by Katherine | 23 May, 2014 | Government and Electricity Industry Positions, Latest News, Users Feedback
Late in 2013, I received the following email:
Hi Katherine,
A friend suggested I email you as I am having problems with getting Genesis to remove my “not” Smart Meter.
I have had it installed for two or three years and have experienced significant behavioural issues with my son and since talking to my friend several weeks ago I just clicked that there is probably a connection here to this meter being on the same wall that his bed is on!
I contacted Genesis and asked when they could remove it and they said they can’t.
I have replied that I have checked, and they can – so when will they do this as I want it removed asap.
What more can I do to expedite this?
I have also phoned TrustPower to see about connecting with them but they said they are very black and white on this issue that they are not able to remove a “smart meter” that does not belong to them. This has to be done by the company that it belongs to. They were helpful and said they don’t actually own many themselves because of all the “issues” with them. I said good – don’t!
I realise you are busy. Look forward to hearing from you when you have time.
Thanks heaps,
[Name withheld]
Site editor’s note: After writing this email, this mother persisted in phoning Genesis until she reached an employee who took her concerns seriously and arranged for the “smart meter” to be removed. (Before she reached a helpful employee she had to put up with some disrespectful treatment from another staff member.)
In her own words, it was this mother’s persistence and refusal to take “no” for an answer that resulted in the removal of the “smart meter”:
“I got the meter removed with lots of hassling – or maybe it was harassing – they would have got sick of my phone calls! They tried to deter me as a last resort by saying ” we have to let you know that there may be a charge in the future for a meter reader…….” I just said fine – money cost is nothing compared to a health cost.”
She offers this advice for other people who want to get rid of a “smart meter”:
“So be PERSISTENT and don’t be bullied into giving the “specific health problems” that were asked for the first few times I rang. I said it was irrelevant and not his concern – I just wanted to know WHEN it could be removed not IF. Also, do not accept the concession to just remove the modem – insist on the entire meter going. (I can’t remember but I think the meter is still doing something even if the chip or modem is out?)
[Ed note: Replacement of a “smart meter” with a non-smart meter also protects your privacy; see this link: www.stopsmartmeters.org.nz/government-and-electricity-industry-positions/network-tasman-there-are-no-privacy-concerns-with-smart-meters-yeah-right/ ]
“And also, do not threaten to, or change power suppliers. If you do then you are really stuck with the smart meter as Genesis or whoever owns it is not going to come and take it out for you (at least not for free) if you are another company’s customer.”
Concluding comments from website editor: This is one of the very few cases of which I am aware in which Genesis has removed a “smart meter”. In general Genesis has been one of the worst companies in terms of rolling out “smart meters”, and it has been reported to me that in some cases the company has not informed customers in advance that their analogue (electromechanical) meter would be replaced with a “smart meter”.
If you are a Genesis customer (or a customer of its subsidiary EnergyOnline) please note that the Terms and Conditions (see links below) for both these companies assume that you agree to the installation of a “smart meter” and that you agree to do nothing to prevent the installation of a “smart meter”. The Terms and Conditions may be modified by an agreement in writing, so if you are with either of these companies and are otherwise happy with the company’s service, and do not want a “smart meter” you may wish to consider writing to the company and negotiating an agreement that allows you to retain an existing electromechanical meter, such as by having it recertified.
NB: If you try this approach, please email through the Contact form at this link https://stopsmartmeters.org.nz/contact-us/ to let us know whether or not it was successful for you. Thank you.
https://stopsmartmeters.org.nz/latest-news/smart-meter-installed-without-permission-headaches-result-smart-meter-removed-headaches-disappear/
by Katherine | 23 May, 2014 | Government and Electricity Industry Positions, Latest News, Uncategorized, Users Feedback
The CEO of Network Tasman Ltd, Mr Wayne Makey, has written an article in the Nelson Mail titled: “Fears regarding smart meters not warranted”. (You can read the article at this link http://www.stuff.co.nz/nelson-mail/opinion/10072263/Fears-regarding-smart-meters-not-warranted .)
In this article, Mr Mackey writes:
“We understand that some people in the community are worried about this new technology and are looking to us to provide answers.”
This statement may be intentionally or unintentionally ironic, since Network Tasman employee Andrew Stanton undertook to provide answers to written questions about the planned “smart meter” roll out, and has at the time of this writing, replied to only 16 questions of 32 questions.
Many of the questions that he has so far refused to answer (or chosen not to answer) are those that related to the amount of radiofrequency radiation (RFR) produced by the “smart meters” that Network Tasman Ltd plans to roll out and how often the brand of “smart meter” selected by Network Tasman Ltd produce pulses of radiofrequency radiation. (More on this issue will follow in a later post.)
But back to Mr Mackey, CEO of Network Tasman Ltd, and his piece in the Nelson Mail:
“The issue of radio frequency fields associated with advanced meters and other appliances has been the subject of intense debate. We have uploaded a number of scientific, peer-reviewed international research articles on our website that conclude there are no proven adverse health effects from any of those common appliances. I encourage anyone seeking information to read these reports, and a Q and A section, at www.networktasman.co.nz.”
Mr Mackey’s choice of wording is important here: he claims that the documents state there are “no proven adverse health effects from any of these common appliances”. However, if you take cell phones as one of these “other appliances” there is strong scientific evidence, tantamount in most people’s opinion to scientific proof, that the radiofrequency radiation that they produce can have harmful effects. In this regard, there is the evidence relating to microwave radiation and cancer that was considered by the WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) when it made its determination that radiofrequency radiation in the microwave range was a possible carcinogen (type 2B). (See: http://microwavenews.com/short-takes-archive/iarc-publishes-rf-cancer-review )
There is also other evidence of health effects, such as adverse effects on male fertility from cell phones (see: http://www.ewg.org/cell-phone-radiation-damages-sperm-studies-find) for example. Given the importance of healthy, genetically-normal sperm in producing healthy, happy babies, this research is frankly alarming.
Back to Mr Mackey’s article and his suggestion that people “seeking information” read the reports on Network Tasmajn Ltd’s website.
