1) CORIX is on CORTES Island
Corix is on Cortes Island and apparently not following the protocol. Not knocking on doors, not talking with people, breaking locks, etc. Keep your eyes out and warn your neighbours.
One person got a digital and was told it needed a special attachment to work. This is not true – digitals (the C1S and theCN1S) do not need any special attachment.
2) We are creating a catalog of the lies and untruths that BC HYDRO have told its customers
We all know that over the last 4 years Hydro and this government have “spoken untruths”about the $meters and the program. Many come in letters, which I, at times, have been asked to help refute. One member suggested keeping a catalog of these twists, with each of contributing from our own experience – phone calls, conversations, letters, ads – and making it public for people to be able to argue points, or to tell friends who are new to this some of the things we’ve been told. This could be fun to do.
Would anyone like to be the one gathering these “gems”, and putting them in a consistent format that could then be put onto our website for everyone to enjoy and to use? Let me know at director@stopsmartmetersbc.ca with Hydro’s gems in the update.
3) If the account name changes then BC HYDRO will force a SMART METER
ATTENTION LANDLORDS/TENANTS: As you know, Hydro’s meter lack-of-choice program says that if an account changes names a $$meter will be installed. This means that the landlord or property owner has no say over what type of meter is installed in the account is in the renter’s name. One member would like to connect with other owners of rental property to brainstorm, consider options. Please email r.vansteele@gmail.com
4) John Horgan asks tough questions to Bill Bennett about payments for Smart Meter project being under budget. WHAT?
John Horgan, leader of the BC NDP party, asked some excellent questions of Bill Bennett of the BC Liberal party, and these are available via Hansard at
http://www.leg.bc.ca/hansard/40th2nd/20140514pm-CommitteeA-Blues.htm approximately line 1630 (on right hand side). Bennett is saying that the huge payment to Gary Murphy (~$1.5 million) has resulted in the program being below budget.
My comment would be that If the budget is wildly overstated to begin with (e.g. $555 per meter) it’s easy to come in under budget.
Thanks to John for keeping the pressure on.
5) Smart Meter resistance increasing
$$meter resistance is growing in many places in the US – California and BC led the way!!
***************************************
Letters:
Sent: June 23, 2014 9:11 AM
To: bill.bennett.mla@leg.bc.ca; john.horgan.mla@leg.bc.ca; mike.farnworth.mla@leg.bc.ca; Complaints BCUC:EX; andrew.weaver.mla@leg.bc.ca; greg.reimer@bchydro.com
Subject: More BC Hydro Mismanagement?
Dear Minister and Elected Representatives
I have received the following information:
2) $meters being replaced after 10 years. These were the initial one way communicating meters, the AMR meters like the C1SR.
Industry estimates that life expectancy for the 2 way meters is 7-10 years, while Hydro based its business case on 20. A great deal for ITRON and its buddies, but not so great for us. In 10 years we’ll be paying for 2 meters!!
http://www.hollandsentinel.com/article/20140618/NEWS/140618941
Is it correct that BC Hydro has based it’s business case to purchase smart meters on a 20 year life while the actual life of the meters Hydro has purchased is only 10 years?
I would appreciate a clarification – either a verification the life expectancy of the meters is 10 or 20 years and the basis for that statement.
Thank you,
———————-
Sent: June 24, 2014 12:29 PM
To: bill.bennett.mla@leg.bc.ca; mike.farnworth.mla@leg.bc.ca; john.horgan.mla@leg.bc.ca; andrew.weaver.mla@leg.bc.ca; Complaints BCUC:EX
Subject: Smart Meter Cost Benefit
Dear Minister and MLA
I urge you to take the time to read this article regarding the costs and benefits of smart meters. Then I ask you to compel BC Hydro to provide their cost benefit analysis of the project to an independent auditor to compare the Hydro analysis with those of European countries, especially those who have found the costs of smart meters exceed the benefits. Critical criteria that should be examined and included are:
1. what life of smart meter was used in the analysis?
2. comparison of the functions the meters have, including the functionality to report consumption data back to consumers.
3. have costs of upgrade of security to protect consumer privacy been included in the analysis?
Respectfully, XXXXXX
—————————
Subject: Re: Spogliarich Reconsider G-59-14- Phase 1 – BCH Meter Choices Decision
Date: June 25, 2014 at 3:58:42 PM PDT
To: “Commission Secretary BCUC:EX” <Commission.Secretary@bcuc.com>
Senior Administrator Constance Smith, Commission Secretary Erica Hamilton, BCUC Staff, and Commission Members:
This is my response to the request for comments on Professor Spogliarich’s request for reconsideration of the Commission’s Decision dated April 25, 2014 to do with BC Hydro’s Application for approval of charges related to the Meter Choices Program.
1. Should there be reconsideration by the Commission?
Yes, definitely. For now, suffice it to say I agree 100% with the reasons for reconsideration put forward by interveners Spogliarich, Mansell, and Darwin. As well, a reason of my own – which is based on my understanding that as well as determining fair/reasonable Meter Choices rates the BCUC has responsibility for matters of safety and accuracy – is the fairness and reasonableness of the various Commission-approved meter choice fees in light of the fire safety and accuracy issues I have raised (perhaps not very clearly) in my submissions to this hearing and as well in my recent correspondence with Mr. Wruck of your Complaints Dept.
2. If there is to be a reconsideration, should it focus on the items from the application for reconsideration, a subset of these items, or additional items?
Yes, it should focus on the items from the application for reconsideration, and yes, additional items should be considered. A general one that needs to be reconsidered is everything to do with the government’s imposition of an, in my opinion, poorly thought out electronic metering program on the citizens of BC.
3. If there is to be reconsideration, should the Commission hear new evidence and should new parties be given the opportunity to present evidence?
Yes, new evidence should be heard. A particular voice that should be sought out – to do with the safety and accuracy issues I referred to in 1. – is that of BC Hydro’s professional engineers.
Yes, new parties should be allowed into the process. After all, thanks to the government thinking it knows what’s best in matters electric for its citizens, there was very little debate about the pro s and cons of the electronic metering program in the legislature.
Finally, I think the furtherance of this hearing should continue in writing
Sharon Noble
Director, Coalition to Stop smart Meters
Get up, stand up for your rights!
RESISTANCE IS FERTILE.
************************************************