San Jose Mercury: PG&E leniency demands explanation

PG&E had taken money from ratepayers for gas pipeline maintenance and instead used it for shareholder dividends and executive bonuses. These are facts.

San Jose Mercury News
August 2, 2016

The federal attorneys who so effectively prosecuted the criminal case against PG&E owe the public, particularly San Bruno residents, an explanation for suddenly recommending leniency if the utility is convicted.

The U.S. attorney’s office is declining to comment on why it decided to drop 99 percent of the possible fines the utility faced for its role in the September 2010 explosion. This would take the potential penalty down to $6 million. For a company the size of PG&E — which recorded an $888 million profit last year — that’s petty cash.

Eight people died in San Bruno. Thirty-eight homes were destroyed. PG&E had taken money from ratepayers for gas pipeline maintenance and instead used it for shareholder dividends and executive bonuses. These are facts.

The jury is now deliberating. If PG&E is convicted of the charges, it deserves the maximum fine of $562 million.

Speculation is that federal prosecutors want to cut short the penalty phase of the trial, which would follow a conviction. With $562 million at stake, it would eat up enormous amounts of their time and money as well as PG&E’s. Making the fine inconsequential would cut things short for sure.

But a slap on the wrist after all this time would not discourage utilities from taking shortcuts at the expense of public safety. Did we mention PG&E’s $888 million profit last year?

PG&E was charged with 12 felony violations of laws that required it to identify risks to its pipeline operations and keep accurate records on conditions of the lines. It also was charged with obstructing the federal investigation.

PG&E’s history of record-keeping is horrible. For example, a key point of contention at the trial was whether the utility had adopted a policy of allowing gas pipeline pressure to go 10 percent above the legal maximum. Federal law requires utilities to classify this as high-risk. PG&E originally produced a memo saying it had adopted the policy, then said that was a only a draft of a policy that had not been implemented. Who knows what’s true?

A supervising engineer in pipeline risk management for PG&E, Calvin Lui, testified that the utility was aware of wide-ranging threats to its pipelines but failed to tell state regulators about manufacturing defects.

He also said “the pipeline codes tended to conflict and confused us.” But the rules seem clear that pressure tests or inspections are required on any pipes in which the maximum pressure has been exceeded. That didn’t happen.

Prosecutors argued that PG&E committed felony violations of the law in one of the worst utility disasters in American history. Backing off on the penalty is confusing to survivors, the public and to utilities watching for signals of accountability.

The U.S. attorney’s office should restore the full penalty request. If it doesn’t, at least tell us why.

http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_30202946/mercury-news-editorial-pg-e-leniency-demands-explanation?source=pkg

Posted under Fair Use Rules.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on San Jose Mercury: PG&E leniency demands explanation

Prosecutors ripped after slashing potential PG&E San Bruno fine by 99 percent

From CBS, Sacramento
August 3, 2016

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) – A surprising decision by federal prosecutors in San Francisco to drop their pursuit of a potential $562 million fine against one of the nation’s largest utilities after a deadly pipeline blast marked the second time in recent months that the office has backed down in a high-profile criminal case against a major corporation.

The decision Tuesday involving Pacific Gas & Electric Co. came weeks after the U.S. attorney’s office abruptly abandoned drug trafficking allegations against shipping giant FedEx during a trial.

The apparent misfires have raised concerns among legislators and legal observers about the performance of the office.

“It is so unbelievable that the U.S. attorney doesn’t have either the confidence or the faith in their work to be able to defend the charges that they originally made,” State Sen. Jerry Hill said about the decision to pursue a lower penalty against PG&E. Hill’s district includes San Bruno, the scene of the pipeline blast.

The setbacks more broadly indicate “the office is not adequately planning and investigating its corporate cases before trial,” added Brandon Garrett, a professor at the University of Virginia School of Law who studies corporate crime.

Criminal prosecutions of corporations rarely go to trial and are more often settled through plea deals or agreements.

Laurie Levenson, a former federal prosecutor who now teaches at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles, said corporate criminal prosecutions are high stakes and usually involve skilled defense attorneys, making them difficult to win.

