Sample Letter To Power Company

Here is a Sample letter to send to your power company, this letter should be sent “Certified with Return Receipt”

Please change the information to your info.

FROM:

TO: Inland Power & Light
Chief Executive Officer Chad Jensen,
Chief of Energy Resources John Francisco
10110 W. Hallett Road
Spokane, WA 99224

Date:

NOTICE OF NO CONSENT TO TRESPASS AND SURVEILLANCE, NOTICE OF LIABILITY
Dear Inland Power & Light and all agents, officers, employees, contractors and interested parties,
If you intend to install a “Smart Meter” or any activity monitoring device at the above address, you and all other parties are hereby denied consent for installation and use of all such device on the above property and installation and use of any activity monitoring device is hereby refused and prohibited. Informed consent is legally required for installation of any surveillance device and any device that will collect and transmit private and personal data to undisclosed and unauthorized parties for undisclosed and unauthorized purposes. Authorization for sharing of personal and private information may only be given by the originator and subject of that information. That authorization is hereby denied and refused with regard to the above property and all its occupants. “Smart Meters” violate the law and cause endangerment to residents by the following factors:
1. They individually identify electrical devices inside the home and record when they are operated causing invasion of privacy.
2. They monitor household activity and occupancy in violation of rights and domestic security.
3. They transmit wireless signals which may be intercepted by unauthorized and unknown parties. Those signals can be used to monitor behavior and occupancy and they can be used by criminals to aid criminal activity against the occupants.
4. Data about occupant’s daily habits and activities are collected, recorded and stored in permanent databases which are accessed by parties not authorized or invited to know and share that private data.
5. Those with access to the smart meter databases can review a permanent history of household activities complete with calendar and time-of-day metrics to gain a highly invasive and detailed view of the lives of the occupants.
6. Those databases may be shared with, or fall into the hands of criminals, blackmailers, law enforcement, private hackers of wireless transmissions, power company employees, and other unidentified parties who may act against the interests of the occupants under metered surveillance.
7. “Smart Meters” are, by definition, surveillance devices which violate Federal and State wiretapping laws by recording and storing databases of private and personal activities and behaviors without the consent or knowledge of those people who are monitored.
8. It is possible for example, with analysis of certain “Smart Meter” data, for unauthorized and distant parties to determine medical conditions, sexual activities, physical locations of persons within the home, vacancy patterns and personal information and habits of the occupants.
9. Your company has not adequately disclosed the particular recording and transmission capabilities of the smart meter, or the extent of the data that will be recorded, stored and shared, or the purposes to which the data will and will not be put.
I forbid, refuse and deny consent of any installation and use of any monitoring, eavesdropping, and surveillance devices on my property, my place of residence and my place of occupancy. That applies to and includes “Smart Meters” and activity monitoring devices of any and all kinds. Any attempt to install any such device directed at me, other inhabitants, guests, my property or residence will constitute trespass, stalking, wiretapping and unlawful surveillance, all prohibited and punishable by law through criminal and civil complaints. All persons, government agencies and private organizations responsible for installing or operating monitoring devices directed at or recording my activities, which I have not specifically authorized in writing, will be fully liable for any violations, intrusions, harm or negative consequences caused or made possible by those devices whether those negative consequences are justified by “law” or not..
This is legal notice. After this delivery the liabilities listed above may not be denied or avoided by parties named and implied in this notice.
Notice to principal is notice to agent and notice to agent is notice to principal. All rights reserved.

Signature

Name of energy user and/or customer ID

 

Smart Meters Radiation Exposure Up to 160 Times More Than Cell Phones (Hirsch)

Source:http://www.electrosmogprevention.org/public-health-alert/smart-meters-radiation-exposure-up-to-160-times-more-than-cell-phones-hirsch/

Daniel Hirsch, California radiation expert and UCSD instructor, criticizes the industry-influenced CCST report that incorrectly minimized smart meter risks, based on the widely distributed  industry-generated Tell Associates report. CCST is a partner with US DOE (US Dept. of Energy), funder and promoter of smart meters. In the following analysis, Hirsch informs us that one smart meter can provide up to the full body radiation exposure of 160 cell phones; in an interview (video), Hirsch provides the average exposure, equivalent to the full body exposure from 100 cell phones. This completely debunks the Tell Associates report, which was paid for by Pacific Gas & Electric.