One of these, the report by EPEC at this link http://www.networktasman.co.nz/Advanced_Meters/Health%20&%20Safety%20of%20Smart%20Meters.pdf, has already been de-bunked by Dr. Don Maisch, Ph.D. (You can access Dr. Maisch’s critique of the EPEC report at this link https://stopsmartmeters.org.nz/latest-news/report-on-health-and-safety-aspects-of-electricity-smart-meters-debunked/.)
I might add that the EPEC, while based at the University of Canterbury, is hardly a disinterested party when it comes to “smart meters”. EPEC’s website shows that it is sponsored by major players in the NZ electricity industry – an apparent conflict of interest at the very least.
And what of the information presented at this link: http://www.networktasman.co.nz/Advanced_Meters/Radio%20Frequency%20Safety.pdf ?
Yes, it shows that “smart meter” emissions can be lower than some other sources of radiofrequency radiation. However, that does not mean the exposure is trivial. At one foot away from a “silver spring”-enabled “smart meter” (such as may occur in the case of a meter mounted on a bedroom wall*) someone is exposed to 8.8 microwatts per square cm (or 88,000 microwatts per square metre). While “smart meters” are designed to produce RFR intermittently, rather than constantly, this is not a trivial level of radiation. The authors of the BioInitiative report (www.bioinitiative.org) have recommended a precautionary level of exposure as 1,000 microwatts per square metre. (See http://healthybuildingscience.com/2013/02/18/emf-and-emr-conversion-formulas/)
Then we have the document at this link: http://www.networktasman.co.nz/Advanced_Meters/Report%20on%20Generic%20EMF%20for%20SmartCo%20v%201.1.pdf …
The document at the link above is likely to be essentially meaningless to most people who do not already have a significant knowledge base concerning “smart meters” and “smart grids” because of the way that Network Tasman Ltd have chosen to present the information. The actual measurements of RFR produced by the “relays” and access p0ints” are not specified.
Instead the document claims to show the “minimum safe distance to ensure the EMF does not exceed 25% of the limit specified in NZS2772”.
The “relays” use the 915-921 MHz band and “access points” use the 915-921 MHz and 900-915 MHz band, for which the NZ national standard (NS: 2772.1:1999) is an appalling 450 microwatts per square cm (4,500,000 microwatts per square metre). (That’s right 4.5 million microwatts per square metre which is 4,500 time higher than the 1,000 microwatts per square metre suggested as a precautionary level by the scientists who created the BioInitiative Report.)
National standard (NS: 2772.1:1999) can be described as a safety standard only in regard to the fact that it is designed to prevent thermal injury. It is not designed to prevent other types of harm from exposure from RFR – such as damage to DNA, for example.)
If the relay and access points that Network Tasman Ltd want to install expose people to 25% of the the RFR limit allowed under NS: 2772.1:1999 if they stand 0.15 – 0.4 metres away from this infrastructure, that is cause for concern, in my opinion, even if this infrastructure is not constantly producing EMR .
Network Tasman Ltd also has a graph at this link http://www.networktasman.co.nz/Advanced_Meters/Radio_Frequency_Fields.asp of its website. The graph gives the impression that “smart meters” expose people to less RFR than do cell phones, and other devices. The document from which this graph has been reproduced has been the subject of a detailed critique, which features its own graphs which tell a different story. You can read the critique by downloading the PDF from the link below.
Hirsch comments on Health Impacts of Radio Frequency from Smart Meters California Council Science & Technology
Last but not least, Mr Mackey states that “Another concern raised is that advanced meters will result in breaches in individuals’ privacy.” This is true – and it is a valid concern. See this link for details: https://stopsmartmeters.org.nz/government-and-electricity-industry-positions/network-tasman-there-are-no-privacy-concerns-with-smart-meters-yeah-right/
Will Network Tasman ltd do the right thing by its community? The CEO seems happy to expose the community to radiofrequency radiation that he has been informed is considered by the International Agency for Research on Cancer to be a possible carcinogen. (See: https://stopsmartmeters.org.nz/government-and-electricity-industry-positions/will-network-tasman-ltd-do-the-right-thing-by-its-community/ )
Perhaps other staff within the organisation will put people’s health above profits and facilitate either the re-certification of analogue (Ferraris) meters which are still in good working order, or install new analogue (Ferraris) meters for people whose current meters have reached the end of their useful lifespan.
*Network Tasman Ltd has not ruled out installing “smart meters” on bedroom walls.
by Katherine | 19 May, 2014 | Government and Electricity Industry Positions, Latest News, Users Feedback
If your electricity company is trying to bully you into accepting a “smart meter”, you are not alone.
Below is one of several reports I have received within the last week or so concerning bullying by companies that want to install “smart meters”.
If your company is bullying you, remember that there is no law that says you have to accept a “smart meter” and stand your ground. Once a “smart meter” has been installed it can be very difficult to get it removed – even if it is causing health problems. Please report bullying via the Contact form at this link https://stopsmartmeters.org.nz/contact-us/. (Your report will be treated in confidence and posted on the site only if you give permission for this to be done.)
If your company persists in trying to make you accept a “smart meter”, you may want to consider changing companies and there is information at this link to help you do this https://stopsmartmeters.org.nz/how-to-get-rid-of-a-smart-meter/ Please also see the comments after the report below.
From a health professional:
Hi Katherine,
The following is an approximate quote of a phone conversation between one of my clients who has a significant auto-immune disease (that necessitates her leaving the country for five months during the winter season). She has given me permission to mention her and her condition although I will not use her name at present.
One to two years ago she asked Mercury Energy if she could avoid a smart meter. They said yes. However, they turned up recently to install & were sent away before installation.
Mercury staff: ” We can come onto your property at any time and do what we want & there is nothing that you can do about it”
This was part of an abusive phone conversation, denying my patient’s rights.
