by Katherine | 12 Jul, 2016 | Latest News
I have received a recent report of a locked meter box being broken into for the purposes of installing a smart meter. This report came from a New Zealander. (If any readers have similarly suffered forced smart meter installations, you can contact www.stopsmartmeters.org.nz for advice via our contact form at this link: https://stopsmartmeters.org.nz/contact-us/
The forced smart meter installation took place despite the person who made the report having previously informed their electricity retailer that a smart meter was not wanted and was under the impression that a smart meter would not be installed. (There was no notice on the meter box at the time of the forced installation.)
The following steps should prevent other such forced installations:
1) Put a sign on your meter box that prohibits entry to the meter box for any activity other than meter reading or maintenance of the existing meter unless you (as the home owner or tenant) have specifically authorised access to the meter box for any other work. The notice at this link can be adapted to your needs www.stopsmartmeters.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/New-notice-for-meter-boxes-February-20151.docx
If you want you can add your name and address to the bottom of the notice.
2) Put a lock on your meter box (you should check your Terms and Conditions first to make sure that this is not prohibited under your supply contract) and then take a photo of your meter box with its sign and lock and keep this somewhere safe.
2) Inform your electricity retailer in writing (email is OK) that you will not accept a smart meter at your home or business. Keep a record of the email sent or use registered mail or a signature required courier if you send a printed letter. Archive any reply that you may receive from your electricity retailer.
NB: Please share this post via email and/or social media to help other people learn how to prevent a smart meter installation.
Smart meters are not compulsory in NZ
Please note that while some electricity company staff claim that smart meters are compulsory or some sort of government requirement it is NOT compulsory to have a smart meter in NZ.
Please note that it seems to be quite common for smart meters to be installed without prior notification, so if you still have an analogue meter and want to keep it, it would be prudent to take the above steps to prevent a smart meter installation NOW.
Resources to help you refuse a smart meter, including bilingual Te Reo/English options may be found at this LINK of www.stopsmartmeters.org.nz
To sign up for the free email newsletter, please visit www.stopsmartmeters.org.nz
Thank you.
Stop Smart Meters NZ is now on Facebook and you can get updates by visiting our page at this link:
https://www.facebook.com/Stop-Smart-Meters-NZ-1211462805538548/
by Katherine | 30 May, 2016 | Latest News, Science
This shouldn’t be much of a surprise given that a number of studies show that people who use cell phones are at increased risk of developing some types of cancer. (NB: See below for some examples as well as important tips to reduce your exposure to radiation from your cell phone, if you have to use one.)
You can read coverage by the Wall Street Journal of this study at this link (you may need to be a subscriber to access the full article) or an article and interview about the study in Scientific American HERE.
Cell phones and cancer in humans
A 2014 study (published in the journal Pathophysiology) showed that the brain tumour risk was highest after 25 years of mobile phone use and after 15-20 years of cordless phone use.
See: https://lennarthardellenglish.wordpress.com/2014/12/01/new-study-confirms-increased-risk-for-glioma-associated-with-use-of-mobile-phones-and-cordless-phones/
This is but one of many other studies showing a link between cell phone use and brain (and other) tumours in people.
Links to more studies are below:
http://oem.bmj.com/content/early/2014/05/09/oemed-2013-101754
https://lennarthardellenglish.wordpress.com/2014/10/16/decreased-survival-in-patients-with-glioblastoma-multiforme-associated-with-use-of-mobile-and-cordless-phones/
https://lennarthardellenglish.wordpress.com/2013/05/10/new-ecological-study-on-the-penetration-of-cellular-telecommunications-subscriptions-shows-a-clear-association-with-the-higher-incidence-of-brain-and-nervous-system-tumours-2/
http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/167/4/457.full
It is now indisputable that radiofrequency (RF) radiation in the microwave range such is produced by cordless and mobile phones, cordless phone bases, smart meters and cell phone towers has been classified by the WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer as a “possible carcinogen” (type 2B).
Cellular phone use safety tips:
I realise that many people do have jobs that require them to use a cellular phone.
