The Appeal now has close to 5,400 signatures. https://www.appel5gappeal.ca/
1) Lest we forget about the sordid history of the Campbell and Clark Liberal governments, The Tyee has offered to remind us of the horribly inept (corrupt?) ideas that have led to BC Hydro rates that are supporting Liberal friends. And we will keep on paying for poor decisions like those forcing us to have smeters.
(click on photos to enlarge)
We’re Paying More and More for the Liberals’ BC Hydro Mismanagement
“As the pandemic cuts demand, consumers are forced to buy expensive, unneeded electricity from private companies.”
During this same period, BC Hydro came up with the idea of smeters. I don’t know if the initial push was government motivated, but in 2008 an application was submitted to the BCUC for smeters which BCUC rejected on the basis that the technology was too new and unproven and the benefits didn’t justify the costs. Then, in 2010, the Liberal government included this, along with Site C, in the Clean Energy Act — with no approval of or oversight by the BCUC.
Will McMartin wrote a couple of excellent articles about the smeter program in the Tyee in February and March, 2011:
First to Profit from $1 Billion Smart Meter Program: Liberal Insiders
Smart Meters, Boondoggle in the Making
2) In the USA in the 1980s, the Environmental Protection Agency was raising concerns about the levels of microwave radiation being emitted and was encouraging employment of the Precautionary Principle. In the Microwave News issue below there are several important articles, one of which reports on the industry’s attempt to put a price on implementing stricter exposure limits. See pg. 1.
Several other articles speak to concerns about the health effects caused by exposure to non-ionizing radiation and options to maintaining the ANSI levels which were the guidelines set primarily by the industry and used at the time basically for radio and TV. There were no other significant wireless devices back then. The EPA was disbanded and told to stop work on non-ionizing radiation. Even back in the 1980s, the cost of protecting the public was too high — and the government appears to be supportive of allowing the public to pay the price, even if it meant their health.
EPA RFIMW Guidelines: Compliance Costs Estimated
“The cost to the U.S. broadcast industry of complying with a 100 uW/cm2 radiofrequency and microwave (RFIMw) radiation exposure standard for the general public would be between $19.1 and $45.6 million, according to an economic analysis by the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. FM stations would bear the greatest burden of compliance with a 100 uW/cm2 standard – 57-64 percent of the total industry costs.”
3) Below is a powerful letter written by a PhD in physics who has worked in the biomedical research field, arguing against the government’s and corporations’ “right to irradiate” the public.
Subject: In Maryland, the “Right to Irradiate” threatens the public health.
January 24, 2020
To: Larry Hogan, Governor of Maryland
Brian E. Frosch, Attorney General of Maryland
Senators and Delegates of the Maryland General Assembly
From: Ronald M. Powell, Ph.D.
Retired U.S. Government career scientist
(short biography appended)
Subject: In Maryland, the “Right to Irradiate” threatens the public health.
What is the “Right to Irradiate”?
The “Right to Irradiate” is an assumed right claimed by the Maryland State Government, by the county governments in Maryland, and by the utilities operating in Maryland. These organizations believe that this “Right” empowers them to mandate the irradiation of the Maryland public with radiofrequency/microwave radiation without considering the impact on the public health, and with no prior proof of safety.
This “Right” includes no provision to accommodate even the most vulnerable members of the public, including pregnant mothers, children, and individuals already struggling with health problems.
This “Right” includes the right to install radiofrequency/microwave transmitters/receivers on, adjacent to, or even inside the private property of individuals and businesses, without the prior approval of the property owners.
The only factors considered are the aims of the government entity or the private company that exercises this “Right”, no matter how narrowly focused those aims may be.
What are examples of the exercise of the “Right to Irradiate”?
Here are three of the more egregious examples of the “Right to Irradiate” permitted, and even advocated, in Maryland:
– the mandatory installation of wireless smart meters on, or even inside, homes or businesses, without the approval of the property owners.