Kind Regards,
[Name supplied]
For more information o Mercury Energy, Genesis and EnergyOnline, all companies that are aggressively rolling out “smart meters’, please see these links:
https://stopsmartmeters.org.nz/latest-news/customer-tells-company-smart-meter-not-wanted-company-sends-technician-anyway/
https://stopsmartmeters.org.nz/government-and-electricity-industry-positions/network-tasman-there-are-no-privacy-concerns-with-smart-meters-yeah-right/
by Katherine | 18 May, 2014 | Government and Electricity Industry Positions, Latest News, Users Feedback
NETWORK TASMAN LTD PROMOTES “SMART METERS” TO THE LOCAL BOARD IN TAKAKA
On Tuesday May 13, 2014, Andrew Stanton, a representative of Network Tasman Ltd gave a presentation to the local board at the Takaka Fire Station. The reason for the presentation was that this lines company, owned by a community trust, plans to install “smart meters” (the company uses the term “advanced meters”, rather than “smart meters”) in homes and business in the Nelson and Tasman areas. In addition, the company has announced the intention to develop a “region wide communications network (‘smart grid’)” through which information is relayed.
The one hour presentation was accompanied by a Powerpoint slide show and was described as “slick and quick” by a local resident who attended the meeting. Members of the public were able to ask questions at the presentation and were told that they would be given answers to written questions at a later date.
Further information about this meeting will be posted when it is available.
SUE GREY MEETS WITH NETWORK TASMAN LTD
Lawyer Sue Grey* also met with Network Tasman staff during the same week. This was a private meeting.
At the meeting she presented her own Powerpoint slide show which can be downloaded at the link below.
Sue Grey’s Powershop Presentation on Smartmeters for Network Tasman
Sue Grey’s own account of the meeting is below:
I was invited to my own private meeting with the CEO and two senior employees of Network Tasman yesterday following my objection to having a smart meter and my explanation why I did not want one.
I prepared a power point summary which I presented at the meeting (I’m happy to share it if you want it). I also left them with a copy of Dr Sophie Walker (of Crown Research Institute ESR)’s most recent (Aug 2013) biannual review of recent EMR research, key points of which I had summarised during my presentation.
“They listened and even asked some questions, however I fear that they will default back to the status quo of money before health.
Crux of key comments/conversations (not necessarily exactly word for word):
NT: If we don’t install smart meters then the power companies will.
SG: What if you go public and state that you have decided not to install them due to public health concerns? You are a community-owned company, you have a great opportunity to make an important stand.
NT: CEO looking absolutely terrified: “The power companies will install them anyway.”
SG: Make them tell the public why they are putting money ahead of public health. Well, let them, and let them explain.
NT: We appreciated your presentation but you should not have said we are hiding behind NZS2772:1 1999.
SG : Well, you are. It is an outdated and unsafe standard
NT: Are you also worried about safety risks from electrical supply?
SG: Yes I am, and I am aware of people who suffer greatly within their own homes already, and that NZ regulation is very lax about how wiring is set up. However I am here today to try to prevent new sources of harm that will add to any existing problems
NT: We only will transmit every 4 hours (house smart meter to relay or/and house to local network.)
SG: You only send power bills once a month- so why do you need to transmit any more often than that?
NT: Our clients consumers want it
SG: By consumers do you mean the public or the power companies
NT: No clear response
SG: (they clearly mean the power companies).
NT: In Christchurch most of Meridian’s customers who have smart meters check the computer feedback regularly during the day.
SG: Are you telling me that people’s lives have become so boring that they have nothing better to do than check their smart meter feedback? Are you talking about private consumers or corporate users?
NT: Everyone … we think
NT: We are not aware of anyone who has suffered health effects from smart meters since they have been rolled out in Christchurch
SG: How hard have you looked? Perhaps I can help you with that.
Site editor’s comments: Personally I find it difficult to believe the claim by Network Tasman Ltd that the “smart meters” that they want to install in people’s home will transmit only every four hours.The company’s website states that “future benefits” of having a “smart meter” include “real-time information to drive smarter electricity choices.”.
I doubt that “real time information” in this context means that the “smart meters” will be transmitting data about electricity use only once every four hours, or if they are, this will only be for a short time, after which they will transmit much more frequently. In Auckland, some electricity companies (such as Mercury Energy) have advertised one of the benefits of having a ‘smart meter” as being able to check on electricity use every 30 minutes, which suggest the meters must transmit every half hour (if not more frequently.)
However, Network Tasman Ltd’s website already includes statements of dubious veracity*, so it appears that either some of its staff are not well-informed about the “smart meter” issue – or the company may perhaps be trying to conceal unpalatable facts about “smart meters” from the public.
So, the question remains…will Network Tasman persist in its plan to roll out “smart meters” and the “smart grid” despite the potential threat to people’s health posed by the exposure to additional electromagnetic radiation? Or will it do the right thing by its community and re-certify analogue meters that are in good working order – or install brand new analogue (Ferraris) meters?
*See these links for discussion of information about Network Tasman Ltd
https://stopsmartmeters.org.nz/uncategorized/in-the-nelson-or-tasman-area-smart-meters-are-not-a-government-requirement/
https://stopsmartmeters.org.nz/government-and-electricity-industry-positions/network-tasman-there-are-no-privacy-concerns-with-smart-meters-yeah-right/
*Here in Sue Grey’s own words is how she came to be interested in the EMR issue:
I live in Network Tasman area but only became aware of their intention to force smart meters on their customers by a story in the Nelson Mail.
I wrote expressing my concerns and NT eventually responded by inviting me to meet with them.
My interest in EMR issues arose in 2008 after I was asked to assist my local community to investigate and then help the community oppose a proposal by Telecom to put a new cell tower approximately 5m from the sandpit at Atawhai Playcentre. This led to a petition by Sarah Allan and 3100 others to parliament and a response in November 2009 by the Local Government and Environment Committee recommending a review of NZS2772:1 1999 and of the composition of the Government’s Interagency Advisory Committee on the Health Effects of Non-Ionising Radiation to remove vested interests from the Committee (eg the Telcos and other economic interests who are currently on it) and to add community and health advisors.
