The ACC is tasked with the responsibility to protect AZ ratepayers by weighing the costs and benefits of all state utility requests.
Sedona AZ (February 13, 2013) – The following is a letter to the SedonaEye.com editor:
Massachusetts’ largest electric utility company has recently declared that:
- There are no cost savings to be had from “smart” meters.
- “Smart” meters do not reduce outages.
- “Smart” meters are not “grid modernization”.
- “Smart” meters are a cyber-security risk.
and contrary to the bogus claims of “smart” meter boosters, given the choice, few ratepayers will “opt in” and ask for a “smart” meter. They have no use for one.
Northeast Utilities says – and I have been telling the Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) for years – “For customers who will pay the price of this system, there is no rational basis for this technology choice.”
Below is the letter I wrote informing the ACC of this news.
Warren Woodward 55 Ross Circle Sedona, Arizona 86336February 12, 2014
Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) Docket Control Center 1200 West Washington Street Phoenix, Arizona 85007Re: Docket # E-00000C-11-0328
ACC Commissioner Susan Bitter Smith
Commissioners;
Are you aware that Massachusetts’ largest electric company, Northeast Utilities, recently echoed what I have been telling you for over 2 years?
In no uncertain terms, Northeast, which serves 1.3 million customers, declares that “… there is no rational basis for the implementation of AMI.” [AMI is “Advanced Metering Infrastructure”, the utility industry’s euphemism for “smart” meters, which was the previous euphemism.]
Enclosed you will find Northeast’s January 17, 2014 submission to the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities. I urge you to read it.
Northeast exposes and debunks several major “smart” meter myths.
Among Northeast’s findings:
ACC Commissioner Gary Pierce
1. ) There are no cost savings to be had from “smart” meters.
2. ) “Smart” meters do not reduce outages.
3. ) “Smart” meters are not “grid modernization”.
4. ) “Smart” meters are a cyber-security risk.
5. ) Contrary to the bogus claims of “smart” meter boosters, given the choice, few ratepayers will “opt in” and ask for a “smart” meter. They have no use for one.
Salient quotes for 1) There are no cost savings to be had from “smart” meters. –
Page ii – “… there is ample evidence that this technology choice [“smart” meters] will be unduly costly for customers ….”
Pages 6 & 7 – “… the costs associated with AMI are currently astronomical, while the incremental benefits for customers are small in comparison.”
ACC Commissioner Bob Burns
Page 7 – “The decision to implement AMI goes against the best business judgment of the Companies and cannot be rationally cost justified in terms of a net benefit for the overall customer base that will pay for the investment over the long term.”
This next is a rather lengthy quote but it makes a point I have made in the past: There is a great deal more expense involved in the “smart” grid than just replacing meters. It is very simplistic to think that there is a cost saving by getting rid of meter readers that way. Indeed, nowhere on earth has the “smart” grid resulted in lower rates for customers. I will remind you that Central Maine Power is now being audited because their $363M in promised “smart” grid savings turned into a $99M loss in short order, and that late last year Germany rejected “smart” meters based on a cost/benefit analysis done by Ernst & Young. Note also that the following list of “smart” meter related expenses does not include the immeasurable cost in damaged human and environment health that “smart” meters cause.
Pages 7 & 8 – “The implementation of AMI involves significantly more than the replacement of meters. An AMI roll-out would require either the significant enhancement or replacement of the following systems: Communications Infrastructure used to transmit communications from the meter to the Companies; Meter Data Management System used to collect, store and process interval data and enable ISO settlement; Meter Asset Systems used to store information about all meter assets; Customer Information System (“CIS”) used to calculate and present bills with time varying rates (“TVR”); ISO and Load Research Systems used to interface with internal metering, CIS and ISO processes; the Outage Management System used to utilize meter-level data to support restoration efforts; and any company-owned home technology systems, e.g., usage displays and thermostats. The Companies’ media and call center capabilities would also need to be enhanced to address any AMI implementation. Costs would also exist in relation to the meters, associated technologies and related systems that are currently in place and that would have to be retired before the end of their useful life.”