Hirsch Chart illustrating radiation exposure of SmartMeters relative to other devices

Abstract
The draft report by the California Council on Science and Technology (CCST) does not appear to answer the questions asked of it by the requesting elected officials. Furthermore, rather than being an independent, science-based study, the CCST largely cuts and pastes estimates from a brochure by the Electric Power Research Institute, an industry group, issued some weeks earlier. The EPRI estimates appear incorrect in a number of regards. When two of the most central errors are corrected – the failure to take into account duty cycles of cell phones and microwave ovens and the failure to utilize the same units (they should compare everything in terms of average whole body exposure) the cumulative whole body exposure from a Smart Meter at 3 feet appears to be approximately two orders of magnitude higher than that of a cell phone, rather than two orders of magnitude lower. (Hirsch, California radiation expert, radiation policy instructor at UCSC)

Smart Meters Potential For Harm Does Exist

“Smart meters are still fairly new, so there has been very little direct research on the possible health effects of exposure to RF from smart meters”

Source: http://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancercauses/othercarcinogens/athome/smart-meters

Smart Meters (American Cancer Society)

What are smart meters?

A meter is any device that measures the use of a product such as electricity, natural gas, or water. A smart meter is a meter that has the added feature of being able to send usage information back to the product supplier on a regular basis, often many times a day. Suppliers have promoted the use of smart meters as a way for them to operate more efficiently and cheaply, as well as a way to provide consumers with real-time information about their product use.

Smart meters have been used for a number of years in some developed countries, especially in parts of Europe. They have been installed in some areas of the United States in recent years as well.

Concerns have been raised about the safety of smart meters, mainly because they give off the same kinds of radiofrequency (RF) waves as cell phones and Wi-Fi devices.

How do smart meters work?

Smart meters record the amount of the product (electricity, water, etc.) consumed over time. They differ from traditional utility meters in that they are electronic and can talk to a central computer system.

Smart meters talk to their central systems using RF transmissions, based on either cell phone, pager, satellite, radio, power line (PLC), Wi-Fi or Internet (TCP/IP) communication methods. Internet and cell phone applications have become the preferred options because of their flexibility and ease of deployment.

How are people exposed?

Smart meters are typically installed outside the home, either in place of or as part of existing meters. The level of exposure to RF energy depends on the distance from the smart meter antenna and the communications protocol used in the smart meter. The frequency and power of the RF waves given off by a smart meter are similar to that of a typical cell phone, cordless phone, or residential Wi-Fi router. However, smart meters are typically only in operation a small portion of the time because they only send and receive short messages at set intervals throughout the day (often several times an hour).

Because smart meter antennas typically are located outside the home, people are much farther away from the source of RF waves than with personal cell phones, cordless phones, or Wi-Fi routers. In addition, walls between the person and the smart meter’s antenna further reduce the amount of RF energy exposure. For these reasons, the exposure to RF energy from smart meters is estimated to be much less than the typical exposure people receive through cell phones, cordless phones, and/or home Wi-Fi routers.

Can smart meters cause cancer?

Smart meters emit RF waves, which are a type of electromagnetic radiation, so there is the potential for them to cause harm. The actual risk of harm, if it exists,is likely to be extremely low, for a number of reasons.

The RF waves that smart meters give off are a form of electromagnetic energy that falls between FM radio waves and microwaves. Like FM radio waves, microwaves, visible light, and heat, RF waves are a form of non-ionizing radiation. They don’t have enough energy to cause cancer by directly damaging the DNA inside cells. RF waves are different from stronger (ionizing) types of radiation such as x-rays, gamma rays, and ultraviolet (UV) light, which can break the chemical bonds in DNA. Long-term exposure to ionizing radiation is a known cause of cancer.

At very high levels, RF waves can heat up body tissues. But the levels of energy given off by smart meters are much lower, and are not enough to raise temperatures in the body.  (Blogger note: If you live in a densely populated area you will have more Smart Meters)

The low levels of energy that smart meters give off at their source are further diluted by the distance they typically need to travel to reach people (unlike cell phones, for instance) and by any walls they have to pass through.

What has the research found?

Smart meters are still fairly new, so there has been very little direct research on the possible health effects of exposure to RF from smart meters. Research has been done, however, on the possible health effects of RF waves in general and from other sources. For example, a good deal of research has focused on the possible link between cell phone use and cancer in recent years.

Some research has suggested that the RF waves from cell phones might produce biological effects in human cells (in lab dishes), but it’s not clear if these effects could possibly cause tumors or help them grow in people.

