What We Need in a State Smartmeter Law

A Smartmeter law needs at the minimum —

1. Halt to wireless communication (transmission) from home meters.

This solves wireless threats to health and interference with medical devices and other wireless devices.

Optical cable (vs wireless radio transmission) can solve the wireless problems, but retains the privacy threats by letting the utility (and anyone they “share” your information with) know all your family’s personal habits.

2. Halt utility access to private-use data.

This solves privacy threats.
No personal-use data should leave your property. This can be accomplished by a Smart-ER meter.

3. Halt to fire danger switch.

This solves the fire danger threat.

4. Halt to Smartmeter installations

until an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is completed under CEQA. The PUC and PG&E refused to prepare one. This hideous violation of law lead to outrage across the state of California. CEQA is intended to let the public know about the environmental impacts of a project BEFORE it is approved.

5. Allow customers to refuse Smartmeters with no cost penalty.

6. Allow customers to have the old meters reinstalled and Smartmeter removed with no cost penalty.

7. Mandate the development of Smart-ER meters that do not communicate with the Utility (e.g. PG&E) in any way thus eliminating the radio-frequency threats and the privacy violations.

8. After the EIR is completed, discuss whether an “opt-in” provision be allowed.

Since the PUC is out of control, California’s legislature needs to adopt a law employing all these provisions for the governor to sign.

# # #

Share
This entry was posted in "Smart"meters, Radiation/Light Pollution and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to What We Need in a State Smartmeter Law

  1. Pingback: What’s Wrong with “Smart”meters? | HOPE: News and Community

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *