News

New CA bill would let consumers just say no to smart meters

Dec 7, 2010

California Assemblyman Jared Huffman thinks electric and gas customers shouldn't have to accept smart meters if they don't want them and has introduced a bill that would require the California Public Utilities Commission to give them an opt-out option. That option would give customers the right to ask for a wired meter. California is one of the hot spots of resistance to smart meter implementation, primarily because of consumer concerns about health effects of the meters. According to the Marin Independent Journal, Huffman's bill also would require utilities to give customers information about the meters that includes timing, magnitude, frequency and duration of radio frequency emissions. It also would require the PUC to temporarily stop smart meter deployments until the opt-out option is available. "This bill is about giving consumers reasonable choices," Huffman was quoted as saying. "Whether or not you believe RF exposures from smart meters are harmful, it's only fair that consumers who are concerned about health effects be given complete technical information and the choice of another technology for devices that are installed at their homes." Last week the PUC denied a request by EMF Safety Network to stop Pacific Gas & Electric's smart meter deployment until more information about the health effects of the meters became available.

Jesse Berst's Take: At first blush, it's easy to argue that such a move forces mainstream customers to subsidize the higher costs of the alternative meters. At second glance, though, this kind of measure could be the easiest, simplest way to end all the controversy. Simply give those who are afraid of electromagnetic radiation the option of getting a wired version instead. Or opting for an old-style meter entirely, and foregoing the additional information and control.

You might also be interested in ...

Scare stories threaten Maine smart meter rollout

No health threat from smart meters

Smart meter angst continues in California

Smart meter news and commentary

Stay connected with SGN …

Drop by our Smart Grid News Talk forums

Get LinkedIn with Jesse

Join Smart Grid News on Facebook

Try our RSS feed

Get our email digest

Talk Back to the Author

Current Comments (8)

Leave a Comment

The German option

That's funny. In Germany it is the other way around. Here it is required by law to install smart meters in new buildings and for major renovation, and customers have an "opt-in option" to get a smart meter anyway.

By the way: When living in a big apartment building opting out will probably not help you in terms of reduction of RF exposure - if you are the only one. You will still have "radiating" meters all around you.

Kielmann Jonas - 12/08/2010 - 07:50

And who pays?

While I agree that consumers should be provided with information regarding the timing, magnitude, frequency and duration of RF emissions, not all smart meters are capable of being wired to the telephone.

One of the real benefits of an AMI system is the ability to reduce manual meter reads. If a customer wishes to opt-out of an automated metering reading program, should they not be responsible for the marginal cost-of-service for reverting back to a manual read?

This might be a $50-$100/month adder, and should all customers subsidize the minority or should the cost be allocated back to the cause as equity would dictate?

Phil Lusk - 12/08/2010 - 09:15

Opt Out -- NO

Before we pay even lip service to these bogus health care scares, we should force the complainers to prove there is any health hazards. People put up bogus concerns to slow progress and as a culture we enable them by repeating their concerns rather than requiring them to demonstrate their concerns.

I find the argument that people should have the option to stop implementation of energy efficiencies in this case through opting out of Smart Meters to be a false choice. Why should my neighbor have the option to opt out and thus increase my energy bills? The neighbor is impeding my choice to reduce energy costs. We don't let people decide whether they obey a law or submit tax forms or receive television transmissions - why should we allow them to use their energy inefficiently. Your car has to have pollution control devices because none of us want to live with polluted air. We just don't get a choice about some things -- that is what shared commitments, shared responsibilities, and social contracts are all about.

Chuck Drinnan - 12/08/2010 - 10:58

Pragmatic Politics

This isn't a health or technology issue. It's politics. And as much as I hate doing so, sometimes it's quicker and less expensive to throw a bone to the wacko fringe and the demagogues they help elect.

Reason or logic don’t help much. In the PG&E situation, once the “higher bill” concern was demonstrated to be unfounded, only then did health concerns become the primary issue. Some people are just obstructionists and the “best” response is not always what’s fair or reasonable. Although there is a lot of merit in offering the opt-out at an additional cost. A higher monthly bill is “logic” that even the fringe can understand.

John Morley - 12/09/2010 - 09:06

The Real Issue is Customer Choice

Smart meters are less dangerous that wireless phones. The real issue is customer choice.

Customer choice is about customer convenience, as opposed to utility convenience, as explained in the post "Smart Grid Customers are Looking for Convenience, as Opposed to Engagement ( http://bit.ly/EWPC74 )."

Is this a way to go through a weak debate process to stress the need for customer engagement (as in commitment) to make sure that real customer choice is not available in California any time soon? This may become a well orchestrated debate game played to keep in place the customer engagement barriers to customer choice.

It is clear that this is not a similar health problem with wireless phones, because in the smart meter case we are under regulation and in the wireless phone case under competition having already customer choice. But, if wireless phones can be shown to be perfectly safe, a similar argument which is already available can be used to show that smart meters are safe. For the two cases to be similar we need to open electric retail markets not to price competition, but to business model innovations competition.