Prosecutors sought a court order Tuesday allowing them to seek a lower fine against PG&E if the company is convicted of violating pipeline safety regulations and obstructing investigators.

The 2010 blast sent a giant plume of fire into the air, killing eight people and destroying 38 homes in suburban San Bruno.

Prosecutors did not explain their decision, which came after more than a month of testimony at trial and as jurors deliberated for a fourth day on 11 counts of safety violations and one count of obstruction.

The judge who later granted the request also provided no explanation. His ruling reduced the maximum fine PG&E could face to $6 million.

Assemblyman Kevin Mullin, whose district also includes San Bruno, said he was shocked to hear about the lower penalty and wants to hear more details about the decision.

“Until we know the rationale, the victims’ families, residents of San Bruno and current PG&E customers everywhere are likely to feel that their concerns are being ignored,” Mullin said.

The potential $562 million fine was double the amount of money prosecutors said PG&E saved by skirting pipeline safety requirements. The utility argued in a court filing that determining any savings would be complicated and unduly prolong a possible penalty phase of the trial if jurors return guilty verdicts.

Hill speculated that the U.S. Department of Justice may have seen PG&E’s filing and decided it didn’t want to spend more money by going to a second phase of the trial.

California regulators previously fined the utility $1.6 billion for the 2010 blast.

Prosecutors may have been concerned that jurors could get angry and side with PG&E because of the amount of damages sought and the time jurors would have to serve during a penalty phase, said Robert Weisberg, a criminal law professor at Stanford University.

“There were various things that the government could have rationally accomplished, and it seems like the government either hadn’t thought it through very well or its motivation shifted during the trial,” he said.

The U.S. Attorney’s Office said Wednesday it could not comment on the PG&E decision during ongoing jury deliberations. It declined immediate comment on its handling of corporate prosecutions.

U.S. Attorney Brian Stretch previously said his office will investigate the FedEx prosecution for any lessons that can be applied to future cases.

That case – nearly two-years in the making – accused FedEx of shipping prescription drugs that it knew were illegal to dealers and addicts, some of whom died. But days into the trial, prosecutors moved to drop the charges, again without explanation.

Copyright 2016 The Associated Press.

http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2016/08/03/prosecutors-ripped-after-slashing-potential-pge-san-bruno-fine-by-99-percent/

Posted under Fair Use Rules.

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Prosecutors ripped after slashing potential PG&E San Bruno fine by 99 percent

Arizona overbilling problems: ‘I couldn’t believe it…how could it be that high?’

Notice the utility company uses the term “concerns” which has no legal standing and downplays the real issues he is raising.

But importantly, the utility company admits overbilling is a widespread problem. “Many of our customers…have similar concerns.” Customers should contact the news channel as well as their local officials if they have higher than normal bills.

Will TEP refund the extra charges to this customer?

From News 4 Tucson, KVOA

N4T Investigators: Meter mess
August 2, 2016
Written By Matthew Schwartz

Tucson – “I couldn’t believe it, and it was like, how could it be that high?”

That was Brian Grundhoefer’s reaction upon seeing his June bill from Tucson Electric Power, for $276.42. The average bill for his small foothills home is about $75.  So he says he turned up the thermostat from 78 to 80 degrees. Then the July bill came, for $372.75, almost $100 higher than the previous month. Yes, both months were very hot, but Grundhoefer says he did not use nearly that much more electricity.

Grundhoefer said, “There’s no way I can be sure, not being an electrician. You know? But I didn’t change my lifestyle, whatsoever.”

Grundhoefer told TEP he thinks the meter malfunctioned and wanted them to come out and test it.  TEP’s usually policy is if they come out to test a meter and find it’s broken, there’s no charge. But if the meter’s working, the customer has to pay $186 for the test.

The News 4 Tucson Investigators met with TEP spokesman Joe Barrios. We said, ”So the customer is really just taking a gamble of paying that money depending on what your guys find, right?  They don’t know in advance if they’re going to find something wrong or not.”

Barrios said, “Well, certainly no, but that’s why it’s important for customers to talk to us about their energy usage.”

Grundhoefer, a 70 year-old widower living on a fixed income, declined to pay for the meter test, and paid his high bills for June and July.