The then Minister Nick Smith and his Cabinet rejected these proposals.
by Katherine | 6 May, 2014 | Government and Electricity Industry Positions, Latest News
stop Smart Meters Australia is warning that “smart meters” may be coming to South Australia, and Tasmanians are also facing a “smart meter” roll out.
See this link for information about South Australia. According to the video at the link below the “smart meters” will be “voluntary” in South Australia:
http://stopsmartmeters.com.au/2014/05/06/beware-south-australia-smart-meters-are-coming/
The situation in Tasmania is more serious with the state government getting behidn the “smart meter” roll out. A new website has been set up especially for this state. Please recommend it to people you know in the state: http://www.stopsmartmeterstasmania.com/
it is a good idea for people in Australia who want to keep up with national developments on the “smart meter” front to sign up to the email list at www.stopsmartmeters.com.au for updates.
by Katherine | 5 May, 2014 | Government and Electricity Industry Positions, Latest News, Users Feedback
Electricity companies often include statements to the effect that “smart meters” are advantageous for consumers because they help people gain “control over” or “better manage” their use of electricity. For example, from Network Tasman’s website page on “smart meters”:
“Over time it is expected that your electricity retailer will share your electricity usage information with you, so that you can make better decisions about how you use electricity in your home or business. Having this information will give you greater control over your energy bills an understanding of where further efficiency gains can be made – allowing you to save money. ” http://www.networktasman.co.nz/Main.asp?ID=17 [Emphasis added]
(NB: if you are in the Nelson/Tasman area served by this company you may be under the mistaken impression that “smart meters” are compulsory; they are not: See these links for details: www.stopsmartmeters.org.nz/uncategorized/in-the-nelson-or-tasman-area-smart-meters-are-not-a-government-requirement/ and www.stopsmartmeters.org.nz/government-and-electricity-industry-positions/network-tasman-there-are-no-privacy-concerns-with-smart-meters-yeah-right/ )
While knowing what your energy consumption is like at any given moment may help people to save money, (such as by turning off lights and appliances when they are not needed, for example) most people who do not want their electricity bill to be higher than necessary do this anyway. It’s a commonsense practice. No one needs a “smart meter” to be able to be able to make sensible decisions to reduce unnecessary electricity use – and thereby minimise their electricity bill.
The real motive for the introduction of “smart” meters may ultimately be what would be colloquially known as “price gouging”.
As WEL (which serves the Hamilton and Waikato area and has been rolling out “smart boxes”*) recently stated in one of its updates (WEL Smart Networks April 2014 Update.pdf):
“Our Smart Network has enable the introduction of optional pricing in the way it is able to measure site-specific information allowing us to introduce different prices for consumption based on offpeak or on-peak hours. We have offered retailers time-of-use pricing plans with the option of passing this flexible pricing plans with the option of passing this flexible pricing model on to customers, empowering our customers with more control options over their energy consumption.” [Emphasis added]
Time-of-use pricing is, in fact, far from “empowering'”. It typically means that a higher rate is charged for electricity at peak times, i.e. when you most need to use electricity, it is more expensive. (By contrast at a time when electricity demand is lower, i.e.in the middle of the night when most people need to sleep, the price of electricity will be lower.) With time-of-use pricing, a typical family’s electricity bill could easily rise even if they do not increase their electricity consumption.
This scenario, which most people would find unacceptable and some would describe as “price gouging” is being spun by the electricity industry as helping to give people “control over their energy consumption”.
Some NZ electricity companies currently offer different pricing plans, some of which offer different tariffs at different times of the day. At the moment these are options, rather than being mandatory. Don’t count on time-of-use pricing to remain optional, however , or for the government to come to the rescue of struggling households (or businesses that cannot change the time of day at which they need to use electricity, and theref0re face excessive costs.) No, the government is all for the “smart grid”.
In a report by the Electricity Commission, “Advanced Metering Infrastructure in New Zealand: Roll-out and Requirements” (3 Dec. 2009) the purported benefits of “smart meters” are extolled:
“‘Smart’ electricity meters, and the infrastructure that accompanies them, can provide a richer information base with which consumers can make better decisions about electricity use. The functionality in ‘smart’ electricity meters allows consumers to participate in the electricity market by allowing them to respond to market signals by altering their consumption patterns.”
“Those ‘smarter’ meters can also provide better information to electricity lines companies about network performance and consumers consumption patterns, allowing better management of networks and more informed investment decisions. ‘Smarter’ meters can also allow retailers to offer a range of tariff options to consumers that:
“(a) financially incentivises consumers to respond to market signals in the form of tariff pricing by altering their consumption patterns to reduce delivered electricity cost;
“(b) allows tariff changes to be carried out remotely. Before smart meter technology, changing tariffs required a site visit and a physical change of meter; and
“(c) provides information to consumers that allows them to choose the best pricing plan for them.” [Emphasis added]
The Electricity Commission considers this differential pricing to be beneficial because it will force people to use less electricity at peak times as many people won’t be able to afford it. This allows the electricity industry to reap the profits from time-of-use pricing while delaying investment in any new generation capacity needed if NZ’s population continues to increase. (Too bad if air pollution in cities increases because people can’t afford to run electric heaters on winter afternoons and evenings and therefore burn coal instead or people in low income households can’t afford to eat hot meals.)
“Developments in AMI have the potential to allow additional peak demand to be managed, delaying the need for investment in new generation, transmission, and distribution,” states the Electricity Commission.
The government has now created a special “smart grid” forum to move ahead plans for “smart” meters and the “smart grid”.
http://www.med.govt.nz/sectors-industries/energy/electricity/new-zealand-smart-grid-forum
Yes, “smart” meters have a lot of advantages if you are an electricity company.
If you are a member of an ordinary family or run a small business (which can’t negotiate with the government for enormous discounts on your electricity), you will be bearing the costs of the implementation of the “smart grid”, will be exposed to additional electromagnetic radiation from “smart meters” and associated infrastructure, and may have higher power bills to boot. What a great deal! (Not.)