Several dozen studies have looked at the possible link between cell phone use and cancer (mainly brain tumors) in people. Most of these studies have not found a link, but a few studies have found a possible link. All of these studies have suffered from limitations that prevent researchers from being able to draw firm conclusions, so this continues to be an area of active research. For more detailed information, see the document, Cellular Phones.

What do the experts say?

Several agencies (national and international) study different environmental exposures to determine if they can cause cancer. The American Cancer Society looks to these organizations to evaluate the risks based on evidence from laboratory, animal, and human research studies.

For example, the major goal of the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), which is part of the World Health Organization, is to identify causes of cancer. IARC has not assessed smart meters specifically, but it has recently classified RF radiation as “possibly carcinogenic to humans.” This is based on the finding of a possible link in at least one study between cell phone use and a specific type of brain tumor. IARC considers the evidence overall to be “limited” because of the conflicting findings and generally low quality of the studies that have been done.

In general, most experts agree at this time that the evidence of a possible link between RF waves and cancer is limited. This is based on the generally poor quality of studies done so far and the fact that it’s not clear how the low levels of energy in RF waves might cause cancer. But experts also agree that more research is needed to assess this risk.

Do smart meters cause any other health problems?

Many researchers continue to examine the possibility of other health effects from exposure to extremely low levels of RF energy. For example, researchers are studying the possible link between cell phone use and problems such as headaches, dizziness, vision problems, disturbed sleep, loss of memory, and the development of benign tumors of the nerve connecting the ear and the brain. So far, there is no conclusive evidence of such links.

One concern with cell phones has been whether the RF waves they give off might interfere with electronic medical devices such as heart pacemakers. According to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), cell phones should not pose a major risk for most pacemaker wearers, especially if the phone is kept more than 6 inches from the device as normally occurs in typical cell phone use. Because smart meters would generally be much farther away, they are not expected to pose such problems.

Could smart meters cause health problems in cancer survivors?

While RF exposure might not cause cancer directly, there is concern that cells in the body that have been damaged by exposure to some other substance might somehow be more likely to become cancerous when exposed to RF waves. In theory, this might be a concern for cancer patients being treated with ionizing radiation and/or medicines that might cause cancer themselves. There is no strong evidence to show that this is the case, but research on this issue is still in the very earliest stages.

How can I reduce my exposure to RF waves from smart meters?

There is no clear evidence at this time that RF waves from smart meters (or other devices) can cause harmful health effects. The low levels of energy from RF waves have not been clearly shown to cause problems even at close range, and the energy decreases the farther a person is from the transmission source.

If there is any increased risk, it is likely to be extremely small – even smaller than any possible increased risk from cell phones. Although it’s not clear if cell phones cause any health problems, some experts recommend that people concerned about possible health effects keep the device at least 3 to 4 inches from the head to lower exposure to RF waves, just to be safe. In the case of smart meters, people are already much farther from these devices, and an added degree of safety is provided by the one or more walls between the person and the smart meter antenna.

Some people may still have health or other concerns (such as privacy) related to the use of smart meters on their homes. In some places where smart meters are being installed, people have the choice to opt in or opt out of having them. Contact your local utility provider to find out what the options are in your area.

Additional resources

More information from your American Cancer Society

The following related information may also be helpful to you. These materials may be read on our web site or ordered from our toll-free number, at 1-800-227-2345.

Cellular Phones

Does This Cause Cancer?

Known and Probable Human Carcinogens

National organizations and Web sites

In addition to the American Cancer Society, other sources of information include*:

Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
Radio Frequency Safety: http://fcc.gov/oet/rfsafety/rf-faqs.html

*Inclusion on this list does not imply endorsement by the American Cancer Society.

No matter who you are, we can help. Contact us anytime, day or night, for information and support. Call us at 1-800-227-2345 or visit www.cancer.org.

References

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Frequently asked questions about cell phones and your health. Accessed at http://www.cdc.gov/nceh/radiation/cell_phones._FAQ.html on September 19, 2012.

Federal Communications Commission, Office of Engineering & Technology. Questions and Answers about Biological Effects and Potential Hazards of Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields. OET Bulletin 56, August, 1999. Accessed at http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/Documents/bulletins/oet56/oet56e4.pdf on September 19, 2012.

World Health Organization. Electromagnetic fields and public health: Mobile phones. Accessed at http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs193/en on September 19, 2012.

Last Medical Review: 10/05/2012
Last Revised: 10/05/2012

Maine Public Utilities Commission didn’t address smart meter safety, court says

By DAVID SHARP,The Associated Press
Posted July 12, 2012, at 8:03 p.m.
A new Central Maine Power smart meter displays electricity usage at a business in Freeport in fall 2010.