We said to Barrios, “You have to admit that this is a huge disparity, right? From an average of 75 dollars a month to 375?” Barrios said, “Well, I would say that it’s certainly worth a look by our employees.”

Barrios says it’s unlikely that Grundhoefer’s digital meter malfunctioned. However, soon after we told him about the high bills, a new meter was installed for Grundhoefer’s house, free of charge.

Barrios said, “We will reach out to this customer to speak with him directly, as we do with many of our customers who have similar concerns. There’s always circumstances that we need to consider, and we’re happy to do that.”

TEP inspected Grundhoefer’s two year-old meter today after removing it and found  there were gaps in reporting data. However, TEP says that would not affect usage. The company says it will waive the meter test fee for Grundhoefer, which it occasionally does, on a case-by-case basis.

A TEP rep will visit Grundhoefer’s home on Wednesday to do an energy audit, to discuss specifics and why his last two bills were so high. The company says if you think your bill is too high, you should call them to discuss your usage.

If you have a story you’d like us to investigate, email us at investigators@kvoa.com or call our tip line at 520- 955-4444.

http://www.kvoa.com/story/32592843/n4t-investigators-meter-mess

Posted under Fair Use Rules.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Arizona overbilling problems: ‘I couldn’t believe it…how could it be that high?’

“Unbelievable”: federal prosecutors abruptly drop fines 99% at PG&E trial

From the San Jose Mercury

PG&E trial: Prosecution unexpectedly drops maximum potential penalty to $6 million
By George Avalos, gavalos@bayareanewsgroup.com
August 3, 2016

See related stories below.

PG&E will no longer face more than $500 million in fines if it is convicted on all charges in the criminal case linked to the fatal San Bruno explosion after prosecutors Tuesday abruptly proposed dropping 99 percent of the fines the embattled utility faced.

The most PG&E could be fined if convicted on all charges would be $6 million — far less than the $562 million prosecutors had been seeking in connection with the September 2010 explosion that killed eight people. The fatal explosion was one of the worst utility disasters in American history.

Prosecutors from the U.S. attorney’s office declined to comment on the reason for the request. U.S. District Court Judge Thelton Henderson approved the request late Tuesday, after jurors finished their fourth day of deliberations.

The PG&E pipeline blast hole on Glenview Dr. is photographed days after the blast which occurred on Sept. 9, 2010. Photo was copied on Feb. 23, 2012. (Photo courtesy of the Hensel family) (Gary Reyes/ Staff) ( Gary Reyes )

“This is unbelievable,” said state Sen. Jerry Hill, whose San Mateo County district includes San Bruno. “There is no way to justify this move when weighed against the loss of eight lives.”

San Bruno Mayor James Ruane, who like Hill has attended the trial, said, “That is a surprise, but I’m sure the prosecutors had their reasons for doing what they did. “The big thing is for PG&E to be convicted of the crimes they committed. A conviction puts a very dark stain on the corporate seal.”

San Francisco-based PG&E faces 12 criminal counts, including 11 charges that it violated federal pipeline safety regulations and one charge that it obstructed an official National Transportation Safety Board probe into the fatal blast. The company has pleaded not guilty.

The request by the U.S. attorney’s office to reduce the potential fines was outlined in a brief filing with the court. The document said that PG&E would be fined no more than $500,000 for each conviction, a maximum of $6 million.

PG&E would face fines only if jurors find the company guilty on any of the 12 charges. At that point, the case would move to a second phase during which penalties would be determined.

In April 2015, the state Public Utilities Commission imposed a $1.6 billion penalty against PG&E for causing the San Bruno explosion, the largest regulatory penalty ever levied on a U.S. utility.

PG&E spokesman Gregory Snapper issued a statement Tuesday in response to the prosecution’s request. “Regardless of this action or the next legal steps, we want our customers and their families to know that we are committed to re-earning their trust by acting with integrity and working around the clock to provide them with energy that is safe, reliable, affordable and clean,” the statement said.

Initially, prosecutors sought a fine that would have been double what they allege the utility saved by evading pipeline safety rules. Under that calculation, prosecutors initially sought a $562 million penalty.

Although prosecutors declined to comment on their request to dramatically reduce the fines, a court filing from PG&E provided some insight into arguments that the defense team may have used with federal prosecutors.

