A physicist friend sent me this nytimes article on Californians rejecting electric meters that transmit information back to the utility via radio: “the signals cause headaches, nausea and dizziness”. In other words, they hold their mobile phone or cordless phone right next to their brains to call up PG&E and complain that the radio transmitter on the side of their house is making them ill.
I pointed out that California led the way in anti-Microwave oven hysteria, forcing restaurants to post warning signs “microwave in use”. The same folks who couldn’t accept a 2.45 GHz signal confined inside a Faraday cage in their kitchen subsequently were happy to accept a 1.9 Ghz signal broadcast from next to their ear directly into their brain.
Next up:
Californians surf the Internets for dangers of radiation from Japanese nuclear reactors using wifi on laptops cradled next to their precious parts.
I hate to dampen your glee at finding yet another California oddity to ridicule, but this concern is shared by others in the country.
http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2010/10/14/critics_voice_concerns_about_new_electrical_meters/
I am more interested in the types of monitoring that can be done remotely by the power companies (supposedly a fair amount about household activities can be deduced by so-called “signatures” of various electrical appliances drawing current at any particular time, i.e. they can tell if anyone is home, whether they are eating, using hot water and the like.) I am not sure if I believe this much detail could be obtained, or whether it amounts to much, but I suppose if a series of observations over time could be collected, the power company might know enough of what your use pattern looked like to know when someone was home and to rent that information, on the fly, to a telemarketer.
@Jim – So the concern is valid because it is shared? Mass hysteria is not a reason to infer validity except perhaps in a social perhaps! There is nothing in the article you linked to that provides any scientific data or any more info than in philg 8 line heavily sarcasm flavored post 😉
I think that most people who oppose these SmartMeters (TM) dislike the idea of someone else having access to their energy consumption data in finely disaggregate form. Some also wonder whether this is the thin end of the wedge, with remote control of one’s thermostats and some appliances coming down the path. Or household consumption quotas at different times of the day being enforceable via SmartMeter and remote control.
(Let’s not forget that these systems are far from secure, and that almost no complex system ends up being used solely for the purpose intended at its inception, both arguments against giving up control over one’s information.)
But you’re right in pointing out that California (where I live) is full of loonies who can’t see the incoherence of their points of view.
@arbitrage- I never meant to infer validity.
I was merely pointing out that we Californians aren’t the only loonies…as Jose puts it 🙂
Also, I have a “SmartMeter”. It was installed because the meter reader refused to enter my yard because of my large dog.
The result of that meter is higher electric bills because it is far more accurate that the old style meter. It also removes the human error factor in reading it.
And, it eliminates the suspicion that some of the lazier meter readers where just skipping houses and guesstimating usage.
I kind of figured that the power company would use the power lines to transmit signals back to their base stations.
Dan: Your idea is a good one, but challenging to engineer since high frequency communication signals will be attenuated by transformers that are designed for 60 Hz. I forget exactly how the power companies were going to try to overcome this Physics 101 problem and dominate the Internet-to-the-home market, but I’m not aware that any succeeded in unseating the cable and phone monopolies.
@jose “with remote control of one’s thermostats coming down the path’
We’ve had remote control here in Austin for a number of years
http://www.austinenergy.com/energy%20efficiency/Programs/Power%20Partner/index.htm
In several part of Italy ant the Netherlands (that’s where I have direct experience) electric meters are read remotely communicating over the power line. Thank to this you can get different rates depending the time you consume energy. The main goal is to try to distribute the load over the whole day offering cheaper energy if used in the evening or in the weekend.
Thanks for rubbing it in that there are tons of idiots here in california. I had naively assumed that the smart power meter used ADSL-like techniques to transmit and receive information to the power provider but even at 2.4GHz the transceivers use less than 1 Watt source and operate in the same frequency range as Wi-Fi! Sitting within a meter to the access point at your $tarbuck$ will give you a bigger dose of this non-ionizing radiation than being 3 meters away from the smart meter. idiots!
Well, I live in San Francisco and am vaguely aware of opposition to the so-called smart meters, but this is the first time I’ve heard of EMF as an argument. I thought the main reason for opposition is that Californians know just how corrupt, incompetent and criminally negligent PG&E is (google “Erin Brockovich” or “San Bruno Explosion”), and we have zero trust in its ability to manage smart meters without screwing up and overcharging people (strange how errors never seem to be in the other direction, isn’t it?)
There are valid reasons for rejecting the so-called smart meters, or at least questioning them. Specifically, there are questions about the accuracy of the meters and the billing process. And also concerns about utilities charging ratepayers for the expense of installing the meters, even though the meters are supposed to save money (which will presumably benefit the executives and shareholders of the utility companies). And then there’s the potential misuse of the data the meters can collect, whether for marketing, or perhaps for law enforcement profiling (pot growing? terrorism? tax evasion?) of questionable accuracy and constitutionality.
Smart meters are a technology that clearly can benefit utility companies, and possibly others who can profit from the data. The benefits to consumers aren’t clear at all. But the utility companies nonetheless insist not only on foisting them on consumers but making them pay for the privilege. That’s reason to reject them, and maybe even a reason for psychosomatic symptoms caused by the associated anxiety. If you’re a conspiracy theorist you might propose that the utility companies are encouraging the spurious health claims as a smokescreen to distract everyone from discussion of the genuine issues.
There are other reasons for not wanting ” smart” meters besides RF radiation:
– Variable rate pricing. AFAIK the dumb meters didn’t know if you were burning a K/h at 4am or 4pm. Of course rates are higher at 4pm than they are at 4am so now they charge you more for using power during the day when you are actually home and awake and using appliances.
– When they do a drive-by meter reading, how can they be sure the reading they are going to charge you is actually from your meter? I assume they don’t double check unless the reading is significantly low. I think you can call PG&E and ask for a second reading, but I assume that requires calling 1800 EAT SHIT, mucking through the voice jail, and waiting on hold for a lifetime.
– PG&E doesn’t have any competitors nor much (effective) oversite from the government. It might be a good idea to say something and ask for some review before it’s too late.
The hippies are just using the health thing as a way to gather attention (#winning) and set up a roadblock to PG&E. I agree on the surface the RF thing is silly but it’s having the desired effect. PG&E hasn’t helped their own cause by blowing up a neighborhood and then losing documentation about the pipeline in question.