 11:22 PM
Check this out for information about refusing smeters: http://www.turn.org/article.php?id=1154 Stand up for your rights, for if you won't, how can you expect anyone else to for you??
April Bolduc August 27, 2011 at 12:10 AM
My name is April Bolduc and I work for SDG&E. We have two website pages that address frequently asked smart meter questions. This one has general smart meter information: http://www.sdge.com/smartmeter/. This one has information related to radio frequency: http://www.sdge.com/campaigns/smartmeter/rf_concerns.html. In the lower right of the page there are numerous links to the third party experts we rely on that have done studies on this issue. If you have any other questions we are more than happy to answer them, and you can email them to info@sdge.com, and put “smart meter” in the subject line. These questions go directly to a smart meter expert.
Susan Brinchman August 27, 2011 at 01:17 AM
Watch SDG&E's April Bolduc admit that people are sick from the meters on San Diego Insider. http://www.nbcsandiego.com/on-air/as-seen-on/Are_Smart_Meters_a_Smart_Idea__San_Diego-115151039.html?code=2.yShb4XqLY4ToMfPaaNKkPA__.3600.1297800000-1453972559%7C4cABEekJuugdLsKvd8yGX2n19m0. Their reports are industry-paid, not reliable, their experts are employees with a script, and they say they are being made to install these smart meters, but I challenge that. The CPUC only authorized installations of the smart meters. The federal gov't said it should be customer choice. SDG&E should be forced to allow opt-outs and then get rid of all the dangerous wireless. Citizens, take action!
Don Lambert. August 28, 2011 at 11:34 PM
From what I understand there is a lobbying group being formed to press for passage of a law mandating the installation of smart meters at the Federal level (perhaps an add on to the tele-communications act).
Don Lambert. August 28, 2011 at 11:50 PM
This is the email addy of the Judge that ordered SDG&E to attend a meeting in San Diego later (Sept or Oct) for OPT-OUT from the smart meter install: amy.yip-kikugawa@cpuc.ca.gov The judge would like comments from those that live in California about any problems and or concerns about smart meters being installed in their homes and neighborhoods. Pleas use Your Honor and be respectful in your comments. The utilities are claiming only the extremists are against the roll out of the Smart Grid/Smart Meters
Ed in SF August 29, 2011 at 09:55 AM
Even though only some people react and show symptoms, that does not mean that the RF and high-frequency EMF from SmartMeters does not affect the rest of us in some way that we can't currently detect. It could be affecting your long term health and you don't even know it! After all, you can't feel your own blood pressure and yet it needs be checked regularly to combat cardiovascular disease. There just isn't a test currently for measuring our sensitivity to RF and EMF, as there is a test for blood pressure. The people who are sensitive to RF and EMF are our canaries in the coal mine. We need to listen to and react to their issues. Why not have customers self-report the numbers on their meters, with photos even? Customers can take a photo of the numbers on their meters and send it in to the utility companies as verification. The utility companies can send their own meter reader out every 6 months to verify. If the self-reporting is incorrect, the utility companies can charge a penalty after a few warnings. After all, people self-report their own taxes and that's been working well for decades. I self-report my car's mileage to my automobile insurance company. Here's some great videos showing SmartMeter radiation exposure: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CL2JQ0FbgvU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6VwYPL9aE4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cejL8DTPdro Some good ideas in the letter posted under this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8JNFr_j6kdI
Don Lambert. August 29, 2011 at 03:29 PM
Susan Beckman and Ed in SF; I am so sorry for your problems caused by these devices, hopefully we can get them banned completely from our great Republic as this roll out of the smart grid/smart meters is an assault on on our way of life and freedoms. Both wonderful comments. Ed, you thoughts are certainly applicable and a common sense way of handling this. Hopefully you both sent your letters to the Judge at: amy.yip-kikugawa@cpuc.ca.gov as this is what she would read
Don Lambert. August 29, 2011 at 06:03 PM
Ed in SF; Excellent u-tube videos, thank you for passing them on to all. Your analogy of ...canaries in the coal mines.... really struck home and should to all that read it. Please, if you have not already, check out: www.stopsmartmeters.org www.electrosmogprevention.org www.thepeoplesinitiative.org to name a few. There are many more good informative sites that come up when one Googles: smart meter issues.
Susan August 30, 2011 at 01:32 AM
Thank you Don, yes we have sent that letter to the judge. I have deleted several of my posts as the comments are so long now and my offerings are just that comments and not helpful web addresses unfortunately. If I get any good news to pass along I will post immediately. Our best to all! Susan and Bob
Don Lambert. August 30, 2011 at 08:45 PM
Susan; Great. Will keep watching for up-dates.
Don Lambert. August 30, 2011 at 08:51 PM
I have sent the various web site links about smart grid/smart meter roll-out and the issues connected to the smart meters of health and privacy issues as well as links to PATCH in their respective areas to my friends and family across this Great Nation of ours. So, to date, no one that I have sent this information had heard of the smart meters and issues. Please send all the links and info to all you know.
Susan Brinchman August 30, 2011 at 09:12 PM
NEW BLOG ARTICLE ON LA MESA PATCH TODAY: Smart Meter Nightmare #3: East County Woman and Pet Sick, Begging for Help http://lamesa.patch.com/blog_posts/smart-meter-nightmare-3-east-county-woman-and-pet-sick-begging-for-help#c
Yves November 04, 2011 at 03:27 AM
At our apartment complex here in North Park, there are 15 smart meters in the meter room. And that meter room is right below my bedroom. How much radiation am I getting? And how do I go about having them removed?
Katie Wilkinson May 10, 2012 at 01:51 AM
I opted out of smart meter because when I moved into my house 6 years ago I began having all the symptoms, especially headaches, and didn't know why except that I have a TOU meter, an early smart meter, and I didn't want those symptoms to get worse. I wish I could have an analog meter. I did a tapping seminar this week, free online, and it has been the only thing except for spending less time at home, to make my headaches go away. I commiserate with others who are suffering from RF.
Susan Brinchman May 10, 2012 at 02:53 AM
Katie, thanks for commenting. Are you in San Diego? or where? People can opt-out in CA, if they have one of the three main utilities (IOU's), Maine, or Vermont (where it is free to do so). Yes, I know someone else whose daughter has been sick for about 5 years ever since they got a TOU meter (digital, electronic, early remotely read smart meter). Headaches, vertigo, extremely sick, cost her insurance company plenty for tests that showed nothing. Then when we measured rf radiation levels that were up to 12,000 times higher than normal, and she changed bedrooms, no more illness, now it has been about four months. That had not happened for five years. So yes, get rid of the TOU meter (which is likely voluntary) ASAP.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something