There is information to help you reduce the risks of unavoidable cellular phone risk at this link: http://www.naturalmedicine.net.nz/childrens-health-and-development/how-to-reduce-your-exposure-to-emr/
Please note that ideally, cellular phone use should be minimised, because the more cellular phones are used, the more cellular phone infrastructure is need to support the phones’ use – and living close to cellular phone base stations has been associated with increased risk of cancer in several studies, for example, the one that you can read HERE.
Ed note: If you think that this article is important, please share it, thank you!
This article is also accessible through our Facebook page at this link:
https://www.facebook.com/Stop-Smart-Meters-NZ-1211462805538548/
Smart meters are not compulsory in NZ
Please note that it is NOT compulsory to have a smart meter in NZ and to learn how people are refusing to have one installed, please see this LINK. Please notethat it seems to be quite common for smart meters to be installed without prior notification, so if you still have an analogue meter and want to keep it, it would be prudent to take steps to prevent a smart meter installation NOW.
Resources to help you refuse a smart meter, including bilingual Te Reo/English options may be found at this LINK of www.stopsmartmeters.org.nz
To sign up for the free email newsletter, please visit www.stopsmartmeters.org.nz
by Katherine | 9 May, 2016 | Latest News, Science
Ed note: In the spirit of an image being equal to one thousand words, please look at the graph below. The graph was created using data supplied to Auckland City Council (prior to the advent of the “super city” Auckland Council) by Mighty River Power.
Mighty River Power owns the smart metering business “Metrix” as well as four electricity retailers, namely Mercury Energy, Tiny Mighty, Bosco and Globug. (The latter company provides a pre-pay electricity service in which customers have both a smart meter plus a second RF producing device (known as a Globug) installed in their home; you can read more about this system HERE.)
As a general rule, Metrix has been installing Elster gREX mesh network smart meters in its customers’ homes. These are a type of radio mesh meter.
As you can see from the graph (which you can enlarge by clicking on it), at close range to the radio mesh network smart meter, the exposure from the meter when it is transmitting is very high.
Please also note that the limit for RF at 900 MHZ, according to NZ Standard (NZS) 2772.1:1999 is approximately 450 µW/cm2 (450 microwatts per centimetre squared).
However, under normal operating conditions, smart meters do not emit RF constantly – they emit RF in brief bursts. Some smart meters produce RF every fifteen minutes; others may emit RF more or less often. Testing of a smart meter in operation will show its emission profile.)
The graph above shows that during these brief emissions, the intensity of RF within a few centimetres of the smart meter is between 100 and 200 times 450 µW/cm2. But this is still legal, because if you average the meter’s emissions over six minutes (during most of which time the meter is not emitting at all) you come up with the answer that the average emission is practically zero. (Time-averaging over six minutes is specified under NZS 2772.1:1999.)
To put the emissions into perspective, the report compiled by a coalition of scientist available at www.bioinitiative.org, just 0.1 microwatts per centimetre squared is recommended as the upper limit for human exposure. (Yes, that it just one tenth of one microwatt per centimetre squared.)
Fortunately smart meters are not compulsory in NZ so no one needs to put up with this type of unnecessary exposure to this type of radiation which is classified as a possible carcinogen (type 2B).
A note about units of measurement: Most of the posts on this site use microwatts per metre squared as a unit of measurement. Using this measurement, the upper limit under NZS 2772.2:1999 is approximately 4.5 million microwatts per metre squared while the upper limit recommended in the BioInitiative Report is 1000 microwatts per metre squared.
Other posts on the site that discuss the emissions of different types of smart meters may be found HERE, HERE, HERE and HERE (under the Technical FAQs section).
NB: If you are interested in the smart meter issue, please sign up for updates at www.stopsmartmeters.org.nz
by Katherine | 9 May, 2016 | Latest News
Last week Katherine Smith (founder of www.stopsmartmeters.org.nz) was interviewed by Sage Forest for the Fresh FM in Takaka. The interview ran on Friday May 6 and focuses on the health problems reported after smart meter installations.
It will be available as a podcast on the website at this link http://www.freshfm.net/Podcast.aspx (Scroll down and it will be listed on “Fresh Start Friday with Sage and Grant”.)
The interview will be repeated on the following dates on the Health Views show in mid June.