Defense attorneys argued that if the company were to be convicted on any charges, PG&E would then be forced in the penalty phase of the trial to present an extensive and complex defense in a proceeding that might have been heard by another jury.

PG&E warned in documents filed July 30 that the penalty phase would become “unduly complicated.”

If PG&E were to be convicted of violating federal pipeline safety standards, jurors would be required under a specific federal fines act to determine the amount of financial gain PG&E received from cutting corners in pipeline safety.

“For regulated utilities, assessing gains or losses accurately is a complex, nonintuitive endeavor that takes legions of regulatory experts,” PG&E attorneys stated in the July 30 filing.

San Bruno officials said a conviction, in their view, should be the primary focus, rather than penalties.

“For PG&E, all these fines are the cost of doing business,” Mayor Ruane said. “But a conviction sends a message that the lives of the eight people who died should not just be the cost of doing business.”

Contact George Avalos at 408-859-5167. Follow him at Twitter.com/georgeavalos.

Related stories:

http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_30198188/pg-e-faces-sharply-reduced-penalties-san-Bruno

Posted under Fair Use Rules

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on “Unbelievable”: federal prosecutors abruptly drop fines 99% at PG&E trial

Federal labor board discusses Smart Meter fire problems

Electrical workers union official Bobby Reed was fired by Texas utility company Oncor after testifying about Smart Meter fire problems to the Texas Senate in 2012. The National Labor Relations Board has just released its Decision and Order on his case. http://apps.nlrb.gov/link/document.aspx/09031d4582177a1a

It contains extensive discussion on the overheating and fire problems of Smart Meters found by union workers at Oncor and CenterPoint, both Texas utilities. Two culprits mentioned are the thinner blades in Smart Meters, and Landis and Gyr Smart Meters being too big for the meter socket. The blades inside the meters provide contact with the jaws of the meter socket. If the blades are too thin or the meter isn’t the right size, this causes inadequate contact or gaps which causes arcing. This is a fire hazard and also results in pitting of the metal surface. The arcing also creates “dirty” electricity – a very serious health issue.

Oncor went to great lengths in its testimony and accusations against Reed to defend Smart Meters.

Bizarrely, the labor relations board and administrative law judge went to great lengths to exonerate the Smart Meters. The judge stated these overheating, arcing, and fire problems are a connection problem, not a meter problem.

In sum, the record reflects that the primary cause of heating that resulted in burned out smart meters and in fires was not from any defects in the meters but rather stemmed from their connections with the meter bases. (p. 26 Decision, p. 19-20 Board Decision and Order — see below)

If this wasn’t such an enormous safety issue, this would be laughable. Political pressure on the Board and judge is the only possible rationale for such an absurd and dangerous decision.

If a meter is not made to correct specs, if it is constructed with cheaper, flimsier materials that do not do the job, then it’s the meter that is to blame.

The NLRB board in their Decision and Order “decided to affirm the judge’s rulings, findings, and conclusions.” They discuss Smart Meter safety issues particularly on p. 4-5, and dodge and weave around the fire problems, obscuring the meter as the problem-causer.

It’s astounding that these high paid, high-falutin NLRB lawyers don’t seem to grasp that electrical meters are a conduit for electricity, which is itself highly dangerous and which must be handled with care. Anything that causes a potential problem with electricity is a big red flag.

  1. Negligence and errors in meter specifications,
  2. Cost cutting to increase profits,
  3. Suppressing information and lying to the public – Reed testified that utility employees were instructed by the company to tell the public “it’s not the meter; it’s your meter can” — and then
  4. Making the public pick up the tab for all the damages

That is reckless and potentially lethal criminal conduct – very high stakes gambling. With the knowledge they have — all these utility officials and meter manufacturers — this could be called cold-blooded and pre-meditated murder.

These meters are the source of the problem. The meter manufacturer and the utility companies that use them are the causers of that problem. And that problem is causing not just “disgruntled” customers, as the NLRB board calls them, but dead customers, dead pets, damaged homes, and burned- up property.

