11/2/11 Wednesday, (From My Desk: Watched Video Feed)

A curious thing happened at the 11/1/11 Tustin City Council meeting.   An Edison representative, Pat Buttress, spoke during the  “public comments” section, that part of the council meeting where usually residents, rather than representatives of large utility companies, are given three minutes to speak.  She spoke after the  father who expressed concerns about the ten “Smart” Meters installed on the wall of his home where his baby sleeps.

Ms. Buttress said  there was “misinformation” out there which she wanted to clear up, but she didn’t mention the words “radiation,” “RF,”  or “health” even once in her seven minute  talk.

She said that Edison was “required” to put “Smart” Meters on all of our homes by 2012 and this program was “implemented at the direction of  the California Public Utilities Commission.”  Customers who “disagree with an issue” regarding “Smart” Meters may contact the CPUC (California Public Utilities Commission) whose contact information is on the back of every Edison bill.

Question: I have heard various people say that “Smart” Meters were “not mandated” but were only recommended.  Edison apparently believes (unless this is a case of good cop, bad cop) that they have no choice, that they must obey the CPUC and install these meters.

It’s a little confusing, though, because  during another part of her talk, Ms. Buttress said, “the U.S. government does not control investor owned utilities and cannot turn off your power.”

What I and probably many of  us just want to know, though, is, if someone is sick  or a parent has legitimate concerns about his baby’s  exposure to pulsed radiation from ten Smart Meters 24/7, who’s going to help these people out?

Ms. Buttress talked about the energy savings we can achieve via this new “Smart” Meters system. However, there is nothing about the “Smart” Meter, in itself, that is inherently green  (it’s actually the opposite as the radiation our neighborhood will now be awash in creates electrosmog).  Instead, what Ms. Buttress described is what Elizabeth Kelley and others have said.  The multi billion dollar “Smart” Meter system is actually a simple (and not very fun) behavioral modification program.

But according to Ms. Buttress, we customers will be “empowered” by having this forced against our will “Smart” Meter–even if it’s making our dog sick, the same dog who slept by our bed for years and whose face is now turning white–affixed to our house.

There will be “new pricing plans” and “options for earning rebates.”  So, it sounds like if we don’t use the air conditioner on a hot summer  afternoon–but use it instead at a time when we actually don’t need to use it–we will get rebates and/or penalties depending on our usage.

There will be, Ms. Buttress said, “environmental benefits,” and she shared impressive analogies.  If we all conserve (and they’re going to make us aren’t they-because we won’t be able to afford not to), then, Ms. Buttress said,  the reduced “peak power consumption” will be equivalent to the “approximate output of a major power plant” or it will be like “removing 79,000 cars from the road.”

I’m definitely for conserving and I will do my best, even if Edison now reminds me of some relative who wouldn’t let me leave the table until I ate all my peas, but I’m still waiting for that “em-powered” feeling.

This entry was posted in Elected Officials, City Council, Smart Meters, What Edison Says and doesn't Say. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to “EmPowered”

  1. Here’s a bit of follow up on whether SCE is “mandated” to put these meters in. According to the Ojai City Council meeting http://ovnblog.com/?p=5251, an SCE executive admitted that SCE filed an “application” to put the Smart Meters in.
    Councilwoman Carlon Strobel asked, “In terms of the mandate from the California Public Utilities Commission, didn’t you file the application and they approved it as opposed to being given a mandate?”
    Michael Schulte replied that was correct, adding, “‘mandate’ may have been too strong of a term.”
    Leonard Klaif, Ojai resident and attorney, wasn’t shy about letting Edison’s representatives know his opinion. “I came in unopposed to the Smart Meters,” he said, “but you lost me when you lied about it being mandated, and when you lie, I have no reason to believe anything you say.”

  2. Tiffany says:

    California just passed Cap and Trade and the CPUC just allowed all utility companies to pass the costs onto the consumers costs will “necessarily skyrocket” according to President Obama.

  3. I just was watching a Smart Meter forum in Santa Barbara from April.http://www.electrosmogprevention.org/multimediaandresources.html
    The costs to Californians they said for the Smart Meter program is over five billion dollars. Cindy Sage said that it was “billed as a green energy solution and yet it’s people that save energy. It’s not smart meters.” She said “if consumers reject these meters for any one of the reasons –then this program fails.”

    • Tiffany says:

      Cindy Sage is a very smart women who is standing up for the fight. I have had the pleasure of emailing her and she has said a lot of things that resonated with me. I love that she took into consideration that these meters are communicating 100% of the time, well, because they, for the most part, are. She had pages of reports and studies (4 to 8 a page) that show RFR is dangerous. The FCC has not updated its regulations since the 90’s! Why? With WHO labeling and suggesting that other commissions label RF as a class 2B carcinogen, why is the FCC not doing something? Is it really that important that we have convenience rather than health? Lets go further, than that; is it that important that businesses can make money than protecting the people it was commissioned for?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s