The dates are 11.40am Tues 14 June, replay 2.40 Friday 17th.
This will be able to heard live by going to the website for the radio station:
http://www.freshfm.net/Shows/
You will see a “Listen Live” icon on the left side of the site.
Thank you to Sage and Fresh FM for the opportunity to discuss the smart meter issue on this radio show.
NB: To keep up to date with smart meter news in NZ, please sign up to the email list at www.stopsmartmeters.org.nz
by Katherine | 7 May, 2016 | Latest News, Science
A new study by Professor Simon Chapman et al which was published by Cancer Epidemiology has just been trumpeted in The Conversation and the Daily Mail as showing that cell phones don’t cause brain cancer.
But is this really the case?
The text of abstract alone gives rise to some observations and pertinent questions:
- Why was 10 years chosen for a cut off point for the Chapman study?
The new Chapman study was designed to detect a 50% increase in incidence in brain cancer assuming that this excess risk should show up at 10 years of cellular phone use.
By comparison, world renowned Australian neurosurgeon Charlie Teo (whose surgical skill has saved or extended the lives of many brain tumour patients) has been quoted (in 2008 as saying: “If you look at the science on mobile phones and the link with brain cancer, it is quite compelling … we know that [ionising] radiation causes cancer, but it takes about ten years for it to develop, so we know that electromagnetic radiation [from phones] is going to take at least ten years to create brain tumours and possibly longer fifteen, twenty years.” [emphasis added]
Moreover, a major study by Lennart Hardell and Michael Carlberg published in 2014, showed a significant increase in glioma (a common, and unfortunately often fatal, type of brain tumour) for people who used both mobile and cordless phones.
The 2014 study (published in the journal Pathophysiology) showed that the brain tumour risk was highest after 25 years of mobile phone use and after 15-20 years of cordless phone use.
See: https://lennarthardellenglish.wordpress.com/2014/12/01/new-study-confirms-increased-risk-for-glioma-associated-with-use-of-mobile-phones-and-cordless-phones/
According to the Chapman study, mobile phones were introduced into Australia 29 years ago. Given that the Hardell study shows that it takes 25 years (or more) exposure for the maximum increase in cell phone-related brain cancers to be detected, it is perhaps not surprising that the 2016 Chapman study did not find a significant excess risk.
According to the Chapman study abstract, cell phones were introduced into Australia in 1987 (only 29 year ago). While today over 90% of Australians are estimated to use a cell phone, at the time of the introduction of this technology to the country in 1987, only a small minority of people actually used a cell phone. (Even by 1993 only 9% of the population was estimated to use a cell phone.) On this basis, relatively few Australians would have had 25 years of exposure to cell phones over the period examined by the study and this would have biased the study towards a “no effect” result.
Was the Chapman study designed to reach the conclusion that cell phones don’t cause cancer?
There is no information about any of the authors’ possible conflicts of interest on the study abstract.
However, Professor Simon Chapman appears to have (or have had) links with the cellular phone industry.
He is the co-author of a paper that examined the impact of cellular phones in emergency situations. (The paper showed that cell phones can be of assistance in helping people get help quicker in emergencies such as car accidents or being lost in the bush.) http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001457598000347
The full text version of this paper acknowledges that funding for the study was provided by AMTA (Australian Mobile Telecommunications Association).
Simon Chapman is also the author of a book called Lifesavers and cellular samaritans : emergency use of cellular (mobile) phones in Australia.
In the worldcat.org listing for the book Simon Chapman is listed as the primary author, WN Schofield and the Australian Mobile Telecommunications Association (AMTA) are listed as being the second and third authors, respectively. AMTA is listed as being the publisher of the book. (See; http://www.worldcat.org/title/lifesavers-and-cellular-samaritans-emergency-use-of-cellular-mobile-phones-in-australia/oclc/225258977)
It is interesting, given this publication record, that Simon Chapman does not declare any conflict of interest in the relevant section of the paper. He could for example, have included a statement to the effect that he has received funding from a telecommunications industry body (AMTA) for a previous paper. (On the other hand, I do not know the disclosure policy for the journal; perhaps authors are required to disclose only funding specifically relevant to the particular paper rather than sources of funding for past work.)
