"The Problems With Smart Meters", Wildlife and Humans
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yoyETbp1Q8&feature=player_embedded
There are other issues that concern our wildlife, and the effects of being surrounded with a canopy of EMF that will surround bugs, butterflies, pets from the installation of Smart Meters and the broadcast receiving towers. This is an excellent book "Birds, Bees and Humans" by Mark Ulrich, and is available here. It is a German translation in 2010 and the research in it is amazing. All navigational creatures, bees, bats, and butterflies like our Monarch Butterflies in the Pacific Grove, CA Monarch Grove Sanctuary, is magnetite.
Their magnetite allows these creatures to navigate in reaction to the fluctuating electromagnetic fields of the earth, like coming storms. Magnetite is like having another ear so that they can react appropriately. When we create artificial EMF's it is louder than the natural EMF's of the planet. One of the reasons cell phone technology works is that they are louder, and will overpower the earth's natural frequencies, they override it, and they are above it. When we do that, we make these guys (navigational wildlife), work a whole lot harder to know where they are going. There are things like sudden hive collapse where the bee's just didn't come back. One of the things EMF's can do in creatures and humans is upset the nitrous oxide system, and in bees this system is part of their learning, smell and immune system.
There are many parallels to the human system as well. When sudden hive collapse as well as immune disease problems bees began, the scientists that wrote the book stated that they had never seen such a great increase in the bugs that the bees had to contend with...what's going on here. Well, if your immune system is affected either by cell towers nearby, or living in an area where there is a lot of wireless radiation going on could account for this. The last chapter of the book is on human impacts. It lists a progression of health impacts. Again, we are not seeing people dying on the streets and it's very difficult to say "we are all walking around more or less functional. A lot of illnesses are long term and have latency periods. A lot of cancers have 10 years or more latency periods. So, we don't get the immediate feedback that would really help us to identify if something is dangerous nor not. If you put your hand on a hot stove, you know instantly, but with microwave radiation, RF and EMF's people are not getting that instant feedback. PG&E says, well, more research is needed, just keep buying all these appliances, keep hanging around your hair dryer mind you. PG&E did say in their brochure you might want to limit your exposure to hair dryers because hair dryers have huge EMF fields. The further you are away from the source, the more the EMF's drop off over a distance. See more of this article including Radio Interference and Accumulative Effects, as well as all the links. more here http://mocotp.com/posts/smart-meter-health-affects-what-pge-is-not-telling-the-public-for-industry-profit
Pacific Grove City Watch Group - P.O. Box 417, Pacific Grove, CA 93950
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Cell Phone Radiation - Higher Risk to Children
Cell Phone Radiation,
Cell Tower Masts, Wireless Radiation.
Recent scientific tests show that just two hours of exposure to high-frequency electromagnetic fields (EMF), such as the ones you're exposed to every time you turn on your cell phone, microwave oven, bluetooth headset, certain household appliances can lead to permanent DNA damage in brain and sex cells...Consistent exposure from daily microwave radiation use can have serious health consequences!
Are Your Children at Risk, Too?
In 1997, alarming results were revealed by Dr. Om Ghandi from the University of Utah showing how radiation penetrates younger skulls far more deeply than those of adults. Below are the results of a computer-image comparison of the heads of adults and children.
 |  |  | ||
Radiation Penetration in head of adult | Radiation Penetration in head of 10 year old child | Radiation Penetration in head of 5 year old child |
Children ARE at a GREATER RISK Because
Their Skulls Have Not Completely Thickened
According to a study from the Neurological Hospital of the University of Freiburg in Germany, cellular telephones' high-frequency electromagnetic fields lead to a significant increase in blood pressure. Pulsed high-frequency fields, as used with cellular telephones, affect biological processes in the brain, which are measurable in electroencephalograms (EEG). It is beyond question that cellular telephones negatively influence the brain's bioelectric activity.
PICTURES BELOW OF RADIATION FROM A CELL PHONE FLOWING THROUGHOUT YOUR CAR TURNING IT INTO A RADIATION CAGE?
Adverse Influence of Radio Frequency Background on Trembling Aspen Seedlings: Preliminary Observations
International Journal of Forestry Research
Volume 2010 (2010), Article ID 836278, 7 pages
doi:10.1155/2010/836278
Research Article
Adverse Influence of Radio Frequency Background on Trembling Aspen Seedlings: Preliminary Observations
Abstract
Numerous incidents of aspen decline have been recorded in North America over the past half century, and incidents of very rapid mortality of aspen clones have been observed in Colorado since 2004. The radio frequency (RF) environment of the earth has undergone major changes in the past two centuries due to the development and use of electricity in power and communications applications, and the anthropogenic RF background continues to increase in intensity and complexity. This study suggests that the RF background may have strong adverse effects on growth rate and fall anthocyanin production in aspen, and may be an underlying factor in aspen decline.
Read the full Study
Conclusions
Conclusions
The results of this preliminary experiment indicate that the RF background may be adversely affecting leaf and shoot growth and inhibiting fall production of anthocyanins associated with leaf senescence in trembling aspen seedlings. These effects suggest that exposure to the RF background may be an underlying factor in the recent rapid decline of aspen populations. Further studies are underway to test this hypothesis in a more rigorous way.
Volume 2010 (2010), Article ID 836278, 7 pages
doi:10.1155/2010/836278
Research Article
Adverse Influence of Radio Frequency Background on Trembling Aspen Seedlings: Preliminary Observations
Abstract
Numerous incidents of aspen decline have been recorded in North America over the past half century, and incidents of very rapid mortality of aspen clones have been observed in Colorado since 2004. The radio frequency (RF) environment of the earth has undergone major changes in the past two centuries due to the development and use of electricity in power and communications applications, and the anthropogenic RF background continues to increase in intensity and complexity. This study suggests that the RF background may have strong adverse effects on growth rate and fall anthocyanin production in aspen, and may be an underlying factor in aspen decline.
Read the full Study
Conclusions
Conclusions
The results of this preliminary experiment indicate that the RF background may be adversely affecting leaf and shoot growth and inhibiting fall production of anthocyanins associated with leaf senescence in trembling aspen seedlings. These effects suggest that exposure to the RF background may be an underlying factor in the recent rapid decline of aspen populations. Further studies are underway to test this hypothesis in a more rigorous way.