AP Photo/Robert F. Bukaty
A new Central Maine Power smart meter displays electricity usage at a business in Freeport in fall 2010.

PORTLAND, Maine — Maine’s highest court ruled Thursday that state regulators failed to adequately address safety concerns about Central Maine Power’s smart meters but the ruling had no immediate impact on more than 600,000 smart meters already installed in homes and businesses across the state.

The Supreme Judicial Court ordered the Maine Public Utilities Commission to reconsider a complaint that raised health concerns, and lead plaintiff, Ed Friedman of Bowdoinham, urged the panel to use the opportunity “to hold full evidentiary hearings on this and look at it under the bright lights.”

“We understand that the horse is out of the barn in terms of the meters being in, but they should’ve vetted these smart meters for safety before they were deployed instead of waiting until they’re deployed to see that there’s well-known biological effects,” Friedman said.

The Maine Public Utilities Commission issued a brief statement saying the panel is considering how best to comply with the supreme court’s unanimous ruling.

“The commission is reviewing the order to determine what steps must be taken to comply with the court’s decision. We have not reached a decision on what process will be required to do so. Any decision about process will be determined by commissioners in a public session,” the statement said.

Smart meters transmit information about electricity use to CMP’s headquarters in Augusta using wireless technology similar to cellphones which emits radio frequency radiation. CMP says smart meters are safe, cut energy use and allow utilities to pinpoint problems during power outages more quickly.

At issue is whether the state regulators shirked their legal mandate to ensure the delivery of safe and reasonable utility services in approving CMP’s smart meters.

Critics also contend the smart meter program poses constitutional problems related to privacy and trespass, but the supreme court dismissed those claims.

As for safety, lawyers for the Maine Public Utilities Commission previously said there was no need for the panel to tackle safety concerns that already had been addressed by federal agencies. They also contended an opt-out provision provided an alternative for people with health worries.

Critics say radio frequency radiation emitted by smart meters can cause sleep loss, heart palpitations, dizziness and other problems. They say the PUC had a duty to look into those health concerns and that the opt-out provision doesn’t assure safety of those who keep smart meters. Friedman said the opt-out provision is meaningless for people who live in congested neighborhoods where they’re surrounded by smart meters.

CMP, which contends smart meters are safe, said the supreme court’s ruling has no immediate impact. The utility said it would continue installing the remaining 2,000 smart meters.

Federal stimulus dollars funded roughly half the $200 million cost of the smart meter project.

“The system is in place and it’s operating. We use it every day. This decision isn’t going to change any of our operations in the short term,” said spokesman John Carroll.

Source:http://bangordailynews.com/2012/07/12/business/maine-public-utilities-commission-didnt-address-smart-meter-safety-court-says/

 Smart Meters: Friedman vs Maine Public Utilities Commission and Central Maine Power Company

January 11, 2012.  On February 25, 2010, Maine Public Utility Commission issued an order to approve the installation of advanced metering infrastructure (AMI) by Central Maine  Power Company (CMP).  The development of this technology was authorized by both federal and state legislation but neither the U.S. Congress nor the Maine Legislature has enacted legislation that mandates participation by electricity customers, or that authorizes utilities to implement mandatory programs.

Federal support for the development of smart meter systems began with the Energy Policy Act of 2005, was supplemented with passage of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, and funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, which set aside $11 billion for the creation of a smart grid.  The Energy Policy Act of 2005 established an optional standard by which utilities are required to make a time-variable rate structure (often accomplished with wireless, digital smart meters, but also with analog meters and wired meters) available “upon customer request.”

On July 29, 2011, the Appellants filed their ten-person Complaint. The Complaint includes extensive citations to peer-reviewed science reports and other documents and publications in support of the allegations that include health and safety, privacy, property rights, constitutional violations, and discrimination.

CMP responded to the Complaint with a one page submission on August 11, 2011. On August 31, 2011, the Commission dismissed the Complaint.  The Appellants filed a Motion to Reconsider. The Motion was denied on October 11, 2011.  The Appellants filed an appeal to the Supreme Judicial Court on January 11, 2012.

For those who are interested in following this case,

1.  Ten-Person Complaint, click here.

2.  Notice of Appeal, click here.

2.  Final Petition for Reconsideration, click here.

3.  Brief of Appellants, click here.

4.  Appendix to Briefs, click here.

5.  Supplement of Legal Authorities, click here.

Attorney for Appellants:

Bruce A. McGlauflin, Esquire
Petruccelli, Martin & Haddow, LLP
Portland, Maine, U.S.A.