Conclusion:
Regardless of whether Professor Simon Chapman does or does not have any telecommunications industry links that may (or may not) have biased his new paper, in my opinion, the media coverage of his 2016 paper is potentially extremely destructive to public health.
It is apparent from the Hardell studies that cellular and cordless phone risk are similar to cigarette smoking in that it can take decades of heavy smoking before lung cancer develops – and of course not all heavy smokers develop lung cancer, although they may suffer from other smoking-related conditions.
With an estimated 90% plus of Australians using cellular phones (and a similar proportion of people in NZ), twenty five years from now we could easily be looking at a significant number of people developing brain tumours that could have been avoided had there been clear public health messaging to avoid cordless and cellular phone use – except in an emergency.
As it is, the publicity given to Simon Chapman’s 2016 study means that most people are likely to believe that cellular phone use is safe. On the basis of the messages in the media relating to Simon Chapman’s 2016 study, they may even allow their children to use cellular phones, even though Hardell’s Pathophysiology paper showed that the risks from mobile (and cordless phone) use are higher in people who begin using these wireless phones prior to the age of twenty.
Today virtually everyone knows that smoking increases the risk of developing lung cancer. (Based on US insurance statistics a white male who smokes has about 10 times the lifetime risk of developing lung cancer as a non-smoking white male.)
However, while the smoking-lung cancer connection is now so well known it is practically taken for granted, this was not always the case. For decades, as genuine research on smoking and disease was being published, so too was tobacco industry funded research also published. This industry sponsored research (aka “tobacco science”) caused confusion in the public and resulted in many people continuing to smoke because they believed that it was safe – and consequently caused many, many unnecessarily early deaths.
A failure by mainstream media to inform the public about the research that demonstrates links between cellular and cordless phone use and cancer could have the same tragic consequences.
Ed note: If you think that this article is important, please share it, thank you!
Cellular phone use safety tips:
I realise that many people do have jobs that require them to use a cellular phone.
There is information to help you reduce the risks of unavoidable cellular phone risk at this link: http://www.naturalmedicine.net.nz/childrens-health-and-development/how-to-reduce-your-exposure-to-emr/
Please note that ideally, cellular phone use should be minimised, because the more cellular phones are used, the more cellular phone infrastructure is need to support the phones’ use – and living close to cellular phone base stations has been associated with increased risk of cancer in several studies, for example, the one that you can read HERE.
Links
Link to Daily Mail article:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-3576681/Mobile-phones-DON-T-increase-risk-brain-cancer-30-year-study-concludes.html
Link to abstract of Prof. Simon Chapman et al’s 2016 study:
http://www.cancerepidemiology.net/article/S1877-7821%2816%2930050-9/abstract
More info
if you are interested in receiving newsletters from www.stopsmartmeters.org.nz (mostly about smart meters but occasionally about other technologies that produce miocrowave radiation) there is a free email list at www.stopsmartmeters.org.nz )
by Katherine | 14 Apr, 2016 | Uncategorized
Editor’s note: The following article was contributed by Whangarei journalist Clare Swinney. The photograph of the meter was supplied by Mr. Priestly.
Huge bill at marae after smart meter installation
Mervyn Priestley, the former Treasurer of the Parapara Marae in Taipa, Northland was shocked when he saw the power bill for the month of April 2015, which had been debited from the marae bank account. It was a humongous $2042.87 and far higher than any of the power bills the marae had received before. The bills were normally were around $350, sometimes far less he said.
Consequently, he first contacted their power company to discuss the reason for the huge bill and told them that there must be a mistake. The lady he spoke to told him that a smart meter is never wrong. Mervyn said that that was the first time he had ever heard of a smart meter, as they had not been told a smart meter was going to be installed and not asked if they wanted one at the marae. He said: “I couldn’t understand how the power bill could have been so high, as we had not had any bookings that month. It should have been low.”