Thursday, March 24, 2011
PG&E seeks Bailout from Customers with CPUC Request
Here's the deal, all must have a wireless smart meter. The radio-off plan applies to residential customers only.
PG&E proposes a radio-off monthly fee that will likely cost anywhere from $2880.00-$4320.00 over the 15 year life of the smart meter, or 20$ more on your bill every month. These figures could change, (go up), of course, depending on the concentration of on/off customers in a square mile radius.
One can actually move their existing meters further away from where they are physically located now at a cost ranging between $2K-11K depending on the distance and overhead vs buried wires.
Not addressed in the proposal is the likelihood one can completely escape the EMF's coming from their radio-on neighbors. Will they pay more for their own health or the health of their neighbors by moving their , (radio-on), gas/electric meters? Nope. Will they pay extra to opt-out, (radio-off), for their neighbors? Double nope.
Contact your legislators and tell them this radio-off opt-out plan won't work, is too expensive, and is not acceptable. The Utilities Commion Committee will be meeting on April 4th, so get your letter off as soon as possible.
Contact CPUC. We have 30 days from 3/24/11 for public input. Let them know what you think of PG&E radio-off opt-out plan.
read radio-on option here
PG&E proposes a radio-off monthly fee that will likely cost anywhere from $2880.00-$4320.00 over the 15 year life of the smart meter, or 20$ more on your bill every month. These figures could change, (go up), of course, depending on the concentration of on/off customers in a square mile radius.
One can actually move their existing meters further away from where they are physically located now at a cost ranging between $2K-11K depending on the distance and overhead vs buried wires.
Not addressed in the proposal is the likelihood one can completely escape the EMF's coming from their radio-on neighbors. Will they pay more for their own health or the health of their neighbors by moving their , (radio-on), gas/electric meters? Nope. Will they pay extra to opt-out, (radio-off), for their neighbors? Double nope.
Contact your legislators and tell them this radio-off opt-out plan won't work, is too expensive, and is not acceptable. The Utilities Commion Committee will be meeting on April 4th, so get your letter off as soon as possible.
Contact CPUC. We have 30 days from 3/24/11 for public input. Let them know what you think of PG&E radio-off opt-out plan.
read radio-on option here
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Stop Smart Meter Bulletin Vol. 6, March 22, 2011
Stop Smart Meters! Bulletin
Vol. 6 March 22nd, 2011
PO Box 66165 Scotts Valley CA 95067
Quote of the Month
“I think it’s high time we stood up with one, large voice and said “no” in no uncertain terms and if that means marching on Sacramento in numbers that simply can’t be ignored and making news to get the attention of those we put in office, then so be it. I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take this anymore!”
-Howard Glasser, Lake County (read his opinion piece here)
ALERT--THE FIGHT IS NOT OVER!! *****CPUC MEETING IN SF THURSDAY***** CALL YOUR FRIENDS AND FAMILY! INVITE YOUR CITY COUNCILMEMBERS AND COUNTY SUPERVISORS!
Individuals and organizations opposing the rollout of ‘Smart’ Meters in San Francisco and elsewhere in California will be gathering at the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) meeting at 505 Van Ness Avenue (at McAllister, near City Hall) in San Francisco this Thursday, March 24th at 9am to testify at their morning meeting. Now is the perfect time to encourage your local elected officials to attend the CPUC meeting to demand that the Commission immediately halt further installations in the state and hold public hearings on health impacts of smart meters- OPT OUT IS SIMPLY NOT ENOUGH! The Governor must also remove Michael Peevey from the Commission immediately. Peevey is a former utility executive with Southern California Edison -- the classic fox watching the hen house, a man who has made the CPUC into a laughing stock and a lapdog to the industry.
If you intend to speak at the CPUC meeting, you will have 1 minute, and you must arrive by 8:45 a.m. to sign up. The CPUC meeting itself begins at 9:00 a.m. You can also sign up by Noon on Wednesday here: https://ia.cpuc.ca.gov/requesttocomment/
SPECIAL ‘ADOPT A WELLINGTON INSTALLER’ EVENT TO FOLLOW CPUC MTG.
We know the employees of Wellington Energy are under more stress than ever these days, what with residents unleashing their pit bulls, demanding they remove ‘smart’ meters, and protesters standing in their way. What the Wellington employees need is a big hug (and maybe a copy of the Sage Associates report). We will be fanning out into the city following the CPUC meeting this Thursday, finding Wellington Energy employees who we can adopt and follow all day long, knocking on doors ahead of the installers and ensuring residents are aware of their rights. If you are interested in joining this special ‘adoption’ event please e-mail info@stopsmartmeters.org
ACTIONS YOU CAN TAKE IF YOU CAN’T MAKE IT TO THE MEETING IN SF (OR EVEN IF YOU CAN!)
1. Contact the Governor and demand an immediate emergency moratorium on ‘smart’ meter installation- and scheduled statewide hearings on public health issues. (deleted text from original) Contact details here: http://gov.ca.gov/m_contact.php
2. Call CPUC Commissioners and demand an immediate moratorium and smart meter health hearings. CPUC Commissioner Florio 415-703-1840 CPUC Commissioner Sandoval 415-703-2593
3. The CPUC is continuing to deny access to public meetings by electrosensitive individuals who are unable to stand the 12+ wifi transmitters in the meeting room. This is despite continued requests for reasonable accommodations under the ADA for the disabled who are most impacted by this program. CPUC has had weeks now to figure out how to provide a phone in option, so people who can't safely access the meeting chambers have remote access, and can participate in real time. E-mail karen.miller@cpuc.ca.gov to demand equal access for EVERY member of the public.
4. Lodge a formal complaint with the CPUC- if you have suffered health or any other impacts because of the rollout (even if you don’t have a smart meter on your own home). Call the Public Advisor’s safety line at 1-800-755-1447.
5. If your local city/ county has not acted against the smart meter attack, organize local residents and demand that they do their job to protect public health and safety.
6. Forward this e-mail newsletter to 5 friends, and have them subscribe if they are interested.
WHAT ARE SMART METERS!?