The Decision and Order is here:
http://apps.nlrb.gov/link/document.aspx/09031d4582177a1a

There are several sections on Smart Meters, including Reed’s Senate testimony on p. 14

This is the earlier Decision by the Administrative Law Judge (it is included in the Decision and Order): http://apps.nlrb.gov/link/document.aspx/09031d4581b1f209

Here is the full section where the ALJ asserts Smart Meters are not the problem:

From the ALJ decision, Nov. 4, 2014, p. 25-26
(included in Decision and Order, July 29, 2016, p. 19-20) 

Smart meters, smart meter bases, and fires

In key respects, the testimony of the General Counsel’s and
the Respondent’s witnesses were substantially consistent and
credible, and I find the following facts.

Initially, a distinction must be made between the smart meter
itself and its installation vis-à-vis the meter base in which it sits.

When the jaws in the lug in the meter base are too wide or
loose, either as the result of improper installation of the smart
meter and/or the thinner blades of the smart meter not fitting
well, this can cause the jaws to heat. Such heating can cause
the lug to break and the plastic block of the meter itself to heat
and burn, resulting in a flash or electric arc and in the meter
burning up. Broken or bent lugs can result from loose connections
between the jaws and the smart meter, improper installation,
constant putting meters in and out, tampering, improper
installation, or movement of the earth. The age of the meter
base is a contributing factor, as is its proper maintenance.

After smart meter deployment began, both Reed and Waugh
noticed more situations in which improper connection between
the smart meter and the lugs (the jaws in particular) had resulted
in heating and/or burning.

Managers Carpenter Moore, and Smith, and Supervisors Anderson
and Efflandt did not contradict their testimony. Thus,
following the start of deployment, troublemen told Anderson of
situations where the jaws were spread too wide apart and did
not make good connection with the smart meter, and they and
told him that the smart meters were heating up and the lugs
melting or burning. Anderson candidly testified that this occurred
“through the whole time” of deployment, not just in the
early part, and that he observed lugs that appeared to be heated
up and melted, along with damaged meters. Efflandt received
complaints from troublemen about smart meter installation
but not about the smart meters per se. He recalled incidents
in which, after the smart meter was installed, troublemen
would be dispatched because the customer was having flashing
problems due to changing of the meter. Carpenter and Moore
both testified about an increase in the number of burned lugs
during deployment, although Carpenter indicated that many
may have been preexisting. Moore testified that CATS tickets
in General Counsel’s Exhibit 26 reflect problems with smart
meter connections, not the meters themselves. Finally, when
Smith had discussions with troublemen in November, they
mentioned problems with installation of smart meters and with
components other than the meter itself (i.e., rings or jaws).

Consistent with the above, the reports that Local 66 representatives
Childers and Lucero received from members indicated
that that the major cause of burned up Itron smart meters in
Houston appeared to be due to loose connections, owing in part
to their thinner blades vis-à-vis the analog meters that they
replaced. This is what they told Reed in 2012. In line with
their testimony, Longeway, the Respondent’s expert witness,
was aware that Itron had produced models in which the blades
were too thin and did not seat with sufficient pressure in the
jaws of the meter base.

Similarly, when Reed and Assistant Fire Marshal Simmons
had discussions in 2012, the focus was on whether smart meter
installation caused fires, not on whether the meters themselves
did so.

Longeway testified about his controlled laboratory experiments
with L+G smart meters that led him to conclude that they
could not cause fires. Oncor had him examine four instances
where there were fires after smart meter installation to determine
if the smart meters were responsible. He concluded that
the smart meter had not caused any of them; rather, they were
caused by faults in the electrical system or by broken lugs.

Prior to Reed’s testimony before the senate committee, Greer
was aware that claims had been made that smart meters were
causing damage to customers’ property, and he had been informed
that in two incidents in Arlington, a problem with the
customer’s meter base had caused a fire.

In sum, the record reflects that the primary cause of heating
that resulted in burned out smart meters and in fires was not
from any defects in the meters but rather stemmed from their
connections with the meter bases.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Federal labor board discusses Smart Meter fire problems

New Mexico: Los Alamos County mandates Smart Meters

From the Los Alamos Monitor

No opt-out for Smart Meters
Advocating action > McLin advocates for class-action suit against DPU
By Arin McKenna
Sunday, July 31, 2016

At its July 20 meeting, the Los Alamos County Board of Public Utilities (BPU) voted 4-1 against an opt-out option for Smart Meters. Stephen McLin voted against the motion.