Not getting anywhere with this woman who was claiming that smart meters were faultless, Mervyn asked to talk to the supervisor. Mervyn said: “I told the supervisor that if someone on the marae committee saw this bill of $2042.87 they could have a heart attack. I knew it could not be right, as I kept a close eye on things at the marae. Thankfully, he listened to me and was reasonable. I asked him how the smart meters work and he said that they used a cell phone network. That’s when I knew the fault was at their end, as there was no cell phone coverage at the marae and when I told him this, he started taking me seriously. It was an estimate, not a real reading they had billed the marae for. Before the smart meter was installed, we were used to having two estimates and had one actual reading of the analogue meter. They did not offer to reimburse the marae for overcharging us for power. I had to ask for the money to be credited back to the marae’s bank account, as they wanted to keep it in their account. Eventually $1628 was credited. It was a stressful time for me and I did doubt myself when I was told that a smart meter is never wrong.”
Ed note: Based on the photo supplied, the information given to Mr. Priestly about the smart meter working through the cellular phone network may not have been correct. The type of smart meter installed at the marae is a Landis+Gyr E350 series smart meter. In NZ, this type of meter often contains a Silver Spring communication model 454 Network Interface Card (NIC) package that contains a modem and a ZigBee chip. This communications package is designed to work as part of a mesh system to relay wireless data from smart meter to smart meter and thereon to a central collection point. If a smart meter in a mesh network is too far away from another smart meter of the same type (or if there is some sort of dense structure or landscape feature such as a substantial mound of earth between the mesh network smart meters) its signal may not be picked up by the neighbouring meter.
Meters in a mesh network can produce pulses of RF more frequently than other types of smart meters and www.stopsmartmeters.org.nz has received reports of adverse health effects from people with Landis-Gyr smart meters at their homes.
You can read more about Landis+Gyr smart meters at the links below on www.stopsmartmeters.org.nz
Technical information
Technical information about these meters may be found HERE, HERE and HERE.
A smart meter of the type installed at the marae could also potentially mean that you lose control over your heat pump, if you have one; please see this LINK for details.
Is this the reason Network Tasman Ltd has been reluctant to answer the questions about the radiofrequency radiation produced by its “smart meters”?
Answers to questions from Network Tasman Ltd …Part 1
Is this the reason Network Tasman Ltd has been reluctant to answer the questions about the radiofrequency radiation produced by its “smart meters”?
Answers to questions from Network Tasman Ltd …Part 1
Reported Health Effects with this Type of Smart Meter (with the Silver Spring communication package
A couple of reports may be found HERE and HERE.
Smart meters are not compulsory in NZ
Please note that it is NOT compulsory to have a smart meter in NZ and to learn how people are refusing to have one installed, please see this LINK. Please notethat it seems to be quite common for smart meters to be installed without prior notification, so if you still have an analogue meter and want to keep it, it would be prudent to take steps to prevent a smart meter installation NOW.
Resources to help you refuse a smart meter, including bilingual Te Reo/English options may be found at this LINK of www.stopsmartmeters.org.nz
To sign up for the free email newsletter, please visit www.stopsmartmeters.org.nz
by Katherine | 13 Apr, 2016 | Latest News
There was a Newstalk ZB smart meter discussion in April 2016.
One of the hosts for the talkback radio station Newstalk ZB had a discussion of smart meters on air on April 5, 2016.
You can hear some of the discussion at the links below, along with some commentary. There are a lot of different perspectives expressed by people who call in to speak to the host, Marcus Lush.
Newstalk ZB on smart meters April 2016
Part 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FErPRZ5QKQs&nohtml5=False
Part 2: https://youtu.be/Q9X4_dEq7VU
Part 3: https://youtu.be/B0ovuRO1rtI
Part 4: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYW1BvJH5TI
Part 5: https://youtu.be/ADu6RAaCW0M
Please note that if you want to keep up to date with the smart meter news in NZ, you can join the free email list at www.stopsmartmeter.org.nz
by Katherine | 8 Apr, 2016 | Latest News, Smart water meters, Users Feedback
Website editor’s note: The piece below was contributed by a retired nurse, who had previously reported how a smart water meter had been installed outside her home without her permission.
Her latest contribution to this site shows the power of a simple letter refusing a smart water meter.
If everyone in Waiuku were to refuse to participate in the smart water meter trial this could have a big positive impact for the Auckland region.