* More information on WEL “smart boxes” here:
www.stopsmartmeters.org.nz/uncategorized/hamiltons-wel-energy-starts-smart-box-installation/
https://stopsmartmeters.org.nz/uncategorized/wel-smart-box-installation-prevented/
https://stopsmartmeters.org.nz/government-and-electricity-industry-positions/is-the-wel-smart-box-a-way-to-facilitate-smart-water-metering/
by Katherine | 3 May, 2014 | Government and Electricity Industry Positions, Latest News, Smart water meters, Uncategorized
On Thursday or Friday (April 24 or 25, 2014) I put in a request under the Official Information Act to the Thames-Coromandel District Council for information about the trail of “smart” water meters planned for the town of Tairua on the Coromandel Peninsula during May 2014. I addressed the request to Mr Bruce Hinson, who is the Thames Coromandel Council Infrastructure Manager.
On Wednesday (April 30), I received an email from a member of the engineering team stating that the Council could answer my questions, but it would cost me $114 – and payment was required before they would action the request. (Under the Official Information Act (OIA) councils and other government agencies are allowed to charge for time to prepare answers to OIA requests, but they do not usually do so.) The tone of the email was friendly, so I decided to phone the respondent to discuss the matter, so that is what I did on May 2, 2014.
I spoke at length to a very personable young man who recently graduated from university with a degree in civil and environmental engineering who is working on the “smart” water meter trial. He explained that the Council’s objective in trialing the “smart” water meters was to better manage water for Tairua.
Rationale for the trial of “smart” water meters in Tairua
Water for the town of Tairua is drawn from a river, which naturally carries lower water volumes during summer when demand for water peaks due to an influx of people arriving for summer holidays in their baches. (People “go crazy” washing things, he said, during the two weeks of the year that they live in their holiday homes.) The Thames-Coromandel Council had an obligation under its resource consent for drawing water from the river not to create an excessive impact on the river system, he said, the implication being that “smart” water meters could help achieve this. Currently there are no water meters in Tairua, he said. “Smart” water meters were considered by the team to be a better option than conventional meters because there was no need to physically access the meter box (such as by prying up the meter box cover) to get a reading, and the potential for human error in reading meters was eliminated by the wireless transmission of data.
We did not discuss what other measures, if any, the Council has trialled to reduce or better manage water demand at the peak time of year, such, as for example, public education campaigns to promote water conservation and/or promotion of installation of rain water tanks to supplement the town water supply for some applications. (This was an oversight on my part.)
Technical aspects of the “smart” water meters being trialled in Tairua
The young engineer was excited by the results of the trial so far, in which an initial test had shown that the signal from one of the “smart” water meters could be detected 600 metres from the “smart” meter, despite buildings and trees being in the way between the water meter and receiver.
The “smart” meter chosen by the Council for Tairua is the Sappel Altair Concentric V3 meter supplied in NZ by Hynds. The Council has chosen to use the 434MHz option for the transmission frequency (which presumably means that the Council engineering team has chosen to team up the meters with the Diehl IZAR RC radio transmitter.) 434 MHz is a public frequency also utilised by some common gadgets such as automatic garage door openers. However, the manufacturer of the IZAR RC radio transmitter designed to be compatible with Sappel modular meter states that its transmission range is “500 metres, depending on the environment”, so it is obviously much more powerful than a garage door opening gizmo. (In practice, as above, the transmission range may be longer than the manufacturer’s specifications.)
According to the engineer, the “‘smart” meters chosen will be transmitting every eight seconds. (The battery life of the for the transmitter is claimed by the manufacturer to be 15 years, without any sort of guarantee that this will actually be the case.) The Council is exploring different ideas for reading the meters, I was told. The trial is using a handheld or drive-by system in which a portable device is used to collect the data from the “smart” water meters as they transmit. The transmitters on the meters are unidirectional. One option the Council team is considering for the ongoing collection of data is to have a receiver mounted in the rubbish trucks which make weekly rounds of the towns to collect garbage, thereby eliminating the need for a separate vehicle (or person on foot) to patrol the streets to collect the data. This is considered an attractive option because it would reduce the cost associated with gathering data from the “smart” meters.
Possible implications for privacy if the trial is considered successful
The IZAR transmitters that are compatible with the Sappel meters used in the Tairua trial have the capacity to be used with a fixed “IZAR RECEIVER GPRS/LAN” system which is capable of collecting all the data from “smart” water meters, storing it and then transferring it to a central computer system. If the Thames-Coromandel District Council were happy with the results of the Tairua trial and chose this option for collection of data from “smart” water meters, this potentially raises privacy concerns, since if the meters transmit data every eight seconds, it should be theoretically possible to use the data to work out patterns of activity in a household, based on patterns of water consumption, in a similar way in which patterns of activity in a household can be inferred from electricity use. (See the graphic at this link http://www.smartmeterpowerstruggle.wordpress.com/ for an example of how electricity “smart meters” can compromise privacy, and for a discussion of privacy and home security issues please see these links: https://stopsmartmeters.org.nz/government-and-electricity-industry-positions/network-tasman-there-are-no-privacy-concerns-with-smart-meters-yeah-right/ and www.stopsmartmeters.org.nz/latest-news/how-smart-meters-can-help-burglars/.)
Health implications
About 25% of households and businesses in Tairua have been selected by the Council to participate the in trial. (The properties chosen have been selected on the basis of ensuring that they represent different types of properties (i.e. permanent residential, holiday homes and business) and different areas of the town.) By contrast, the trial of “smart” water meters in Tauranga was limited to one suburb. (See this link for a discussion of the trial of “smart” water meters in Tauranga: https://stopsmartmeters.org.nz/latest-news/smart-water-meters-in-nz-the-situation-so-far/.)
Considering that each “smart” water meter used in the Tairua trial will transmit every eight seconds around the clock for a distance of up to half a kilometre (or possibly more) at the 434MHZ frequency, the “smart” water meter trial in Tairua may represent an experiment in exposure of an entire town to this particular frequency at levels that are unique in the history of NZ.