According to the Department of Public Utilities (DPU) staff report, distributed energy resources such as roof-top solar are changing the face of the industry, and new options such as micro-grids, distributed energy resource management technologies and demand response programs for managing peak electricity demand more efficiently and economically are on the horizon.

Rate structures are also changing to provide options such as demand/response, time-of-use metering and value of solar tariffs (which credits customers for home solar generation).

Smart Meters, which allow two-way communication between the utility and the customer, are central to implementing those changes.

DPU plans to replace all electric meters with Smart Meters in FY2018. Gas and water meters will also be replaced with remotely read meters.

“When we get to the full deployment of these radio reads in our system, our plan is to not have meter readers at all anymore,” DPU Manager Tim Glasco told the board. “So that begs the question of what do we do if someone has strong feelings about having a radio transmitter on their meters at their house?”

DPU staff estimates that approximately 100 out of 8,000 households would opt out, based on how many opted out of a Smart Meter study on Barranca and North mesas.

According to Glasco, the main concern for those opting out are possible health impacts from having RF transmissions near their home. Glasco noted that numerous studies have failed to demonstrate any adverse health effects.

The other major concern is that someone could access data from the customer’s meter. The staff report points out that Smart meters “have extremely advanced data encryption and security protocols” and that there is no evidence that anyone has hacked into a smart meter data transmission and used the information for nefarious purposes.

Vice Chair Andrew Fraser was concerned that current law identifies utility billing as public records that must be released upon request, and that someone could use that information to determine when a customer is home.

Staff estimates that maintaining a half-time meter reader who would have to travel to widely spaced households and manually enter data into the system would cost an average of $20 per month per opt-out customer. They recommended that those customers shoulder that cost if the board allowed an opt-out option.

Based on his initial calculations, Deputy Utilities Manager for Finance and Administration Robert Westervelt does not anticipate that eliminating meter readers would significantly reduce the customer service fees, since other services such as billing and recovering the initial cost for the meters are encompassed in those fees.

McLin demanded that the department provide a cost/benefit study.

Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on New Mexico: Los Alamos County mandates Smart Meters

Michigan: Consumers Energy lies to the public and begins installing Itron Smart Meters

Despite the known problems, Consumers Energy is forcing Smart Meters on the public.

Consumers Energy tells several lies in this cheerleading article:

Itron Smart Meters do not broadcast once a day. They broadcast 1250 – 26,000 times per day according to California Public Utilities Commission documents which the commission compelled the utility companies to disclose.

The United States National Toxicology Program links this radiation with cancer. The World Health Organization declared it a possible carcinogen back in 2011.

Power outage information is not getting to the company from the meters. Customers still have to phone in an outage.

Pre-paid programs are a terrible idea. They jeopardize the health and safety of low income residents, particularly during the winter or the summer. At least one man froze to death due to a pre-paid scheme. Even though he had the money, he didn’t pay the bill when his prepaid amount ran out because he had dementia.

And the fire risk from these meters is frightening. Itron is known for its thin blades which cause arcing and “dirty” electricity. The company has never taken responsibility for that.

All of this hype by Consumers Energy is false advertising and fraud . There are no benefits except for the utility companies. These meters and their program will cost consumers over and over again. There will never be any savings. The rising costs will take everything. Add the health impacts and fire danger, and this is assault and more.

By Taylor DesOrmeau | tdesorme at mlive.com]
July 29, 2016

JACKSON, MI – There are smart phones, smart watches, smart cars, smart TVs and smart boards.

Now, all Consumer’s Energy customers will have smart meters.

The meters are being installed in Parma and Concord in late August and throughout the rest of Jackson County starting in December.

Smart meters have a communication chip inside that sends a message every night to the company with the amount of energy used for the day. With the new gas and electric meters, customers can view online their hourly energy use.

The digital meter also tells Consumers Energy whenever there’s a power outage.