The installation of wireless gas and electric meters is one of the largest technology rollouts in history. Yet in California and other states, there was virtually no consultation with the public and local governments in advance of the $2.2 billion “Advanced Metering Infrastructure” (or AMI) project -- the first mandatory microwave radiation device to be installed on our homes and businesses. Wireless radiation has been linked with cancer[1] and DNA damage[2] at exposure levels far below FCC guidelines, in peer-reviewed scientific studies. “Smart” meters pose health risks, violate individual privacy, interfere with electronic appliances, increase carbon emissions and overcharge customers. But utility companies and tech firms love them because they allow them to layoff meter readers and generate more profit. Luckily, more communities every day are learning the facts and refusing the DumbMeter onslaught. Check out our new primer (that you can circulate) outlining the case against wireless utility meters here: http://stopsmartmeters.wordpress.com/why-stop-smart-meters/
WHAT IS “STOP SMART METERS!”?
Growing out of the grassroots group Scotts Valley Neighbors Against Smart Meters, which was started in June, Stop Smart Meters! is now a community supported statewide advocacy, media outreach, and direct action group providing activism consultation and technical assistance advice to dozens of local groups statewide (and now nationally and even internationally) who are fighting the wireless ‘smart’ meter assault.
The fight against ‘smart’ meters has brought about new, unexpected political alliances. Please join us and add your voice to thousands of others. More info, regular news updates, analysis, and tips on resisting ‘smart’ meters at our website: http://stopsmartmeters.org
To join Stop Smart Meters! and add yourself or others to the distribution list for this newsletter, please send a request to: info@stopsmartmeters.org
THANK YOU FOR DONATING TO STOP SMART METERS!
Even if it’s only a small amount, it all adds up and it really goes a long way toward making this education and advocacy possible. Remember we are community supported- please chip in if you can! Please make checks payable to Joshua Hart, write Stop Smart Meters! on the memo line and send to Stop Smart Meters! Post Office Box 66165 Scotts Valley CA 95067. Contact us directly if you require a tax deduction. Thank you for your support!
CHECK OUT OUR ALLIES
We urge you to get to know, and contribute to our friends at the following organizations, who are all working on different angles of the ‘smart’ meter issue:
Health and Safety: EMF Safety Network http://emfsafetynetwork.org
Health and Envt: Environmental Options Network (EON) http://eon3.net
EON EMF Blog: http://eon3emfblog.net/
Environmental Health Trust: http://www.environmentalhealthtrust.org/
Californians for Renewable Energy http://www.calfree.com/
Privacy issues: Electronic Frontier Foundation http://eff.org
Consumer Rights: The Utility Reform Network (TURN) http://turn.org
SMART METER CAMPAIGN UPDATES
34 CA LOCAL GOVERNMENTS UNITED IN DEMANDING A ‘SMART’ METER HALT
The number of local governments opposed to the ‘smart’ meter program continues to climb. A total of 26 cities and 8 counties throughout CA- representing 2,242,123 people- have now formally demanded a halt to PG&E’s mandatory ‘smart’ meter program. It is now illegal under local ordinance to install within the jurisdiction of 10 of these local governments. Call the sheriff or police department if you see installations in any of these areas (or if PG&E tries to install on your home against your will). The updated list of local governments protesting can be found here. Want your city or county to be added to the list? Why not get them to pass an ordinance? Sample letter here.
MONTEREY COUNTY CONSIDERS ACTIONS AGAINST PG&E
Tuesday, March 22 (today!) 1:30 PM, Monterey County Board of Supervisors
From Nina Beety: The whole afternoon agenda on the 22nd will be devoted to Smart Meters. The Health Department will present its report on Smart Meters with recommendations for action, there will be time for public comment, and the Board will vote on an action. We need to pack the chambers. Carpool from the Peninsula and from every area in the County. This meeting is it, and we need to be there. The Board could make a decision covering the whole county, not just the incorporated areas, which, if it were an ordinance, would be fantastic.
SAN FRANCISCO GETTING “EXTRA STRENGTH” SMART METER RADIATION
Exposing the population to wireless radiation from these 625,000 wireless meters packed into a 7x7 square mile city- the densest city west of the Mississippi- on top of all the pre-existing radiation- is a human experiment of unprecedented proportions.
STOP SMART METERS! TAKES DIRECT ACTION TO STOP SF ROLLOUT
SSM! Has been out in the Marina and the Richmond District in SF confronting Wellington Energy and informing residents of their rights to refuse installation. Marina District protest, outreach, and parade with bullhorn: http://stopsmartmeters.org/2011/03/07/stop-smart-meters-hits-sf/ Richmond District resident takes direct action to stop Wellington installer: http://stopsmartmeters.org/2011/03/11/cpuc-admits-to-smart-meter-health-crisis-opt-out-plan-falls-short/ SSM on the warpath, presents to community groups in SF: http://stopsmartmeters.org/2011/03/08/presenting-the-case-against-smart-meters-to-san-francisco/
SAGE ASSOCIATES WEBSITE HAS NEW RESOURCES
Sage Associates website contains new info including a collection of expert letters in response to the flawed CCST report, peer-reviewed science indicating health impacts from levels of RF lower than ‘smart’ meters, and the Seletun Scientific Statement warning of health impacts particularly to pregnant women and children: http://sagereports.com/smart-meter-rf/
“I WANT TO DIE” - WOMAN REALIZES HER ‘SMART’ METER IS TO BLAME FOR DEBILITATING MIGRAINES
Great new article by Jen Pleasants on Salon published Friday about her struggle with migraines, and eventual realization that her (not so) smart meter was to blame. Her solution in the face of her utility’s refusal to remove here meter- install a faraday cage to block the radiation. If utilities refuse to remove smart meters that are causing health problems, this is just one recourse that people have:
DEFEND YOUR ANALOG METER
If you are fortunate enough to have escaped the ‘smart’ meter onslaught so far, you may want to physically defend your property from microwave trespass. Here are some pics of how one family is keeping Wellington Energy at bay:
SSM! ASKS DIFFICULT QUESTIONS AT THE CPUC PRESS CONFERENCE
Stop Smart Meters! Director Josh Hart was there on Feb. 24th for the CPUC meeting and press conference. Strangely, the fire alarm went off as soon as we started asking difficult questions. http://stopsmartmeters.org/2011/03/01/difficult-questions-about-san-bruno-and-smart-meters-easy-pull/
MONTEREY COUNTY SMART METER ACTIVIST HERO NINA BEETY IS A STAR
Nina has been putting everything she has into the fight for our health and our privacy- spending $4000 on her credit card for a full page ad in the Monterey Herald, even though she is on disability. See: http://stopsmartmeters.org/2011/03/03/nina-beety-its-time-to-take-action-against-smart-meters/
STOP SMART METERS! NOW ON TWITTER!