José Antonio Vanderhorst-Silverio, Ph.D. - 12/09/2010 - 12:16

Utilities will get their profit

The energy utility industry is very interesting. I have the right to purchase electricity. I have very little say in where it comes from and how much I pay for it. Regardless of efficiencies and standards or health threats, I should have a right to refuse a new meter. I do not think smart meters will reduce the cost of energy. Utilities will get their profit. And they will get it from us. Suppose the new meters really reduce the utility's costs of fleets of meter readers. OK. That should reduce the cost of my per kWh rate. I doubt it will. But maybe. Then, because I have better visibility to my energy habits and can possibly tie that directly to costs, like the Prius Effect, I will smartly reduce my energy consumption. So the utilities will find a way to raise their income to offset my reduced usage.

They are also implementing meters without security standards. Our infrastructure has risks enough as it is, and now we are adding what are essentially millions of access points to the digital control and communication of the grid. In theory, a hacker from anywhwere in the world has access to who knows what.

I think the comment that complainers need to prove the risk is incredibly ignorant of history. Should I have to prove the oil spill in the Gulf is bad for marine life in order for BP to be forced to clean up? Most energy consumers do not have the wherewithall to measure the EMR around them and the science of long term effects is not without debate.

Let those who want smart meters get them. Let those who don't do without. Over time, the smart meters will likely come anyway.

William Barnett, Jr. - 01/12/2011 - 04:30

Smart Meters do not equal lower costs

The argument that smart meters will lower rate-payer costs as the utilities will eliminate the ‘meter readers’ has yet to pan out. In fact several municipalities that have gone totally smart meter have not only found that they are not able to eliminate the meter readers but they have also added a lot on unplanned capital expenses in new hardware and software as well as headcount within their IT, facilities, and billing departments to sort out all of the data. Numerous have already gone back to their PUCs to request price increases to off-set the additional capital expenses of deploying smart meters.

Without a clearly defined financial incentive there is little reason for the consumer to willing take on the many risks associated with smart meters such as data protection, privacy, security, resiliency, and availability. As noted the threat of local or regional blackouts from hackers grows almost exponentially with each new batch of installed meters.

As to privacy – those not familiar with TEMPEST better do their research! RF Smart Meters are an ideal interface for espionage, life-style monitoring, and unprotected 24x7 self incrimination. They represent a huge invasion of privacy that is unwarranted in light of the minimal societal benefits. These issues will spawn an entire new industry to retrofit facilities with double-shielded isolation transformers and capacitor decoupling all of which will INCREASE energy consumption by 2 to 4% over a traditional “dumb” meter.

Jack Pouchet - 01/19/2011 - 14:52

Let people choose

Your home is your castle - PG&E (or anyone) is not supposed to make you have something on your property that you think is dangerous. If you don't mind a wireless smart meter, then get one, but those of us that do, need to have a wired option.

Sandy - 02/09/2011 - 19:32

Leave a Comment

New to this Blog? Need some help?

Email:

[?]
We will send you an email with an appproval link you must click for your comment to appear.

Full Real Name:

[?]
Real comments need a real name.

Subject:

[?]
Please provide a short subject for your comment.

Comment:[?]

Do not post commercial/sales messages here. They will be deleted. Try: pr@smartgridnews.com
PLEASE NOTE: All HTML codes will be removed from your comment.

CAPTCHA Security Code

The numbers (0) and (1) are not used.
[?]
Please type the characters you see into the box above.

Remember my name? (Uncheck to forget.)

You can not edit or delete your comment once it is posted. Please check for spelling now.
Your IP Address is: 38.107.179.210

Smart Grid: The Tuesday Topic - Smart Grid News - Grid Modernization and the Smart Grid

THE TUESDAY TOPIC

Does Texas have it right? (And "traditional" states have it wrong.)

It has taken a while, but more and more observers are calling the Texas "experiment" with retail competition a success... and even suggesting it may be a model for the rest of the country. Is it?
Join the conversation >>

EXPRESS MENU

READER FAVORITES

Latest news
Commentary
Hot topics
Conference calendar
Smart Grid News Talk Forums
Smart grid 101
Webinars

MOST POPULAR

Asset management
Building automation
Business case
Command and control
Communications technologies
Customer care
Demand response
Demand side management
Distributed generation
Distribution automation
Energy efficiency
Electric vehicles
Global smart grid
Grid optimization
Home area networks
IT and back office
Lessons learned
Markets and pricing
Meter data management
Microgrids
Policy and regulation
Projects
Renewable energy
Research and development
SCADA
Security
Smart grid companies
Smart homes
Smart meters
Standards
Storage
Strategy
Transmission
Utility resources

Get SGN's free email alert
What's in the SGN email? \| Twitter \| Facebook \| Linkedin \| RSS