Posts Tagged ‘MA smart meters’

Watch the part about smart meters and why its bad to sign the opt out contract for not wanting the utility company to install a smart meter.
Published on Aug 8, 2016

The “Opt-Out” contract IS A SCAM! This video presents detailed info how to more effectively refuse and challenge harmful and illegal programs which attempt to force you to accept dangerous policies such as vaccinations and spying/transmitting utility meters. This video goes into detail to present your legal options and explain the powerful free documents at which are designed to put the authority back in your hands.

$7,000 is too much for an electric meter
National Grid’s run-amok Worcester area
‘smart’ meter pilot is $29M (65%) over-budget at $7,000 per meter, & does not represent Massachusetts demographics.
The many

egregious ahhem, 
misrepresentations in National Grid’s FEB 2016 ‘Interim Report‘ need to come to light before we all end up with $7,000 ‘smart’ electric meters.
The Massachusetts Attorney General’s Office will listen to ratepayer concerns on 
June 13th in Worcester (see details below)

CLAIM: 98% retention & 72% satisfied but the 4,000 – 6,000 

subjects who quit were conveniently not counted

CLAIM: In a ‘portion of Worcester’  

NOT: Groton, Auburn, etc.

CLAIM: ‘smart’ meters installed April ’14 

NOT: Installed in ’12 & ’13

CLAIM: Worcester Library usage 

Overstated Worcester’s Main Branch usage by 71%

 CLAIM: Not enough lower income subjects available
though half of Worcester meets National Grid’s threshold
CLAIM: 0.2% electricity “saved” on average
CLAIM: $1,250,0000 “saved” –  total (see chart below)


– 0.2% of the average annual MA home’s bill is less than $3

– Less than 11,000 subjects remain in the pilot

– $3 x 11,000 = $33,000



 $29,000,000 (65%) over budget (and counting)

 Sustainability Hub: $700k / 1,400% over budget 

 Cost:  $7,000 per meter and rising

 Vegetation decimated for ‘smart’ networks

 National Grid bought ratepayer private financial

& lifestyle data without their permission


National Grid and MA Department of Public Utilities rely on 
career tobacco testifier and outdated health data.
v Adverse symptoms ignored or scorned: headaches, sleep 
issues, ear ringing, neurological, etc.



Page 11 of Interim Report

Massachusetts Attorney General’s Office Public Listening Session
Monday, June 13, 2016: 6 – 8 pm
Energy & Environment Listening Session
devoted to hearing directly from YOU about issues
important to Greater Worcester & the Commonwealth.

Broad Meadow Brook Center & Sanctuary
414 Massasoit Road, Worcester
Open to the public: RSVP
Questions for the AG: 



Guess who is paying for the cost overrun…. yup.. us!
The Company’s filing is designed to recover $14,791,900 in smart grid pilot program costs both incurred in 2015 and under-recovered from prior years. To recover these costs, the Company seeks approval of the following for effect May 1, 2016: (1) revised Smart Grid Customer Cost Adjustment Factors (“SGCCAF”) pursuant to its basic service tariff, M.D.P.U. No. 1250; and (2) revised Smart Grid Distribution Adjustment Factors (“SGDAF”) pursuant to its smart grid adjustment provision tariff, M.D.P.U. No. 1238. The Department docketed this matter as D.P.U. 16-28.
In this proceeding, the Company proposes to recover $8,954,786 in customer-facing pilot program costs from its basic service customers, which includes $6,781,437 in customer-facing pilot program costs incurred in 2015 plus an under-recovery of $2,173,348 in customer-facing costs from prior years (Exh. MHK-3, at 1). 2 To collect these customer-facing costs, the Company proposes following revised SGCCAFs for effect May 1, 2016: Table 1: Proposed SGCCAFs 3 Customer Group SGCCAFs ($/kWh) Residential/Streetlight $0.00120 Commercial $0.00118 Industrial $0.00155 In addition, the Company proposes to recover $5,837,114 in grid-facing pilot program costs from its distribution customers, which includes $5,744,486 in grid-facing pilot program 

About Smart Meters. An investigation of smart meter tobacco scientist health expert Peter Valberg, who testified before the Worcester Zoning Board of Appeals concerning the safety of an antenna in the National Grid smart meter pilot program. Valberg also testified for the MA Dept. of Public Utilities to override citizen health complaints. This video has been submitted to the MA Attorney General, calling for an investigation of the Worcester pilot and the DPU mandate.