For the latest campaign updates and links to developing stories that don’t make it onto our website, follow us on Twitter! We are “stopsmeters”
OUTSMART PG&E STICKERS NOW AVAILABLE
Fairfax produced stickers opposing PG&E’s ‘smart’ meter program are now available- see http://www.t-shirtprofit.com/ and click on the ‘profit’ link. There are also a number of stickers available from http://www.refusesmartmeter.com/
GET AN INSIDE VIEW INTO WHAT THE ‘SMART’ GRID INDUSTRY IS SAYING
A reader writes in: “I just subscribed to SmartGridToday: the worldwide daily news journal of the modern electric utility industry http://www.smartgridtoday.com/
I took advantage of their 14 day free trial subscription and it is been a very informative experience so far. Especially in the forum. These are industry people and smart meters are a big topic. I recommend the trial subscription.”
FAIRFAX WINS PUBLIC CEO’S AWARD FOR BEST ORDINANCE OF THE YEAR
Congratulations to the Town of Fairfax in Marin County who this week won Public CEO’s “Ordinance of the Year Award.” Fairfax’s elected officials and public servants have been blazing a trail for the rest of the state and the country to follow. Three cheers for Fairfax!
SIGN PETITION CALLING FOR NEW FCC STANDARDS ON WIRELESS EXPOSURE
MEDIA UPDATE AND LINKS
Wireless ‘Smart’ Meter Debacle
SF Chronicle Editorial: ‘Smart’ Meters Should be Customer Choice
Letters to SF Chronicle re: their editorial
New Electricity Meters Stir Fears
NIEHS Considers New Priorities- tell them to investigate ‘electrosmog’
The Problems with “Smart Grid” – Dumb and Dangerous
Stop Smart Meters! interviewed on KSCO- great radio show with call-ins!
Smart Meters- What’s Next? Righteous Commentary From Lake County
Peevey: No Guarantee- Even for Weak Opt Out Plan
Study Shows Greater Security Concerns for Smart Meters
http://www.smartmeters.com/the-news/2047-study-shows-greater-security-concerns-for-smart-meters.html
Assemblymember Bill Monning on ‘Smart’ Meters
Maine Public Advocate Blasts Utility over ‘Smart’ Meters
Utilities and CPUC Vulnerable Over Mishandling of Environmental Review
Smart Grid Industry Whines: “We’re Going to Have to Take Their Complaints Seriously”
Power Companies Scheming to Force ‘Smart’ Meters onto New Markets
Michael Peevey Gives View of “Green’ Energy:
PG&E Disregards Precautionary Principle with ‘Smart’ Meters
Building the Smart Grid- Disturbing Hints of Privacy Invasions and Tech Gone Crazy
Opposition from the Right: Rush Limbaugh Rants Against Smart Meters
http://blogs.houstonpress.com/hairballs/2011/03/rush_limbaugh_gets_pwned_by_ce.php#comment-164771704
British Columbia Utility Admits: We Have Not Conducted Any Tests on the Safety of this Technology: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-4s2C1l6Xc
CPUC Floats Opt Out Plan- Sebastopol Mayor Calls for Meter Removal
CPUC Ponders Opt Out- Opponents not Impressed
La Mesa Today: Are your ‘smart’ meters a risk to public health?
Lake County Passes Ordinance- Prepares Legal Action Against PG&E
Smart Meter Installation Turning into “Nightmare Scenario”
From USA Today: Could smart electric meters be a dumb idea?
San Luis Obispo County Demands Halt:
AARP Questions Wisdom of “Smart” Grid
Maine: Foes of ‘Smart’ Meters Resist and Insist: Health Effects are Real
Seaside Bans Smart Meters
Protesters call for blockage of PG&E’s new SmartMeters in San Francisco
Sausalito Wants SmartMeter Alternative
PG&E Continues Installing SmartMeters, Despite the Law: http://www.publicceo.com/index.php/local-governments/151-local-governments-publicceo-exclusive/2562-pgae-continues-installing-smartmeters-despite-the-laws-and-protests-of-municipalities
Marin Women Vow More Civil Disobedience Over Smart Meters
Germany: Smart Grid Expectations Not Being Met
“Whiff of Revolt” in Australia over “Smart’ Meters
Maine: Prominent M.D. Links Patient’s Hospitalization to Smart Meter Installation, Urges Opt-Outs
San Anselmo Mayor Demands Smart Meter Ban Enforcement
Alternet: Are Smart Meters Really a Threat to Health?
San Clemente Deadlocks on Smart Meter Opposition
Comments on CCST Report:
NBC San Diego: Are ‘Smart’ Meters a Smart Idea?
‘Smart’ Water Meters Failing in Saipan
GENERAL WIRELESS AND HEALTH NEWS
Israel Puts Brakes on 4G Wireless Technology for Health Reasons
Oregon Introduces Cell Phone Warning Label Legislation
Will Microwaves Kill More than Cigarettes and Asbestos Combined?
Japan’s Wireless Fails in Earthquake- Land Lines Provide Emergency Communication
FCC Expects ‘Spectrum Deficit’ by 2014
Effects on Blood of Cell Phone Use
Connecting the Dots: Putting the Volkow Brain Scans in Perspective
SF Residents Upset About Next G Wireless Antenna in Richmond District
Alaska Supreme Court Upholds Award for RF Radiation Injury Below Legal Limit
How to Lower Your EMF Exposure
Green America: Do Cell Phones Cause Cancer?
