Tuesday, June 19, 2012

Smart Meters: Public Discussion - Wednesday June 13, 2012, 5:30-7:00 PM - Hayes Room at The Kellogg-Hubbard Library, Montpelier.


Post to Facebook: 
 
For Distribution:  
 
June 11, 2012
 
Annoucement from The Bridge - Montpelier VT's community newspaper:
 
Smart Meters:  Public Discussion - Wednesday June 13, 2012, 5:30-7:00 PM - Hayes Room at The Kellogg-Hubbard Library, Montpelier.
 
Green Mountain Power is currently installing smart meters in Montpelier. The Bridge is sponsoring a public discussion about these devices. Representatives from GMP will discuss the benefits and other issues of this technology. Allen Gilbert from the ACLU will discuss information and security issues. Representatives from The EMR Policy Institute will discuss health and safety issues.
 
# # #
 
Background and References for the June 13 Forum presentation of The EMR Policy Institute:
 
Why Opt Out of a Wireless Smart Meter? 
Smart Meter Health Concerns Not Grounded in Fact?
 
Green Mountain Power, Central Vermont Public Service, and Burlington Electric Department are now deploying wireless “smart meters” around the state.  Even so, it seems many of their customers are still unaware of what they are, and why there is so much controversy.
 
Smart meters are a new type of electric meter that closely track energy usage.  Most of Vermont’s utilities chose a wireless “mesh” option.  These wireless meters send usage data from one meter to another, down the street, until it reaches one of the collectors located in each neighborhood.
 
What few realize is that wireless meters emit levels of radiofrequency (RF) radiation that concern many independent scientists. They warn that long-term exposure to these kinds of electromagnetic fields increases the risk of serious short- and long-term health issues. http://tinyurl.com/bnp4gmh#18 The London Resolution; #16 David Gee; #17 Cindy Sage, David O. Carpenter
 
Recently the American Academy of Environmental Medicine released a position paper calling for immediate caution for wireless meter installations. The paper states, “more independent research is needed to assess the safety of smart meter technology” as “patients are reporting to physicians the development of symptoms and adverse health effects after smart meters are installed on their homes. Immediate action is necessary to protect the public’s health.” http://aaemonline.org/emf_rf_position.html
 
In a January 18, 2012 letter to the Austrian Federal Ministry for Economics, Family and Youth, The Austrian Chamber of Physicians (Austrian Medical Association –OAK ( www.aerztekammer.at )
 calls for a reconsideration or suspension of “the planned timetable of the mandatory introduction of ‘smart meters’” in Austria, “pending clarification and solution of open questions.”  OAK’s letter states:

The Austrian Chamber of Physicians strictly rejects another, in this case actually state-mandated, expansion of the electrosmog exposure on the Austrian population.

The expected health consequences would be an increase in symptoms and diseases that fall into the category of so-called multi-system diseases. This illness is characterized by involving several organs or functional systems at the same time and in interaction.

These health and socioeconomic consequences that are to be expected are, from the perspective of the Austrian Chamber of Physicians, mandatory to be included in the consideration.

Who is liable in the event of health problems and diseases caused by the increased field exposure on the part of the Smart Meter?
 
See:

 
 
At its March 3, 2012 Vienna meeting of environmental medicine officers of the Regional Medical Associations, the Austrian Chamber of Physicians adopted the following position on the EMF syndrome:
 
Guideline of the Austrian Medical Association (Austrian Chamber of Physicians) for the diagnosis and treatment of EMF-related health problems and illnesses (EMF syndrome).
 
Consensus paper of the Austrian Medical Association’s EMR Working Group:
 
In areas where wireless meters have already been deployed, thousands of health complaints have been reported with symptoms including: migraines, ringing in the ears, heart and circulatory issues, difficulty sleeping, depression, and memory loss.  http://emfsafetynetwork.org/?page_id=2292
 
Utilities downplay the RF levels emitted from wireless meters, some even going so far as to say they emit less radiation than the human body. This is factually misleading, and prevents customers from understanding what the meters actually do.
 