ACC Commissioner Brenda Burns
Page 12 – “Given that the grid modernization technology sphere is a dynamic, rapidly evolving marketplace, it is also unclear whether the incremental benefits, if any, would begin accruing to customers prior to the implemented AMI platform being rendered obsolete. In any event, the cost remains unjustified by the benefits.”
Salient quotes for 2) “Smart” meters do not reduce outages. –
Page 4 – “Meters do not reduce the number of outages ….”
Page 11 – “Customers value price and reliability above all else and the implementation of AMI serves neither of these objectives.”
Salient quotes for 3) “Smart” meters are not “grid modernization”. –
Page ii – “Rather than furthering grid-modernization objectives, the Department’s mandate to implement AMI creates an intractable obstacle to grid modernization.”
Page ii – “… the objectives of grid modernization are achievable with technologies and strategies that rank substantially higher in terms of cost-effectiveness.”
ACC Chairman Bob Stump sits on NAURC
Page 4 – “An Advance Metering System is not a “basic technology platform” for grid modernization and is not needed to realize “all of the benefits of grid modernization.”” [italics in original]
Page 4 – “Meters do not reduce the number of outages; metering systems are not the only option for optimizing demand or reducing system and customer costs; and metering systems are not necessary to integrate distributed resources or to improve workforce and asset management. Therefore, it is not correct that advanced metering functionality is a “basic technology platform” that must be in place before all of the benefits of grid modernization can be fully realized ….”
In technical detail, pages 4 and 5 then go on to list numerous methods to truly modernize the grid, all without the financial fiasco of “smart” meters.
Salient quote for 4) “Smart” meters are a cyber-security risk. –
Page 9 – “AMI introduces a brand new portal into the Companies’ information systems, significantly increasing the cyber-security risk.”
Salient quotes for 5) Contrary to the bogus claims of “smart” meter boosters, given the choice, few ratepayers will “opt in” and ask for a “smart” meter. They have no use for one.
Pages 10 & 11 – “… there is no evidence that customers are willing to pay for the limited incremental functionality gained through implementation of AMI. In fact, there is evidence to the contrary. For example, industry studies show that only 46 percent of customers are aware of the concept of “smart metering,” and of that percentage, 33 percent associate smart metering with complaints of meter inaccuracy, higher customer bills, invasion of privacy and health concerns. In the Companies’ experience, even very large customers with sophisticated energy-management capabilities prefer stabilized, fixed and/or predictable rates to assist in managing their business or personal interests rather than time varying rates. Certain customer segments, particularly the commercial and industrial sector, have significant reservations about AMI and TVR [Time Varying Rates]. Many customers have a deep aversion to technology that links them to the “grid” in a way that they perceive as an invasion of their privacy and/or detrimental to their health.”
Page 11 – “Smart metering pilot programs across the country have produced similar results in terms of showing a lack of customer interest. Even the most successful residential time-of-use pricing programs have no more than 50 percent participation by the residential customer base. For example, NSTAR’s Smart Energy Pilot has seen significant participant degradation relative to the initial number of customers installed. As reported to the GMWG, NSTAR Electric made 53,000 customer contacts in an attempt to enroll customers in its smart grid program; only 3,600 customers enrolled; only 2,700 customers were installed and approximately 40 percent of those 2,700 initial participants were removed or dropped out of the pilot by May 2013. PSE&G’s “myPower” pricing pilot saw similar results in which 27 percent of participants were either removed or dropped out (excluding the control group).”
Similarly, here in Arizona, I have heard that Tucson Electric Power’s AMI/Home Area Network pilot program was such a dismal failure that no one talks about it.
Commissioners, when are you going to wake up to the monumental fraud which is occurring? Or are you sleeping with the fraudsters?
As Northeast says – and as I have been telling you for years – “For customers who will pay the price of this system, there is no rational basis for this technology choice.”