GENERAL UTILITY DYSFUNCTION
PG&E’s Diablo Canyon Plant a Disaster Waiting to Happen
Earthquakes and Nuclear Power Reactors: Unforgiving and Deadly
PG&E Created Own Pipe Safety Rule, Document Shows
PG&E Making Man Made Storm Clouds Over Northern California
Business Week: The Flaw in Obama’s Wireless Plan
PG&E Still Sails Smooth, and That’s the Rub
DEMOCRACY
Annie Leonard: Why Democracy Only Works When People are in Charge
More False Climate Solutions in Trouble: Carbon Offsets Under Legal Challenge
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703300904576178431416877032.html?mod=WSJ_WSJ_US_News_5
How Small, Mostly Conservative Towns Have Found the Trick to Defeating Corporations
If you’d like to be removed from this list, please e-mail us at info@stopsmartmeters.org and we will do so immediately. ~Thank you for your support!~ - Stop Smart Meters!
Endnotes:
[1] Hardell L, Carlberg M, Söderqvist F, Hansson Mild K and Morgan LL: Long-term use of cellular phones and brain tumours- increased risk associated with use for ≥10 years. Occup Env Med 64: 626-632, 2007. DOI 10.1136/oem.2006.029751.
[2] Lai, H. and Sigh, N.P. DNA single- and double- strand DNA breaks in rat brain cells after acute exposure to low-level radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation. Int. J. Radiat. Biol. 69:513–521, 1996.
--
Joshua Hart
Director, Stop Smart Meters!
http://stopsmartmeters.org
Smart Meters - Monterey County BOS - No Concern For Your Health
03/22/11 - Today, the ravenous consumption of analog meters by PG&E received unanimous approval by the Monterey County Board of Supervisors who adopted the United Nations World Health Organizations position that wireless smart meters are as safe as cell phones.
Crafty proponents of wireless smart meters speak out of both sides of their mouths. They find various reasons to dismiss peer-reviewed studies of the opponents, while at the same time maintain more studies are needed. So the MoCo BOS decide to request more studies...that, of course, will happen when we all start turning shades of purple.
MoCo BOS also provide the excuse that they don't want to open the county up to possible lawsuits with PG&E if they were to take a strong health advocacy position. Just minutes before the presentation of the Health Commission Report, they approved spending an additional $100K of your tax dollars on lawsuits when it comes to the desalination plant.
Omni-missing Supervisor Potter was the only supe not to meet with health advocates sounding the alarm of an environment surrounded by EMF prior to the county municipality's action. He walked out of the public chamber just prior to the Health Commissions presentation immediately after voting on an additional $100K to fund desal lawsuits. This is one reason he should be recalled. Public Health issues require participation, not missing in action.
The remaining supes likely tow the union, United Nations position. Whatever they want, they get. They should all be recalled as they have negated their concern for public health.
Since there are no protections for the citizens coming from our local governments and agencies, we will now protect our property with cages, and file civil lawsuits against PG&E for property rights violations. We need to understand this outcome was by design, as most Americans remain passive to authority.
PG&E is banking on the fact that few citizens have the stomach for such actions, and will eventually roll over and allow their analog meter to be replaced. When our government allows something of this magnitude to happen, there is a problem with government. You need to call the newly appointed members of the CPUC right now, and tell them forced deployment of wireless smart meters will not be tolerated and to take quick action to assist citizens under siege by PG&E.
In the meantime, we will be surrounded by EMF's at unprecedented levels, where no environmental study exists or is pending. We will not know, at any given time, if our exposure levels rise above the FCC limits if we don't have a device on our person that warns us. The life of a lab rat has just begun.
We plan to continue working within our own communities to educate our neighbors about the hazards of wireless smart meters and what it will cost them to protect themselves in their own homes.
Pacific Grove City Watch is sponsoring a Community Warning - "Surrounded by Microwaves". March 30th, 7:00pm, Community Center, 515 Junipero. More info here.
One person from every neighborhood should attend.
Crafty proponents of wireless smart meters speak out of both sides of their mouths. They find various reasons to dismiss peer-reviewed studies of the opponents, while at the same time maintain more studies are needed. So the MoCo BOS decide to request more studies...that, of course, will happen when we all start turning shades of purple.
MoCo BOS also provide the excuse that they don't want to open the county up to possible lawsuits with PG&E if they were to take a strong health advocacy position. Just minutes before the presentation of the Health Commission Report, they approved spending an additional $100K of your tax dollars on lawsuits when it comes to the desalination plant.
Omni-missing Supervisor Potter was the only supe not to meet with health advocates sounding the alarm of an environment surrounded by EMF prior to the county municipality's action. He walked out of the public chamber just prior to the Health Commissions presentation immediately after voting on an additional $100K to fund desal lawsuits. This is one reason he should be recalled. Public Health issues require participation, not missing in action.
The remaining supes likely tow the union, United Nations position. Whatever they want, they get. They should all be recalled as they have negated their concern for public health.
Since there are no protections for the citizens coming from our local governments and agencies, we will now protect our property with cages, and file civil lawsuits against PG&E for property rights violations. We need to understand this outcome was by design, as most Americans remain passive to authority.
PG&E is banking on the fact that few citizens have the stomach for such actions, and will eventually roll over and allow their analog meter to be replaced. When our government allows something of this magnitude to happen, there is a problem with government. You need to call the newly appointed members of the CPUC right now, and tell them forced deployment of wireless smart meters will not be tolerated and to take quick action to assist citizens under siege by PG&E.
CPUC Commissioner Florio 415-703-1840
CPUC Commissioner Sandoval 415-703-2593
In the meantime, we will be surrounded by EMF's at unprecedented levels, where no environmental study exists or is pending. We will not know, at any given time, if our exposure levels rise above the FCC limits if we don't have a device on our person that warns us. The life of a lab rat has just begun.
We plan to continue working within our own communities to educate our neighbors about the hazards of wireless smart meters and what it will cost them to protect themselves in their own homes.
Pacific Grove City Watch is sponsoring a Community Warning - "Surrounded by Microwaves". March 30th, 7:00pm, Community Center, 515 Junipero. More info here.