Independent expert Daniel Hirsh PhD, Professor of nuclear policy at UCSC, examined the evidence and determined that it’s actually the other way around:  wireless meters emit 50 times more whole body RF exposure than a cell phone. http://tinyurl.com/8xntbrk
 
Current advertising campaigns compare wireless meters to cell phones and other household devices, asserting that the meters emit much less radiation than what we are already exposed to on an everyday basis.  http://www.cvps.com/ProgramsServices/smartpower/assets/ElsterDS42-1078A.pdf
 
The Vermont Department of Health (VDH) has also misinformed the public about wireless smart meter RF emissions. William Irwin PhD, chief of radiological services, has stated that wireless meters only “send a signal a couple times per day.”  http://tinyurl.com/6tyj9e4   However, his statement – seemingly in defense of the industry he is charged with regulating – ignores that meters operating in a mesh network are constantly chattering.  In fact, wireless meter designers have acknowledged that their meters can average more than 10,000 RF transmissions per day. http://tinyurl.com/7zh4mtd  p. 7.
 
Measurements taken by independent investigators have shown that wireless meters, even as far as 30 feet away, can emit RF levels comparable to having a cell phone tower nearby. Studies on populations that live near cell towers consistently show an increased risk of cancer and neurological illnesses.  http://tinyurl.com/6r4p88x   http://buildingbiology.ca/pdf/rimbachstudy.pdf
 
Utilities have repeatedly claimed that the meters comply with FCC requirements.  But the FCC “guidelines” were adopted in 1996, based on research published prior to 1986. The research studies used continuous wave RF, not the kind of modern modulated “pulsed” radiation that is emitted from smart meters.  http://tinyurl.com/bn73mmz      http://tinyurl.com/btfpae2       www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12036   http://tinyurl.com/bnp4gmh - #15 Carl Blackman
 
FCC guidelines are thermally based, i.e., they protect you only against short-term overheating or shock. Claiming that radiation levels fall within FCC guidelines says nothing about safety from the risk of long-term exposure that gives rise to many chronic diseases. The public is most concerned about increased risk of cancer, miscarriage, birth defects, semen quality, autoimmune diseases, etc. http://tinyurl.com/czeq69p         http://tinyurl.com/cdk5bvz
 
In May 2011, the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer classified all RF radiation as a Group 2B possible human carcinogen, the same category as lead paint, exhaust fumes, and DDT.  http://tinyurl.com/84cekfd   IARC Director Christopher Wild called the group of more than two dozen scientists and doctors from 14 countries, "the world's leading experts."  The vote was nearly unanimous.   ( http://tinyurl.com/7jcs4wx)
 
Wireless smart meters are reported to interfere with household electrical appliances, medical devices (i.e. pacemakers, insulin pumps) and home security systems, causing them to malfunction.  http://tinyurl.com/d4frnxs  and  http://tinyurl.com/8xgee8z
 
Because of all of this, over 50 California municipalities have taken actions that make wireless smart meters illegal within their jurisdictions.  All the while, utilities have steadfastly denied any connection between wireless meter installation and the hundreds and hundreds of health complaints that arise as soon as installations take place.   http://tinyurl.com/86mdukb   Scroll down to find the list.
 
Many scientists and academics have written to government agencies in charge of the decision to deploy wireless smart meters, to alert them of the possible dangers in such a widespread public exposure to RF, urging commissions in charge of overseeing utilities to exercise more precaution.   Utilities and regulators may sound reassuring, but many experts in the field are not so sure wireless smart meters are good for you.  www.ccst.us/projects/smart2/
 
The good news is that the Vermont Legislature and the Public Service Board have required utilities to allow customers who may share these concerns to “opt out” of the wireless smart meter installation programs, and to do so for free.  We encourage you to inform yourself, and make your own “smart” meter decision.


P.O. Box 117 | Marshfield, VT 05658 US

No comments:

Post a Comment