People who have electrohypersensitivity (EHS)** may be adversely affected by this trial. Overseas, concern has been raised that exposure to the non-ionising radiation produced by “smart” meters used to measure electricity consumption appears to act as a trigger for the development of EHS in some people. (See: http://skyvisionsolutions.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/aaem-wireless-smart-meter-case-studies.pdf ) In NZ, many of the “smart” meters being introduced for electricity are designed to transmit for longer distances (“a few kilometres”), according to the PDF “Smart-Meter-FAQ-Aug11.pdf” on the website of the Electricity Authority, so electricity “smart” meters are obviously more powerful than are “smart” water meters. Moreover, as the strength of the signal from any “smart” meter declines with distance, “smart” electricity meters which are typically mounted on the wall of a home probably pose more of a risk than “smart” water meters on council property. (Presumably these will be installed in the footpath, as are the conventional “water” meters in Auckland.) However, the possibility that “smart” water meters may trigger EHS cannot be ruled out and the longer term effects of living in an area where “smart” waters meters transmit every eight seconds twenty four hours a day must be considered an unknown.
Possible outcome of the trial
If the trial is successful, conceivably the Thames-Tairua District Council may choose to introduce “smart” water meters in other towns in its region.
Pe0ple in Tairua (or elsewhere in the area administered by the Thames-Tairua District Council) who are not happy with the idea of being exposed to additional electromagnetic radiation from “smart” water meters may wish to notify the Council that they do not consent to the installation of a “smart” water meter to measure water consumption at their home or business. A template that can be personalised may be downloaded from the link below:
FORMAL NOTICE OF NON CONSENT FOR SMART WATER METER
Please share this post with family and friends in this area.
More information on smart water meters in NZ may be found at this post: www.stopsmartmeters.org.nz/latest-news/smart-water-meters-in-nz-the-situation-so-far/
**Information on electrohypersensitivity may be found at this link: http://www.es-uk.info/
For a personal story which illustrates how difficult a condition EHS is for sufferers to live with, please see this link: https://stopsmartmeters.org.nz/latest-news/what-is-it-like-to-live-with-electrohypersensitivity-ehs-one-womans-story/
Health professionals may want to read this link: http://www.scribd.com/doc/87308119/Guideline-of-the-Austrian-Medical-Association-for-the-diagnosis-and-treatment-of-EMF-related-health-problems-and-illnesses-EMF-syndrome
by Katherine | 27 Apr, 2014 | Government and Electricity Industry Positions, Latest News, Smart water meters
A 2013 article in the Waikato Times suggests that one reason for the introduction of WEL’s “smart boxes” may be to facilitate “smart” water meters in the Hamilton and Waikato area. Leaving aside the potential health concerns with “smart boxes” and “smart” water meters, introduction of water metering is controversial in Hamilton, due to people’s concerns that it will increase costs. In cities where water meters have been introduced, such as Auckland, water bills may be $80 per month for a family of four – in addition to rates, adding to the cost of living.
According to the Waikato Times:
“In September last year, Mr Ninnes briefed Mr Allen on WEL Networks’ progress rolling out its electricity smart meter technology, and expectations that every property in Hamilton will be connected to the company’s new network through a fully functioning WEL Networks smart box by the middle of this year.
“Mr Ninnes then told Mr Allen he had just brought together a specialist team to develop a smart water meter “proof of concept” to demonstrate the smart boxes could also support water meters, feeding information directly to WEL.
“He discussed a small field trial of smart water meters connected to Raglan properties already hooked up to WEL Networks’ completed smart network.” http://www.stuff.co.nz/waikato-times/news/9282623/Water-meters-may-be-closer-than-you-think
(Site editor’s note: I have since made enquiries about this trial with Waikato District Council and was advised that the trial did not take place.)
If you are in the WEL area, and do not want to have the additional exposure to the radiofrequency radiation produced by a WEL “smart box” you are within your rights to refuse the installation of a WEL “smart box”. For an example of a letter that prevent a WEL “smart box” installation, please see this link: www.stopsmartmeters.org.nz/uncategorized/wel-smart-box-installation-prevented/
For a general discussion of “smart” water metering in NZ, please see this link: https://stopsmartmeters.org.nz/latest-news/smart-water-meters-in-nz-the-situation-so-far/
by Katherine | 16 Apr, 2014 | Government and Electricity Industry Positions, Latest News
Network Tasman’s website makes the statement that “There are no privacy concerns with smart meters”.*
(SOURCE: http://www.networktasman.co.nz/Main.asp?ID=17 )
The company further claims that:
“The sole reason for installing an advanced meter is to increase the efficiency of electricity usage in your home and across the electricity network. All meter reading data is in code and can only be read by the smart grid system computers. No other data (eg voice or video) can be transmitted.”
Let’s take the company at its word that its aim in installing “smart meters” is to increase the efficiency of electricity use in homes and in the electricity network in general (as well as to provide a means of measuring electricity consumption in a way that is convenient for the Network Tasman.) Network Tasman is run by a community trust and I imagine that everyone involved with the company is well-intentioned.
However, while Network Tasman may not have an interest in violating your privacy by mis-using data gained through “smart meters”, the same may not be true of other parties who may gain access to data obtained through “smart meters”. Overseas, “smart meters” have been shown to be vulnerable to hacking. (See this post: https://stopsmartmeters.org.nz/latest-news/bbc-smart-meters-need-to-be-harder-to-hack/) What’s more, by their very nature, “smart meters” accumulate a lot of data about electricity use, and they are designed to transmit data at regular intervals. This information that can be gained after data from smart meters has been de-aggregated can be quite detailed, as shown at this link: http://smartmeterpowerstruggle.wordpress.com/
Overseas experience has shown that in some cases, data from “smart meters” may be sufficiently detailed as to allow people with access to this information to know what particular TV programme you may be watching. (See: https://stopsmartmeters.org.nz/latest-news/is-your-smart-meter-spying-on-you/ )
Suffice, I think, to say that there are privacy issues with “smart meters”, despite what Network Tasman’s website claims.