One person from every neighborhood should attend.
Sunday, March 20, 2011
Monterey Co. Health Commission - "Few Studies Mapping Exposure"
Smart Meters - Monterey BOS Review of Health Issues Related to Smart Meters
Read The entire Health Report*****
What's wrong with this report? It makes no sense, especially their recommendations. The Health Commission is supposed to be concerned about our health, right. Think again. They missed the boat completely.
This report pulls out an apple; tells us the apple has been studied; people are warned about the apple, then states they are fairly confident the orange studies are so similar to the apples; they reassure us that the apple is safe so therefore the orange must also be safe, but they need more studies to make sure. Meanwhile, our Health Commission recommends doing studies that won't happen before we are all surrounded by a NEW, non escapable web of EMF's. You call this public health protection?
1. Comparing cell phones (apples) to smart meters (oranges)
Not every household has three cell phones transmitting 24/7/365. They are voluntary, and there are warnings on their use. All homes and buildings will now have three wireless utility meters transmitting at various times on top of the wireless devices already in use by the population. This new concentrated web of EMF is new, no enviromental impact study has been done on this phenomenon and even this report states:
"Once the smart grid is fully active, it is expected that smart meters will transmit more frequently than once every four hours resulting in a higher duty cycle. Exposure levels are expressed as .tW/cm2. There are few reports providing detailed modeling of the potential exposure patterns that may be associated with individual or arrays of smart meters."
What!!! No exposure pattern map?
What will be your exposure as you stand outside of Church with your child in a baby buggy and two children while you visit with friends for 10 or 15 minutes? What is the exact exposure of that specific spot?
What will be your exposure if you are throwing a BBQ party in your own back yard?
You can't see the EMF's web hot spot. How do you know what your exposure is, does it exceed FCC standard? Does anyone know?
Who will test every square inch of our cities to find out where not to stand for certain periods of time. The answer is no one knows, the exposure map is missing.
So this New potential health hazard is not even being considered, given little weight, yet the Health Commission simply recommends more studies! How about a specific study, like exposure mapping of every inch of real estate in our county.
"It is the recommendation of the Monterey County Health Department that the Board of Supervisors direct staff to send a letter to the PUC requesting the PUC continue to study through independent experts the effects of long-term exposure to low level EMFs and report out findings to all county health departments."
Are you people insane. How about a full blown ban with the wireless smeters removed until which time the entire county can be mapped, along with warnings on the patches of real estate where people, plants and animals (including insects) will get a blast of EMF's that will surpass the FCC safety limits on the non-thermal, low frequency microwaves. Neither me nor my family want to be your lab rats. I am not convinced you believe we should not be.
Saturday, March 19, 2011
Does Electrical Workers EMF exposure pass Californias 30% formula for Public Safety?
At the Pacific Grove City Council special meeting on March 9th, one member of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (Local 1245) spent less than 3 minutes to state that because they had studied Electromagnetic Field (EMF) exposure of their high power line workers and claims it is safe for them, that smart meters are safe as well. “To date, scientific studies have not identified or confirmed negative health to radio frequencies produced by smart meters," he said.
We get the impression that all is hunky dory working around EMF's, and those that think differently must be nuts. In fact many EMF studies do show adverse health effects among electrical workers, including power line workers; and studies do show adverse health effects among living things at 900Mhz exposure to the non-ionizing, pulsing microwave EMF's at the exact frequency as smart meters. How do we know who to believe? How do we as individuals gauge these conflicting studies for public safety?
The State of California uses the 30% formula. If there is a 30% chance of harm to public health, then they will error on the side of caution and develop public safety policy accordingly. That's a pretty low threshold, but better be safe than sorry.
After reading the below article, ask yourself if EMF exposure to electric workers meets or surpasses the 30% formula. Then compare what you think to what our IBEW Local 1245 representative states as "safe."
Note he did not say relatively safe, he said safe.
The information below is found at http://www.lessemf.com/pamphlet.html. After reading it, ask yourself if you would really feel "safe" exposed to EMF's to the degree electrical workers are?
+++++
Q. Do electrical workers have higher risks of cancer?
A. Several studies have reported increased cancer risks for jobs involving work around electrical equipment. To date, it is not clear whether these risks are caused by EMFs or by other factors. A report published in 1982 by Dr. Samuel Milham was one of the first to suggest that electrical workers have a higher risk of leukemia than do workers in other occupations. The Milham study was based on death certificates from Washington state and included workers in 10 occupations assumed to have elevated exposure to EMFs. A subsequent study by Milham, published in 1990, reported elevated levels of leukemia and lymphoma among workers in aluminum smelters, which use very large amounts of electrical power.
About 50 studies have now reported statistically significant increased risks for several types of cancer in occupational groups presumed to have elevated exposure to EMFs. Relative risk levels in these studies are mostly less than 2, and the possible influence of other factors such as chemicals has not been ruled out. At least 30 other studies did not find any significant cancer risks in electrical workers. Most of the earlier occupational studies did not include actual measurements of EMF exposure on the job. Instead, they used "electrical" job titles as indicators of assumed elevated exposure to EMFs. Recent studies, however, have included extensive EMF exposure assessments.
A report published in 1992 by Dr. Joseph Bowman and colleagues provided some information about actual EMF exposures of various electrical workers. As shown in the table below, electrical workers in Los Angeles and Seattle did have higher EMF exposures than non-electrical workers.
For this study, the category "electrical workers" included electrical engineering technicians, electrical engineers, electricians, power line and cable workers, power station operators, telephone line workers, TV and radio repairmen, and welders and flame cutters.
In a further analysis published in July 1994, Dr. Stephanie London, Bowman, and others found a weakly positive trend for increased leukemia risk in relation to exposure to magnetic fields among electrical workers in Los Angeles County. These results were consistent with findings from studies based on job title alone that electrical workers may be at slightly increased risk of leukemia.
A 1993 study (Sahl et al.) of 36,000 electrical workers at a large utility in California found no consistent evidence of an association between measured magnetic fields and cancer. Some elevated risks for lymphoma and leukemia were observed, but they were not statistically significant. A 1992 study of Swedish workers (Floderus et al.) found an association between average EMF exposure and chronic lymphocytic leukemia but not acute myeloid leukemia. There was some evidence of increasing risk with increasing exposure. The Floderus study also reported an increase in brain tumors among younger men whose work involved relatively high magnetic field exposure.