Source:http://www.magdahavas.com/smart-meters-friedman-vs-maine-public-utilities-commission-and-central-maine-power-company/

Port Angeles smart meter effort in ‘imminent failure’ without major changes

By Jeremy Schwartz
Peninsula Daily News

PORT ANGELES — The city’s contractor for the beleaguered “smart meter” project lacked the skills and expertise to complete installation and managed the project poorly, a consultant told the City Council.

These shortcomings have placed the smart meter project in “imminent failure” and will require significant — and perhaps costly — changes on the part of Atlanta-based Mueller Systems to get it back on track, Tom Hulsebosch, energy and utilities practices managing director for West Monroe Partners, told the council during a nearly two-hour presentation Tuesday.

Hulsebosch said the smart meter program, also called the advanced metering infrastructure, or AMI project, cannot be completed as Mueller is currently managing it but could be salvaged if the company makes changes.

That could add $1.9 million to the $4.9 million the city has budgeted for Mueller Systems’ current contract.

“The ball is in Mueller’s court,” Hulsebosch said.

A representative of Mueller Systems could not be reached for comment Wednesday.

Council members took no action on the smart meter project, meant to replace the city’s aging analog electric water meters with digital devices that can be read wirelessly.

Last month, the city declared Mueller in breach of contract for failing to met “crucial benchmarks” for the project and gave the company 60 days to formally respond.

“We are expecting a response probably next week,” said Craig Fulton, the city’s public works and utilities director.

Fulton said he expects the response to, at the least, include how Mueller intends to move forward to address project problems.

“We need an action plan,” he said.

The city is prevented by its contract with Mueller to consider alternatives outside of the company until Mueller has responded to the city’s contract-breach notice, Fulton said.

“[At this time], it would be inappropriate to provide any ways forward beyond this contract,” Fulton said.

The contract with Mueller does allow the city to work to recoup the money paid to the company if the system has not been put in place according to the contract requirements, Fulton has said.

The city had inked an $86,500 contract with Chicago-based West Monroe Partners in October to scrutinize the delayed smart meter project through interviews with city and Mueller staff and by reviewing reams of documents associated with the project.

The full installation of the new meters has been delayed by at least a year and a half since the council approved the contract with Mueller Systems in December 2010.

The city has paid Mueller $1.9 million of the contract so far, mostly for the purchase of the new devices themselves.

Smart meters would be able to send utility usage data wirelessly from homes and businesses to City Hall and receive information back.

Tests of batches of the 2,080 smart electricity meters and 1,200 smart water meters installed on city houses and businesses have failed to consistently send accurate usage data from the meters to city servers, Hulsebosch said.

City staff members continue to read the new meters manually, Hulsebosch said, and the city has not relied on the devices transmitting data wirelessly to City Hall.

“At no point were customers in danger of getting an improper bill,” Hulsebosch said.

He told the council that Mueller failed to develop work plans to install and test the system.

“Mueller had never completed the implementation plan. That’s a foundational document,” Hulsebosch said.

Some city residents have raised privacy and public health concerns about the smart meters. Between 60 and 70 people attended a September council meeting in opposition to the project.

At Tuesday’s meeting, Port Angeles resident Cindy Turney said she found research showing that the radio frequencies smart meters use to transmit information can be dangerous to human health and that the meters will cost residents more money.

Virginia Leinart, another city resident, told council members she thinks smart meters installed on residents’ homes would be an invasion of privacy.

“I would ask you to call for an end to smart meters in Port Angeles,” Leinart said.

“It would stop the big black boot of surveillance and remote control from entering our lives.”

The city has maintained that the meters will not harm human health, that they would collect only utility usage information from homes and businesses and would not be able to control personal appliances or violate anyone’s privacy.

 

Source:http://www.peninsuladailynews.com/article/20140206/news/302069982/consultant-8217-s-report-port-angeles-smart-meter-effort-in

Smart Meter Dangers are Real

Stalin_D

 

Vidya Frazier, Guest
Waking Times

If you’ve been suffering from health symptoms since you had a smart meter attached to your home and others are telling you it’s just your imagination—take heart: there is clear evidence stating that smart meter dangers are real.

Evidence of Smart Meter Dangers

The conclusions of independent research are that safety standards of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) are woefully insufficient for guarding people against smart meter radiation levels—and that some installations of smart meters don’t even comply with those inadequate standards.