In NZ, two electricity companies (Genesis and its subsidiary EnergyOnline) claim to own the data obtained by “smart meters” in their customers’ homes and to have the right to supply this data to “third parties”. (See this link for details: https://stopsmartmeters.org.nz/latest-news/is-your-smart-meter-spying-on-you/)
Most of these companies’ customers probably have no idea that their privacy (and potentially home security, should this data fall into the wrong hands) is being compromised in this way. What do Genesis and EnergyOnline plan to do with this information? Sell it to other companies, perhaps? This would potentially create a new revenue stream for these electricity retailers.
NB: Genesis and EnergyOnline also have it in their Terms and Conditions that customers must accept a “smart meter”, see this link for details: https://stopsmartmeters.org.nz/latest-news/smart-meter-installed-without-permission-headaches-result-smart-meter-removed-headaches-disappear/
Unfortunately, the privacy issues may not go away if the transmission chip (also known as a modem) is removed from a “smart meter” to prevent it from transmitting data (via microwave radiation) back to the lines company and/or retailer.
Many “smart meters” also include an infrared optical port, which generally looks like a red light on the front of the meter. When a meter reader comes to a home or business of a non-transmitting “smart meter” s/he obtains information about electricity use via a connection established between portable equipment supplied by the metering company and the optical port. The information that can potentially be exchanged through this optical port is potentially quite detailed, as was demonstrated by an FBI investigation into “smart meter” hacking in Puerto Rico in 2009. (The hacking cost utilities companies millions and millions of dollars.) According to the website http://krebsonsecurity.com/ the hacking was most likely accomplished by establishing a connection with the “smart meter” via its optical port, after which its software was illegally re-programmed to result in savings for the customer.
I think it likely that when a meter reader “reads” a “smart meter” a large amount of detailed information about the customer’s electricity use is transferred to the company through the connection between the optical port and the meter reader’s portable equipment. Whether this data is as detailed as the data that is accumulated by the electricity company when a “smart meter” regularly transmits data about electricity use (which can be as often as every half hour with some NZ companies) I do not know. However, “smart meters” have the ability to store data, so it is not inconceivable that a lot of data could be transmitted when the optical port is accessed by a meter reader.
Under the circumstances, I think it would be wise to assume that a “smart meter” which has had its transmission chip removed is still a threat to privacy and home security. It is certainly better than a “smart meter” which is transmitting in real time; however, if there are regular patterns of activity in a home (i.e people work 9-5 jobs and leave for work and return home at regular – and therefore predictable times – each week day and/or have regular commitments out-of-home in the evening) these patterns may be reflected in data that is accumulated by their electricity company (or other company that has access to metering data).
I would welcome contact from anyone who has information about technical matters that relate to the topics discussed in this post. You can reach me through https://stopsmartmeters.org.nz/contact-us/
*In case Network Tasman Ltd removes the statement from its website, here is a screenshot showing the statement:

by Katherine | 15 Apr, 2014 | Government and Electricity Industry Positions, Latest News, Uncategorized, Users Feedback
If you live in the Nelson or Tasman area served by lines company Network Tasman, you may have read the following statement on the company’s website:
“The requirement for meter replacement is regulated by the NZ Government and must be completed nationally by 2015”
This statement was at the following link http://www.networktasman.co.nz/Main.asp?ID=17 (at the time of writing this post) but an email from company representative Andrew Stanton sent on Monday May 19 stated that the website is going to be updated, so the link above no longer includes the wording.
However, I took a screenshot of the part of the website that contains the statement “The requirement for meter replacement is regulated by the NZ Government and must be completed nationally by 2015” and you can see it at this link:
https://stopsmartmeters.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Frequently-asked-questions-from-Network-Tasman-website3-May-17-2014.png
The original statement on Network Tasman Ltd’s website gave the impression that the government regulations mean that existing analogue meters (also known as electromechanical meters or Ferraris meters) have to be replaced with “smart meters”.
However, according to the Electricity Authority, there is no government requirement for existing analogue to be replaced with “smart meters”. The Electricity Authority requires that electricity meters be “re-certified” by April 2015. (See this link for a discussion of this issue https://stopsmartmeters.org.nz/uncategorized/is-it-compulsory-to-have-a-smart-meter/. )
As far as I am aware, there is no reason why lines companies cannot re-certify existing analogue meters that are in good working order (or install brand new, appropriately certified analogue meters for those homes/businesses where an analogue meter has reached the end of its useful life.
New analogue meters are considerably cheaper than new “smart meters”. Analogue meters also have the advantage that they can not produce any “dirty electricity”. (Any meter with electronic components – even a “smart meter” which has had its transmission chip – also known as a modem – removed so that it does not produce microwave radiation – will probably contain a “switch mode” power supply and thus may produce “dirty electricity”. )
Some people who are sensitive to electromagnetic radiation (EMR) react adversely to “dirty electricity”. There is also research linking “dirty electricity” to cancer. (For more information about “dirty electricity” please see this link www.stopsmartmeters.org.nz/health-issues/)
by Katherine | 16 Mar, 2014 | Government and Electricity Industry Positions, Latest News
A document that is being used by the NZ electricity industry to justify the “safety” of the new microwave-emitting “smart” or “advanced” meters being introduced into NZ has been debunked by Don Maisch, PhD.
The report “Health and Safety Aspects of Electricity Smart Meters” was produced by the Electric Power Engineering Centre (EPEC) at Canterbury University*.