“It offers our customers the opportunity to go online and look at their hourly energy use,” said Kathryn Burkholder, outreach coordinator for smart energy at Consumer’s Energy. “It gives us an opportunity to offer programs for our customers like a pre-paid program where they can pay as they go.

There are lots of interesting programs available with the new meter technology.”

The new technology will also eliminate estimated bills for customers.

The power goes out for five to 10 minutes during the installation process, however residents are alerted via a postcard, letter and phone call ahead of time and a knock on the door before the installation.

The program costs $750 million, but will save $1.8 billion, Burkholder said.

About 0.5 percent of customers opt out of the service, which costs $69.39 up front and $9.72 a month.

“Some people believe that there are health issues associated with them,” Burkholder said. “They’ll go online and read about the meters causing cancer, which is absolutely untrue. Our meters emit about as much radio frequency as a baby monitor.”

http://www.mlive.com/news/jackson/index.ssf/2016/07/consumers_energy_to_install_fr.html

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Michigan: Consumers Energy lies to the public and begins installing Itron Smart Meters

(VIDEO) WXYZ Channel 7 — Analog Meter Choice: Michigan bill would let customers opt out of smart meters

From Smart Meter  Education Network
Posted May 23, 2016

2:16

WXYZ Channel 7 reports on the introduction of Michigan’s Analog Meter Choice Bill. DTE does not respect customer choice, health concerns, and privacy concerns. Learn more about the bill at SmartMeterEducationNetwork.com.

DTE cut off power to a very few customers in 2015, trying to make an example of them. Customers continue to lock their meters. Many have had locked meters for 4 years or more. DTE’s shut-offs were illegal, but no one has fought them.

To get the bill passed, you MUST WRITE TO YOUR STATE REPRESENTATIVE AND SENATOR. Learn more at http://www.smartmetereducationnetwork.com/optout-legislation-michigan.php

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on (VIDEO) WXYZ Channel 7 — Analog Meter Choice: Michigan bill would let customers opt out of smart meters

Electrician discusses Smart Meter hazards (VIDEO)

NOTE: If you have flickering lights or other electrical issues mentioned in this video and you have evidence of a potential fire situation, and/or you detect heat from the meter or electrical panel or you hear sounds (eg. popping, sizzling),  contact your fire department. Take pictures and/or video of the meter, electrical panel, and socket. Document everything. Get the name and business card of the utility company representative who investigates and fire department personnel. 

Michigan utility companies DTE and Consumers Energy use Itron Centron OpenWay electric Smart Meters.

From Smart Meter Education Network
July 30, 2016

Why do smart meters catch fire, melt, or blow up? Why are your lights flickering after a smart electric meter was installed? Is this dangerous?

Redford, Michigan electrician Rob Marx discusses these issues.

10 minute video

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Electrician discusses Smart Meter hazards (VIDEO)

Japan: Smart Meters’ huge costs eliminate savings for public

From Japan Times

July 27, 2016

Three months have passed since the retail sale of electric power was fully liberalized. Approximately 300 companies have since entered the business of generating and selling electricity, and more than 1 million consumers have signed contracts with them, switching from the major power companies that have monopolized each region.

Some of those consumers may be feeling satisfied with new lower power rates, but their satisfaction could be short-lived. They may well end up shouldering the huge cost of the liberalization program.

There are hidden costs related to generating and supplying electricity that consumers never catch sight of because they are not listed on their monthly bills. These hidden costs are so huge that they could erase any benefits to consumers.

The Organization for Cross-Regional Coordination of Transmission Operations (OCCTO) issues weekly reports on how the liberalization of electricity retail is proceeding. It says that as of June 10, about 1.11 million consumers had concluded contracts with new power suppliers. Though this number may seem impressive, it accounts for a mere 2 percent of the total number of the nation’s households. If this percentage figure is taken as a yardstick, the liberalization of power retail can be termed a total failure.

How much savings have accrued to those 1 million plus consumers as a result of changing their power suppliers? It is still too early to come up with an exact answer because electricity bills usually go up sharply in the winter and summer months. But assuming the new contracts have resulted in an annual average saving of ¥10,000, as indicated by many websites’ comparison of differences in power charges, the total savings come to about ¥11.1 billion.