To begin with, FCC standards, set back in 1996, were based on studies with models of healthy 6’2”, 220 lbs men exposed for short periods of time to wireless radiation.

This, of course, is not even relevant in today’s world, in which women, children and people in poor health are continuously exposed to the radiation from many different sources.

But perhaps most importantly, the FCC only tested for thermal damage—and the health risks independent researchers are finding today are from non-thermal radiation. Also, other sources of radiation (such as Wi-Fi, cell phones, and other wireless devices, all present in today’s homes) were not present in the testing sessions with radiation.

For all these reasons, the report strongly cautions that smart meters are not safe.

Read More: http://www.wakingtimes.com/2014/02/24/smart-meter-dangers-real/

Largest Mass. Electric Utility: Smart Meters “Irrational”

According to Halt MA Smart Meters, Massachusetts largest electric utility NSTAR has submitted scathing comments to the Department of Public Utilities (DPU) regarding its proposed mandate (to the utility, not the customer- there is no legal mandate for individual utility customers to accept “smart” meters on private property anywhere in the US or abroad that we are aware of- that is a myth and a lie perpetuated by utilities).

NSTAR states in its official submission to the DPU:

  • “there is no cost justification that can support the implementation of ‘smart’ meters”
  • “Smart Meters do not reduce the number of outages” 
  • “Smart metering systems are not necessary to integrate distributed resources” (wind & solar)”
  • “Smart meters introduce a brand new portal into (our) information systems, significantly increasing the cyber-security risk.”
  • “mandated implementation of (smart meters) is not a prerogative within the [DPU]‘s discretion”
  • “Many customers have a deep aversion to technology that links them to the ‘grid’ in a way that they perceive as an invasion of their privacy and/ or detrimental to their health”

It is worth noting how far the “smart grid” has fallen in terms of public acceptance that now a major US utility has courageously come out and rejected “smart” meters,  complaining loudly about a state mandate even as state utilities commissions- driven by a corrupt association with the smart grid industry- continue to blindly push “smart” meter programs that have shown themselves to be a waste of public funds, a waste of energy, and a threat to our health, safety and privacy.

In California, the Public Utilities Commission was responsible for pushing the smart grid on initially reluctant investor owned utilities.  While companies like GE, Landis & Gyr, and Silver Spring Networks continue to profit handsomely from the smart meter gravy train, it’s clear that this train is stalling on an uphill grade without brakes, and we know how that story ends…..

For more information, see Halt MA Smart Meters Newsletter

NStar’s DPU  comment: HMSM highlighted version or original NStar Mass.gov doc

Source: http://stopsmartmeters.org/2014/02/11/largest-mass-electric-utility-smart-meters-irrational/

Nein! German ministry rejects smart meters

Quick Take: Many of us (most of us?) have assumed that the smart meter wave would roll through the U.S. and then on to Europe and the rest of the world. Now comes a report from a German agency that says smart meters don’t make economic sense in that country. This despite the fact that EU countries are under a mandate to connect 80% of their customers to smart meters no later than 2020.

Not only could this have major repercussions in Europe – it could also rebound back to the U.S., where roughly two-thirds of all meters are still the old-fashioned kind. It’s not hard to imagine that this negative assessment will give some U.S. regulators pause.

Still, all is not lost. A separate report from a pan-European trade association lays out the steps European utilities can take to make smart meters a reality, as you can read by clicking the link. – By Jesse Berst
Ernst & Young has authored a study on behalf of the German Federal Ministry of Economics analyzing the costs and benefits of a full smart meter rollout. It concludes that smart meters are not in the interest German consumers.
European Union (EU) climate mandates require that member countries connect at least 80% of customers to smart meters by 2020. However, the implementation may be subject to an economic assessment, such as the one just published.
The study says the savings from smart meters do not justify the costs, particularly for residential customers. It therefore concludes that it would not be reasonable to impose the 80% target on German utilities. Instead, it recommends an alternative deployment whereby smart meters would be installed only when an existing meter needed to be replaced anyway.
The Federation of the German Energy and Water Industry (BDEW) applauded the results, which confirm the long-standing position of that industry Association.

Jesse Berst is the founder and Chief Analyst of SGN and Chairman of the Smart Cities Council, an industry coalition.

http://www.smartgridnews.com/artman/publish/Technologies_Metering/Nein-German-ministry-rejects-smart-meters-5958.html#.UhC_6RbzSoV

 

Related Story

No Nationwide Roll-Out of Smart Meters Recommended According to Cost-Benefit Analysis: http://www.germanenergyblog.de/?p=13875