Each such wireless smart meter is a transmitter/receiver of radiofrequency radiation. For wireless smart meters for electricity, Maryland does permit the ratepayer to opt-out of the installation; but the ratepayer must pay an initial fee and a monthly fee forever for the privilege of not being irradiated. And the ratepayer who opts out must continue to pay “his share” of the costs of the wireless-smart-meter system, built into his rates, even though he or she is not using that system.
– the mandatory installation of cell towers in communities.
Each cell tower is a transmitter/receiver of radiofrequency/microwave radiation. The Maryland Government and the county governments are now considering expanding this “Right to Irradiate” to permit the installation of so-called 5G (“Fifth Generation”) cell towers up and down the residential and business streets of the State. Residents now face the prospect of looking out their windows directly into a cellular antenna.
Many Maryland residents currently live in communities that have an optical-fiber cable running down their streets. They are connected to that cable by an optical-fiber “link” that runs from the street up to their homes. The individual cell towers of 5G will have to connect to that optical-fiber cable running down the street. The towers will replace the optical-fiber link to the home with a wireless link that is slower, less reliable, less cyber secure, less energy efficient, more expensive, dangerous to health, and entirely outside of the control of the residents. The principal benefit will be to get mobility inside the home, even though mobility inside the home is relatively unimportant. Further, if customers want mobility inside the home right now, even at the expense of their health, they can simply activate the Wi-Fi capability that comes with their current Internet service, which, at least, they can control and thus can turn off.
– the mandatory installation of Wi-Fi in the public schools.
Wi-Fi relies on radiofrequency/microwave transmitters/receivers located in virtually every classroom, and positioned right over the heads of children, even disabled children, who are even more vulnerable to harm. Irradiation generally continues throughout the day, by Wi-Fi systems left running even when they are not needed, and extends throughout every year of a child’s public education. Parents who want to protect their children from such radiation are effectively denied access to a free public-school education.
Sadly, the public schools have failed miserably in educating children about the safe use of technology. The schools teach the elements required to understand the vulnerabilities of living entities to radiofrequency radiation: mathematics, biology, chemistry, and physics. But they ignore applying that education to understanding the health risks of the wireless technology that they themselves mandate.
As a classic example of the “Right to Irradiate”, the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission is currently planning to install wireless smart meters to measure water consumption of its 475,000 customer accounts. Those accounts serve 1.8 million residents of Montgomery County and Prince George’s County. The health implications of this plan are described in the first attached message, just delivered to WSSC and called “Wireless smart meters harm human health.” Those health implications are presented in the broader context of the three above examples. The remaining six attachments support the first one and are referenced in it. [see attachments below]
Maryland is heading in the wrong direction on wireless technology, which is a heartbreak for such an otherwise enlightened state. Maryland seems caught up in a frenzy of belief that wireless technology is the “wave of the future”. This frenzy is fanned by profitable industries that won’t take “NO” for an answer, no matter what the cost in human health and life. As a result Maryland apparently isn’t even considering safe ways to implement communications technologies within the State; and Maryland is not educating it residents, including its children, about the risks involved. This must change.
If you care about the health of Maryland residents, kindly read the first attachment.
Who am I?
I am a retired U.S. Government career scientist (Ph.D., Applied Physics, Harvard University, 1975). During my Government career, I worked for the Executive Office of the President of the United States, the National Science Foundation, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology. For those organizations, respectively, I addressed Federal research and development program evaluation, energy policy research, and measurement development in support of the electronics and electrical-equipment industries and the biomedical research community. I currently interact with other scientists, with physicians, and with other informed individuals around the world about the impact of electromagnetic fields, including radiofrequency radiation, on human health.
I have been a resident of Montgomery County since 1979.
Thank you for your attention.
Ronald M. Powell, Ph.D.
Sharon Noble, Director, Coalition to Stop Smart Meters
“Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm.” Winston Churchill