The Video talks about Valberg in MA around minute 11.

The Smart Grid Consumer Collaborative, (a reincarnation of the corrupted Tobacco Research Institute) lists Valberg as one of two expert sources supporting the claim that smart meters are safe. The Utilities Telecom Council also deferred to Valberg. Industry and regulators across the US have based their rejection of claims of physical harm on interpretation by Peter Valberg, with no scientific study, oversight, investigation or protection of human rights. Scores of California residents were disabled by the acute onset of illness coinciding with smart meter installation, now extended to many other states.

The Center for Public Integrity’s Feb. 8 article “Meet the Rented White Coats Who Defend Toxic Chemicals,” by David Heath chronicles a 2008 example of mercenary science. A lawyer defending the asbestos industry attempted to pin the blame for mesothelioma on tobacco. Evan Nelson contacted Peter Valberg of Gradient Corporation, who was “happy to oblige” by publishing supportive science in peer-reviewed journals for a fee. According to David Heath, “Valberg would adopt Nelson’s theory as an expert witness in lawsuits, using it against mesothelioma victims such as Pam Collins of Bellevue, Ohio.”

What Health did not report is that Peter Valberg curiously also had a lucrative career defending tobacco. A search in the Legacy Tobacco Archives at University of California, San Francisco yields 396,225 matches. In fact, Valberg continues to practice tobacco science. In early 2014, Valberg prevailed for Phillip Light cigarettes, denying victims the right to take part in a class action lawsuit because they had not paid an extra surcharge for Light cigarettes. The same week Valberg defended Phillip Morris, he also appeared on behalf of the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities to negate citizen health concerns. What is a tobacco scientist doing testifying on behalf of state utility regulator, financed by taxpayer and/or ratepayer expense?

Peter Valberg is the “expert” tapped by the energy and telecommunications industries and federal government backing the “Smart Grid,” to provide “evidence” that wireless smart utility meters and infrastructure are safe.


Eversource Energy, National Grid and Unitil have filed proposals in response to a requirement that they file grid modernization plans to reduce the effects of power outages, optimize demand — including reducing system and customer costs — integrate distributed resources and improve workforce and asset management.

National Grid presented the DPU with four five-year options that range from $225.3 million to $830.5 million, and up to $1.3 billion over ten years. The more expensive options include providing the company’s 1.3 million customers with smart meters.

So how do they recoup the 1.3 billion….. guess who gets higher electric bills even when they claim this saves energy…. so your meter reading goes down but the base rate skyrockets so what benefit it is to us, the customer?

While the town of Sheffield didn’t find our moratorium By-law to be appropriate as a zoning regulation and therefore the vote didn’t pass, we could have reapplied as an ordinance. But, we decided to spend our time in outreach to educate folks about the controversy surrounding this issue. That way for those who care about the implications of the smart meter they can stay up to date.

This is our first post in that vein:

Hundreds of residents crammed Kingston City Hall on Wednesday Feb/4th/15 night, to criticize the introduction of “smart” electric meters to New York’s energy grid. Their remarks were part of a hearing process conducted by the New York Public Service Commission. Officials said the Kingston meeting turnout and duration exceeded recent hearings held, in both, Buffalo and New York City. The Public Service Commission’s panel listened to four hours of testimony. Opponents claim that the new digital utility meters produce electromagnetic pollution, which sicken residents.

According to The World Health Organization the microwaves they emit when transmitting information is carcinogenic. It is classified as a class 2b carcinogenic toxin.