Dr Maisch, whose PhD thesis examines the effects of vested interests on standards for electromagnetic radiation, has made his critique of EPEC’s report available on his website at the following link:
http://www.emfacts.com/2014/03/a-critique-of-the-new-zealand-report-health-and-safety-aspects-of-electricity-smart-meters/
NB: Dr Maisch visited NZ in late 2013 and gave three public lectures on “smart meters”. Footage of the lectures may be viewed at this link: https://stopsmartmeters.org.nz/uncategorized/dr-don-maisch-auckland-lecture-now-online/, while the Power Point slides for the lectures may be accessed from this link of his website: www.emfacts.com/download/New_Zealand_pres.pdf
*Information that briefly covers the relationship between EPERC and the electricity industry may be found at this link https://stopsmartmeters.org.nz/uncategorized/nz-electricity-industry-position/
NB: The EPEC “Health and Safety Aspects of Electricity Smart Meters” document is available from the EPEC website http://www.epecentre.ac.nz/media/smartmeter.shtml
by Katherine | 24 Feb, 2014 | Government and Electricity Industry Positions, Latest News
Northeast Utilities (NU) is New England’s largest utility system and serve more than 3.6 million electric and natural gas customers in Connecticut, Massachusetts and New Hampshire. NU recently filed a document with the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities critising a proposed state plan to require the installation of “smart” (or “advanced”) meters.
The document produced by Northeast Utilities stated, in part:
“There is no rational basis for …mandated implementation of [smart meters].”
“The [smart meter] technology choice is made although there is no evidence that this is a good choice for customers. Conversely, there is ample evidence that this technology choice will be unduly costly for customers and that the objectives of grid modernization are achievable with technologies and strategies that rank substantially higher in terms of cost-effectiveness. For customers who will pay the price of this system, there is no rational basis for this technology choice.”
The full story, including more excerpts from the NU document may be read at this link: http://smartgridawareness.org/2014/02/13/no-rational-basis-for-smart-meters/
The issue is also covered at this link: http://www.takebackyourpower.net/news/2014/02/21/major-u-s-utility-says-no-rational-basis-for-smart-meters/
Major U.S. Utility Says “No Rational Basis” for Mandating Smart Meters
by Katherine | 8 Feb, 2014 | Government and Electricity Industry Positions, Latest News
According to www.scoop.co.nz it will cost millions of dollars to replace analogue (electromechanical) meters with microwave-radiation emiting “smart meters” in Invercargill and Southland.
According to the article:
“PowerNet will begin its installation of smart meters within the next couple of months, after the announcement of a $24.5 million investment.”
The roll out is planned to occur over a three year period. To their credit, while PowerNet chief executive Jason Franklin said that while he expected “education” about “smart meters” would cause people to welcome them, “Ultimately, if someone doesn’t want a smart meter we won’t impose one on them.”
http://www.stuff.co.nz/southland-times/news/9681601/Millions-ploughed-into-new-meter-system
According Powernet’s website, the company manages lines for The Power Company Limited, Electricity Invercargill Limited, OtagoNet Joint Venture, Stewart Island Electricity Supply Authority (SIESA), and Electricity Southland Limited (Lakeland Network in Frankton.)
If you live in any of these area and do not want a “smart meter”, please see this link for information: https://stopsmartmeters.org.nz/how-to-avoid-getting-a-smart-meter/
Please also warn relatives and friends in the area.
by Katherine | 22 Jan, 2014 | Government and Electricity Industry Positions, Latest News
The Australian state of Victoria has been the site of a massive roll out of “smart meters” in recent years. This has been financially costly for all consumers. It has also meant that some people who are sensitive to electromagnetic radiation have had their health so badly affected that they have had to move to another state to escape the level of electromagnetic pollution caused by the “smart grid” in their home state. (For one example, please see this link http://stopsmartmeters.com.au/2013/12/21/farewell-steve-and-thank-you/)
Now it appears that some of the companies involved in this “smart meter” roll out, during which people have reported being intimidation by power companies ( see: http://stopsmartmeters.com.au/2013/11/29/leave-me-be-sp-ausnet-you-have-harmed-me-enough-already/ ) are at least part-owned by companies that are in turn owned by the Chinese communist regime. This regime, is, of course infamous for its treatment of political and religious dissidents. Lesser known is the regime’s brutal treatment of women; under its “one child family” policy women who become pregnant with a second child can be (and have been) kidnapped from the street or their homes by “Family Planning” officials and taken to hospitals where their babies have been forcibly aborted, up to and including the third trimester. (Apologies to sensitive readers.)
For more details on the Chinese communist regime’s financial interest in companies trying to force “smart meters” on Australians, please see this link:
http://stopsmartmeters.com.au/2014/01/06/the-chinese-government-is-now-the-major-player-in-victorias-electricity-distribution-businesses/
by Katherine | 17 Jan, 2014 | Government and Electricity Industry Positions, Latest News
Counties Power which manages the electricity lines for Pukekohe and surrounding areas including parts of Papakura is now replacing analogue (electromechanical) meters with “smart meters”. These will be replaced first in Pukekohe.
According to Counties Power’s website:
“The smart meters being purchased by Counties Power will be supplied by Landis+Gyr, and will be manufactured in Australia. The meters can communicate with each other and with 220 relays to form a meshed communication network. This mesh configuration ensures no single fault will disrupt the meter communications. The communication equipment is provided by Silver Spring Networks, with the accompanying software being managed by Metrix.” (See: http://www.countiespower.com/news.htm for more information.)
The meshed network system chosen by Counties Power will probably mean that the meters send out pulses of microwave radiation more frequently than “smart meters” which are not part of a mesh network.
The “smart” electricity meters being installed by Counties Power contain a “Zigbee” ship or unit which is an additional source of microwave radiation. (See http://www.countiespower.com/smartnetwork.htm)
People who live in Pukekohe, Papakura and surrounding areas who do not want a “smart meter” should take precautions now such as putting a lock and notice on their meter box if it is outside. In the case of an indoor meter box is inside, it is prudent to inform members of the household who may be at home that if a technician comes to replace the electricity meter, they should not to let the technician into the house. For more information on how to prevent an unwanted “smart meter” installation, please see this link: https://stopsmartmeters.org.nz/how-to-avoid-getting-a-smart-meter/
Please also take the time to inform friends and relatives in the area about the “smart meter” issue as it can be difficult to get a “smart meter” removed once it has been installed.
Counties Power is respecting people who notifiy the company that they do not want a “smart meter”: See this link for an example: https://stopsmartmeters.org.nz/latest-news/retired-nurse-prevents-counties-power-smart-meter-installation/
Recent Comments