Results of a major study of electrical workers in Canada and France were reported in early 1994. The research team, led by Dr. Gilles Theriault, looked at 4151 cancer cases in 223,292 workers from two utilities in Canada and one in France. Workers with more than the median cumulative magnetic field exposure (31mG) had a significantly higher (up to three times higher) risk of developing acute myeloid leukemia. Workers who had the greatest exposures to magnetic fields had twelve times the expected rate of astrocytomas (a type of brain tumor), but according to the authors, this finding "suffered from serious statistical limits" and was based on a small number of cases (five) in the highest exposure category. In the analysis of median cumulative magnetic field exposure, no significant elevated risks were found for the other 29 types of cancer studied.*
There were inconsistencies in results among the three utilities and no clear indication of a dose-response trend. The authors concluded, therefore, that their results did not provide definitive evidence that magnetic fields were the cause of the elevated risks found in leukemia and brain cancer. However, they observed as "noteworthy" the fact that despite the enormous number of analyses done, the only two types of cancer for which a significant association with EMF was found (leukemia and brain cancer) were among the three for which an association had been hypothesized, based on previous studies.
In another major study involving more than 138,000 utility workers (Savitz et al. 1995), the authors concluded that the results "do not support an association between occupational magnetic field exposure and leukemia, but do suggest a link to brain cancer."
*A later analysis reported an association between exposure to short bursts of extremely high magnetic fields and increased risk of lung cancer.
We get the impression that all is hunky dory working around EMF's, and those that think differently must be nuts. In fact many EMF studies do show adverse health effects among electrical workers, including power line workers; and studies do show adverse health effects among living things at 900Mhz exposure to the non-ionizing, pulsing microwave EMF's at the exact frequency as smart meters. How do we know who to believe? How do we as individuals gauge these conflicting studies for public safety?
The State of California uses the 30% formula. If there is a 30% chance of harm to public health, then they will error on the side of caution and develop public safety policy accordingly. That's a pretty low threshold, but better be safe than sorry.
After reading the below article, ask yourself if EMF exposure to electric workers meets or surpasses the 30% formula. Then compare what you think to what our IBEW Local 1245 representative states as "safe."
Note he did not say relatively safe, he said safe.
The information below is found at http://www.lessemf.com/pamphlet.html. After reading it, ask yourself if you would really feel "safe" exposed to EMF's to the degree electrical workers are?
+++++
Q. Do electrical workers have higher risks of cancer?
A. Several studies have reported increased cancer risks for jobs involving work around electrical equipment. To date, it is not clear whether these risks are caused by EMFs or by other factors. A report published in 1982 by Dr. Samuel Milham was one of the first to suggest that electrical workers have a higher risk of leukemia than do workers in other occupations. The Milham study was based on death certificates from Washington state and included workers in 10 occupations assumed to have elevated exposure to EMFs. A subsequent study by Milham, published in 1990, reported elevated levels of leukemia and lymphoma among workers in aluminum smelters, which use very large amounts of electrical power.
About 50 studies have now reported statistically significant increased risks for several types of cancer in occupational groups presumed to have elevated exposure to EMFs. Relative risk levels in these studies are mostly less than 2, and the possible influence of other factors such as chemicals has not been ruled out. At least 30 other studies did not find any significant cancer risks in electrical workers. Most of the earlier occupational studies did not include actual measurements of EMF exposure on the job. Instead, they used "electrical" job titles as indicators of assumed elevated exposure to EMFs. Recent studies, however, have included extensive EMF exposure assessments.
A report published in 1992 by Dr. Joseph Bowman and colleagues provided some information about actual EMF exposures of various electrical workers. As shown in the table below, electrical workers in Los Angeles and Seattle did have higher EMF exposures than non-electrical workers.
For this study, the category "electrical workers" included electrical engineering technicians, electrical engineers, electricians, power line and cable workers, power station operators, telephone line workers, TV and radio repairmen, and welders and flame cutters.
| EMF Exposures of Workers in Los Angeles & Seattle | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Electrical: | ||||
| Non-Electrical: | ||||
| Source: Bowman et al. 1992 |
A 1993 study (Sahl et al.) of 36,000 electrical workers at a large utility in California found no consistent evidence of an association between measured magnetic fields and cancer. Some elevated risks for lymphoma and leukemia were observed, but they were not statistically significant. A 1992 study of Swedish workers (Floderus et al.) found an association between average EMF exposure and chronic lymphocytic leukemia but not acute myeloid leukemia. There was some evidence of increasing risk with increasing exposure. The Floderus study also reported an increase in brain tumors among younger men whose work involved relatively high magnetic field exposure.
Results of a major study of electrical workers in Canada and France were reported in early 1994. The research team, led by Dr. Gilles Theriault, looked at 4151 cancer cases in 223,292 workers from two utilities in Canada and one in France. Workers with more than the median cumulative magnetic field exposure (31mG) had a significantly higher (up to three times higher) risk of developing acute myeloid leukemia. Workers who had the greatest exposures to magnetic fields had twelve times the expected rate of astrocytomas (a type of brain tumor), but according to the authors, this finding "suffered from serious statistical limits" and was based on a small number of cases (five) in the highest exposure category. In the analysis of median cumulative magnetic field exposure, no significant elevated risks were found for the other 29 types of cancer studied.*
There were inconsistencies in results among the three utilities and no clear indication of a dose-response trend. The authors concluded, therefore, that their results did not provide definitive evidence that magnetic fields were the cause of the elevated risks found in leukemia and brain cancer. However, they observed as "noteworthy" the fact that despite the enormous number of analyses done, the only two types of cancer for which a significant association with EMF was found (leukemia and brain cancer) were among the three for which an association had been hypothesized, based on previous studies.
In another major study involving more than 138,000 utility workers (Savitz et al. 1995), the authors concluded that the results "do not support an association between occupational magnetic field exposure and leukemia, but do suggest a link to brain cancer."