But this figure is only an illusion, because huge investments were made in preparation for liberalization and the money needed for those investments is being collected from all of the power consumers in the name of fees for using transmission lines.

One case that illustrates such big investments is the installation of what is known as a “smart meter,” a device that measures the amount of electricity consumed in real time and communicates the data to a power company for monitoring and billing. This device had been on the market even before liberalization but is now a must-have. A smart meter must be installed in every household in principle when its electricity supplier is changed. Tokyo Electric Power Co., which serves 20 million households, initially budgeted ¥21.9 billion for three years from 2012 to 2014 to install smart meters. Although a regulatory body reduced the sum by ¥6.5 billion, the balance still means that Tepco spent around ¥5 billion annually in the name of liberalizing the retail of electricity.

Other major power companies also invested huge sums to install smart meters. The total sum budgeted by the nine other regional power companies for that purpose averaged ¥62 billion a year. Even if it is assumed that 10 percent of that was slashed by the regulatory body, it still leaves a total of some ¥55 billion a year. When the amount spent by Tepco is added, as much as ¥60 billion has been spent every year for installing smart meters.

This sum more than offsets the cost effectiveness of liberalization. The estimated savings of ¥11.1 billion accruing to consumers is an overblown figure if various marketing devices to lure consumers are taken into account. This figure is likely to dwindle from next year on, showing that it is difficult for consumers to benefit.

Worse still, smart meters have become an impediment to, rather than a necessary tool for, the liberalization of electricity retail. The meters were originally meant to accumulate data, which then would be transmitted to power retailers via the major regional power monopolies. Only through this process will it become possible to calculate charges for individual customers.

After the liberalization got underway, however, it surfaced that it is impossible to collect the necessary data. The regional monopolies blame the manufacturers of the smart meters for supplying faulty products. But the monopolies, which bought the smart meters, aren’t free of blame. They will have to bear the cost of parts replacement and repairs, which in turn will be passed on to consumers in the form of increased expenses for transmitting electricity.

Since their installation will continue beyond 2020, there will be no limits to rising costs related to smart meters. Any savings accruing to consumers by switching suppliers will easily be wiped out by this increased cost.

The smart meter is not the only thing causing a huge waste of money in connection with the liberalization. For example, in preparation for the liberalization program, OCCTO purchased an exchange system built by Hitachi Ltd. for use in the power wholesale exchange. The cost was low at about ¥1.6 billion, but when transactions started, the system proved to be unworkable, necessitating major repairs.

OCCTO also functions as a new provider of jobs for ex-bureaucrats of the Ministry of Economy, Industry and Trade (METI) who are seeking post-retirement jobs. An ex-METI official already secured the post of OCCTO secretary-general — a position from which the official can intervene in OCCTO’s personnel affairs.

The body is staffed by about 150 people, including those seconded from the major power companies. It is difficult to say that the body is functioning properly because former METI officials are in powerful positions. An insider says OCCTO is made up of an undisciplined group of people with no coordination among them and that experts originally from the power companies, who are the only professionals in the body, have proven useless.

OCCTO’s annual budget stands at a whopping ¥4.5 billion, including the salaries of its personnel. The budget is expected to surge because the body plans to spend an additional ¥3.5 billion to develop a new exchange system. All these sums, of course, are to be shouldered by consumers.

The government has spent huge sums of taxpayer money in connection with the liberalization of electricity retail. While the sum spent on publicity has remained less than ¥100 million, the government has earmarked ¥2.2 billion in the current fiscal year for subsidies to renovate hydroelectric plants and ¥12 billion for technological development of next-generation thermal power plants. These types of funds are used almost exclusively by major power companies, as if they are being rewarded for cooperating with the liberalization.

When all the figures cited above are added together, the total comes to around ¥80 billion and is bound to keep on rising every year. And this money is charged to consumers while they are unaware of it. Compared with the large amounts of money thus collected from consumers, an annual saving of ¥10,000 resulting from changing one’s power supplier is just a mirage.

*http://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2016/07/27/commentary/japan-commentary/fraud-called-retail-electricity-liberalization/#.V5kwUSMrLe0

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Japan: Smart Meters’ huge costs eliminate savings for public