Retired nurse succeeds in having smart water meter removed
Earlier this week, I saw Watercare personnel in the street. [Ed note: Watercare is the “Council Controlled Organisation” that provides water and waste water services to most people who live in the Auckland region.]
On enquiring what they were doing, three Pacifica/Maori guys said they were changing all the [water] meters to “smart” meters.
When I said to the men that I didn’t want one and said why, a Pakeha older man “flew” out of the truck and proceeded to tell me that I didn’t know what I was talking about – the meters were akin to cell phones. He just about had an apoplectic fit when I remarked that cell phones are not safe either. [Ed see this link for a discussion of some of the research on cell phones and brain and other cancers.]
He calmed a little when I explained the two cards in my mail box within four days, the first saying the water meter outside my fence didn’t need to be changed, the second saying that a “smart” one had been fitted as part of a trial.
He told me that the meter wasn’t mine and it wasn’t on my property. I replied that it served my property; also that Counties Power’s meter wasn’t mine either, but it served my property, and the outcome of my letter to them. [You can read about how this contributor successfully avoided the installation of a smart electricity meter at this link.
I emphasised that smart meters are not compulsory, and those of us who are knowledgeably informed about them shouldn’t have them forced on us.
On his advice to contact the PTB immediately, I proceeded to write my letter – using your template for refusing a smart water meter at this link: www.stopsmartmeters.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/FORMAL-NOTICE-OF-NON-CONSENT-FOR-SMART-WATER-METER.docx
[Ed note: Please note that since this template letter was posted, the email addresses for the Minister of Health and some other people have changed; these will be updated as my time allows or you can google them.]
I found that most of the politicians/email addresses are now outdated – had to find the relevant ones. The Auckland Council’s CEO’s email [was] nowhere to be found and I told someone at Council that such info should be on the website and easy to find. I was given Stephen Town’s email address.
I received acknowledgments from Auck. Council people within 24 hours – nothing from any of the politicians.
I included in my letter a copy of most of my letter to Counties Power in 2014 (which may be read at this link), including their subsequent intimation that my address had been removed from their installation list.
Yesterday, hand-delivered to my mail box was a letter from Watercare Project Mgr, Waiuku Smart Meter Trials, confirming that the smart meter has been removed.
Ed note: This is a great example of how one person is making a difference.
A successful trial of smart meters by Watercare in Waiuku could potentially lead to smart water meters being foisted upon everyone in the Auckland region.
This retired nurse has paved the way for successful refusal of a smart water meter, please share this link with everyone you may know in the Waiuku and encourage them to do likewise.
More information about smart water meters (including reasons to refuse their installation) are at this link: www.stopsmartmeters.org.nz/category/smart-water-meters-2/
To stay up to date with the smart meter issue in NZ, please sign up to the free email list at www.stopsmartmeters.org.nz
by Katherine | 30 Mar, 2016 | Latest News, Privacy
Editor’s note: The article below is a guest contribution to www.stopsmartmeters.org.nz sent in by Andrew from Nelson. If you would like to contribute an article or share a personal experience related to a smart meter. you can contact us via this link.
Information risk
There’s been a lot of concern about these proposed ‘smart meters’ and the microwave radiation they produce. It’s not been proven dangerous but not proven entirely safe either.
[Ed note: There is published research on adverse health effects reported following smart meter installations; please see this link for more information: https://stopsmartmeters.org.nz/uncategorized/peer-reviewed-journal-publishes-article-on-smart-meter-health-effects/ ]
The only certain thing about it is that the risk – whatever it may be – is to customers, for the benefit of power companies, who are promoting the things.
There is another undeniable risk. These meters collect and send away a disturbing amount of information about every household’s habits. A normal meter adds up the total you use and the reader comes once every two months. There’s not much you can find out about a customer from that, except the intended thing, namely what their bill should be.
But these smart meters measure how much your family uses every half hour of every day, and hand it to your power company, via the network company. This is called ‘time of use metering’. And it’s completely new for household users. A few years ago these meters measured the power you use each half-hour down to the nearest 1/000th of a unit. To put this in perspective, if you get up at night, turn on one lightbulb and are not back in bed within 36 seconds, it’s got you logged. Electronics will only have got more powerful since then.