*A later analysis reported an association between exposure to short bursts of extremely high magnetic fields and increased risk of lung cancer.
Friday, March 18, 2011
Why No Environmental Impact Study of Wireless Smart Meters by CPUC
No Environmental Impact Study was requested because the CPUC "were under no obligation to look" in response to PG&E's unilateral decision to install wireless smart meters in the 2006 position to deploy Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI). You can now understand why the people on the board of the CPUC have no genuine interest in what happens to Californians, and why the opt-out request plan to PG&E rings shallow.
Steven Weissman, associate director of the Center for Law, Energy and the Environment on 3/14/11 wrote in his article entitled "Public Policy and Those Pesky Smart Meters" for the Berkley Blog:
"Other utilities are focusing more on public education prior to deployment. But more significantly, regulators had the tools – and most likely the legal responsibility — to have tackled the health and safety issues before letting the utilities change a single meter.
The Commission has permitted the regulated utilities to send crews out to the site of each of their millions of residential and commercial customer sites to change the meters and install a wireless communication web linking them together. This decision is discretionary. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, the Commission needed to ask itself whether there was a potential that the program could lead to significant environmental impacts. It never asked. Instead, it simply declared that it was under no legal obligation to look.
Perhaps the answer would have been “no”, but the Commission needed to address the question. By failing to do so, the Commission and the utilities remain vulnerable. If a preliminary environmental study pointed to no potential health and safety impacts, the Commission could have backed up its assumption that such is the case. In addition, those who disagree would have had an opportunity to consider the Commission’s reasoning and, perhaps, point out the error of its ways. On the other hand, if the study suggested that there were potential problems, the Commission could have investigated them further and, potentially, discovered constructive ways to mitigate the impacts.
Instead, the Commission went with its gut, and decided that there probably was nothing to worry about. By waiting to address the concerns this late in the game, the Commission fanned the flames, created a greater opportunity for public distrust, and likely made the change-out more expensive." read full article Worth reading are the comments and the ongoing propaganda going out to the citizenry.
We should all note that Mr. Peevey, head of the CPUC, was a past president of Edison Electric and part of his job was to protect the public interest. Sounds like a conflict of interest that should shoot up some conflict of interest red flags.
If you are concerned about these disturbing series of events, please contact your neighbors. Invite them to come with you to a Pacific Grove presentation "Community Warning - Surrounded by Microwaves", a local presentation to alert the public about the problems with wireless smart meters. See calendar of events for more information. Wednesday, March 30th, PG Community Center, 515 Junipero, 7:00pm.
Steven Weissman, associate director of the Center for Law, Energy and the Environment on 3/14/11 wrote in his article entitled "Public Policy and Those Pesky Smart Meters" for the Berkley Blog:
"Other utilities are focusing more on public education prior to deployment. But more significantly, regulators had the tools – and most likely the legal responsibility — to have tackled the health and safety issues before letting the utilities change a single meter.
The Commission has permitted the regulated utilities to send crews out to the site of each of their millions of residential and commercial customer sites to change the meters and install a wireless communication web linking them together. This decision is discretionary. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, the Commission needed to ask itself whether there was a potential that the program could lead to significant environmental impacts. It never asked. Instead, it simply declared that it was under no legal obligation to look.
Perhaps the answer would have been “no”, but the Commission needed to address the question. By failing to do so, the Commission and the utilities remain vulnerable. If a preliminary environmental study pointed to no potential health and safety impacts, the Commission could have backed up its assumption that such is the case. In addition, those who disagree would have had an opportunity to consider the Commission’s reasoning and, perhaps, point out the error of its ways. On the other hand, if the study suggested that there were potential problems, the Commission could have investigated them further and, potentially, discovered constructive ways to mitigate the impacts.
Instead, the Commission went with its gut, and decided that there probably was nothing to worry about. By waiting to address the concerns this late in the game, the Commission fanned the flames, created a greater opportunity for public distrust, and likely made the change-out more expensive." read full article Worth reading are the comments and the ongoing propaganda going out to the citizenry.
We should all note that Mr. Peevey, head of the CPUC, was a past president of Edison Electric and part of his job was to protect the public interest. Sounds like a conflict of interest that should shoot up some conflict of interest red flags.
If you are concerned about these disturbing series of events, please contact your neighbors. Invite them to come with you to a Pacific Grove presentation "Community Warning - Surrounded by Microwaves", a local presentation to alert the public about the problems with wireless smart meters. See calendar of events for more information. Wednesday, March 30th, PG Community Center, 515 Junipero, 7:00pm.
Thursday, March 17, 2011
March 24, 2011 - Come to SF and Speak at the CPUC public Comments
On Thursday March 24 we will return to the CPUC to speak at public comments. We will continue to ask for a moratorium, opt out rights for all Californians, and evidentiary hearings on microwave health impacts. Please join us. The meeting starts at 9 am. Arrive early to sign up to speak. Prepare a one minute statement to read to the Commission. 505 Van Ness Ave.
Thanks to all for your efforts. We have made a difference and they have stopped ignoring us!
SmartMeters: What's next?
Updated: 03/17/2011 07:08:34 PM PDT
SmartMeters: What's next?
It's a sad state of affairs when your peaceful, serene county begins to feel like a war zone and you have to stay home, stand guard and keep watch for the SmartMeter installation trucks rolling down your street to protect your home because PG&E doesn't understand the meaning of the word "no."
What part of "no" don't they understand? We've posted signs saying do not install. We tell them no at the door. Kelseyville's District Supervisor Rob Brown has followed Wellington trucks to people's homes advising residents that they can say no when PG&E's SmartMeter messenger and facilitator tells us we don't have a choice. Like other cities and counties around the state, our county supervisors passed a moratorium putting a ban on installation until AB 37 has its chance in Sacramento to provide customers with an opt-out position. People have formed citizen blockades to stop SmartMeter installations. We've written our legislators. We've contacted PG&E and the CPUC. What more do we have to do? It seems that with all this and an ongoing, ever-growing movement of health professionals and scientists, community groups and regional organizations all essentially saying "stop!" we're nonetheless being besieged by an industry with deadlines they are bent on meeting come hell or high water and the public be damned in the process.
more
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)