Whether your particular meter has a radio modem or the meter reader comes at the end of the month with a ‘smart’ reader and hooks it onto your ‘smart’ meter so it can suck out the whole month’s half-hourly readings, the data collected is much the same.
When the network company came to promote ‘smart’ meters they were asked “Who owns the information you intend to collect, what will it be used for and who might it be handed on to?” The answer was “That’s a good question. You’d better consult your power company’s terms and conditions.” So here’s a selection from various power companies’ terms and conditions. Look it up if you don’t believe it!
“We may, at any time, replace the meter on your premises with a smart meter or install a remote meter reading device on your existing meter.
“You agree that we own all metering data and any other data collected by the meter.
“We will use any personal information collected …for the purposes of…
* conducting data analysis to identify particular products and services that may be of interest to you;
* to avoid prejudice to the maintenance of the law by any public sector agency, including the prevention, detection, investigation, prosecution and punishment of offences
Welcome to 1984! Of course nobody’s going to look through your time-of-use power bill to see what they can sell you. But they will use specialist companies who program computers to do exactly that – to the whole customer base. It’s called ‘data mining’ and it’s routine.
Time of use data can already suggest when you’re on holiday, whether there are school kids in the house, when you get up and go to bed, how much TV you watch, whether you cook at home or buy fast food, and what you do at the weekend. Think about it a bit and you will see how. And it’s only going to get worse as our houses fill up with ‘smart’ appliances that talk to each other.
What about the security of your data? It’s probably protected by ‘128 bit encryption’ which nobody hacks by brute force, and your power company will hold it in accordance with the Privacy Act. Sounds reassuring. Except accidents with huge amounts of people’s data are all too often in the news. And there’s always a criminal element lurking. It could be high-tech hacking but it doesn’t have to be. Bribery and blackmail work just as well in ‘big data’ as anywhere. Your time-of-use data could slip through the internet unseen, and it would be a godsend to burglars.
It’s worth stating the blindingly obvious: the purpose of having an electricity meter is to calculate our bill, not to target advertising at ourselves. And the last thing we need is to have our metering data taken from us, analysed, and turned back on us insidiously to make us dissatisfied with what we have so that we buy more stuff.
In Silicon Valley they say ‘SMART’ stands for ‘surveillance marketed as revolutionary technology’, and they have a point. Once again, the only certain thing is that the risk – whatever it may be – is to customers, for the benefit of power companies, who are promoting the scheme.
In the end, what is in it for us customers to have a ‘smart meter’ in our house? We’ve used electricity and paid our bills according to normal meters since forever, and it works. If you have a huge solar panel that generates for the grid, you may need a high-tech meter. But for the rest of us – and that’s nearly everybody – the best way to know our time of use data is not being abused is not to create it in the first place.
Just tell your power company that you do not consent to having any kind of ‘time-of-use’ meter or ‘smart’ meter. If necessary, change to a company that doesn’t insist on one. They’ll get the message pretty quickly.
Value your privacy? You may want to refuse a smart meter…
Smart meters are NOT compulsory in NZ and many NZers are refusing smart meters- and not just because of the privacy risks. You can find a good summary of some of the other reasons that people are refusing smart meters at this link.
Please note that if you would like to receive email updates on the smart meter issue for NZ, you can sign up to the free email list at www.stopsmartmeters.org.nz
by Katherine | 30 Mar, 2016 | Latest News
The website www.takebackyourpower.net (from which you stream or purchase a copy of the award-winning smart meter documentary Take Back Your Power has a comprehensive new report and also a video on smart meter fires and explosions.
The link to the report and video is below:
Smart Meter Fires: Burning meters, burning questions, shocking answers (video)
Smart meter fire information for New Zealand
Information about smart meters and fires in NZ may be found at this link:
https://stopsmartmeters.org.nz/latest-news/are-smart-meters-causing-fires-in-new-zealand/
Ed note: Please note that smart meters are not compulsory in NZ and many NZers are successfully refusing smart meters for a variety of reasons, some of which are detailed at this link.
If you would like to keep up to date with the smart meter situation in NZ, please sign up to the free email list at www.stopsmartmeters.org.nz
Recent Comments