Sincerely,
Warren Woodward
Cc: Governor Jan Brewer, Attorney General Tom Horne
[The enclosure that accompanied the hard-copy of this letter, Northeast Utilities submission to the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities, may be found online here:
http://www.env.state.ma.us/dpu/docs/electric/12-76/12-76-Comments-7986.pdf ]
For the best in Arizona news and views, read www.SedonaEye.com daily!
If these utilities are handled by poor business management it’s time to organize for public audits and maybe Nuclear Reg to come in and shake the sheets off the nuke plant management? What jeopardy are we in as a state if cyber risk is overlooked by utility board for nuke plant? Party primaries need to address this issue with candidates.
@ Gary Francis — Pat Ferre and I have made the same point repeatedly in our ACC docket filings: How scary is it to have a company so inept and mendacious as APS running a nuke plant?
The utility company also operates three nuclear reactors. Its Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station in Arizona, the largest nuclear plant in the U.S., came under scrutiny by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in 2005 when operational problems began to cause prolonged outages.[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arizona_Public_Service
checked out that link by 3 nuke plants & see this–damn scary people aps!
Major power outage
On September 8, 2011 there was a widespread power outage affecting a region spreading west from Yuma, Arizona, to San Diego, California, and affecting parts of Northern Mexico. The outage was the result of 23 events that occurred on five power grids in a span of 11 minutes including the APS North Gila Substation.[5] Federal, regional and local officials are investigating what happened and why the outage cascaded the way it did.[6] Most of the areas affected were served by San Diego Gas & Electric, which saw its entire service area lose power.[7]
The outage appears to have been caused by the actions of an APS employee in the North Gila substation, and it is unknown why safeguards did not keep the outage limited to the Yuma area.[8]
The outage occurred days before the tenth anniversary of the September 11 attacks, and hours before the United States Department of Homeland Security warned of a potential terrorist attack leading up to the anniversary, but the Federal Bureau of Investigation and SDG&E early in their investigations ruled out terrorism. [9]
Poor Quality Control
Nancy Baer 10:00pm Feb 16
Sedona can take the same approach to “smart” meters as Fairfax, CA:
Fairfax just passed an ordinance to ban Smart Meters for 3 years. Sedona can certainly do it too. http://www.marinij.com/…/fairfax-town-council-approves…
Fairfax Town Council approves three-year ban on SmartMeters
http://www.marinij.com
The Fairfax Town Council has agreed to impose a three-year ban on the installation of Pacific Gas and Electric Co.
Remember to “opt out” now see:
http://www.sedonasmartmeterawareness.com/WHAT-CAN-I-DO-.html
And please sign and share our petition:
http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/ban-smart-meters-in-sedona-arizona.html
Maybe we need to hire the Town of Fairfax’s legal team since it does not seem that the one we have here in Sedona knows how to stop and ban this intrusive move by APS. Should not be allowed to ever occur…way too much risk involved and once the health damage is done to the residents of Sedona or anywhere it cannot be reversed. Are they also proposing these “Smart” meters for Medical Centers, Hospitals, Nursing Homes, City Complexes and Shopping Centers? The harmful “grid system” should really be wonderful to experience in these places. It is a mindless decision by corporate people that are only looking at the bottom line and have no real medical knowledge…mainly because there has been none to surface that I, or apparently many others, are aware of that does anything but say this is harmful to your health, totally unnecessary and in several reported cases actually cost more money to the consumer since you are now “hooked up” directly to APS so they can change the “rate charge” at will if they feel the profits are not high enough. “Smart Meters do nothing but invade your privacy, possibly create or increase health risks and line the pockets of “Big Corporate” at the little guy’s expense. Time to stand up together and say “NO” to this outrage and save ourselves from future expenses and health risks.
Here is the link that goes with the above post on Town of Fairfax. Thought there was a link to it in a previous post above. The full Fairfax Ordinance can be read here: http://www.town-of-fairfax.org/pdfs/council/council_packet/2014/020514/Item 21 – Ord 775 SmartMeter.pdf
The opening paragraph from the current website of the U.S. Department of Energy states:
President Obama has announced the largest single grid modernization investment in U.S. history, funding a broad range of technologies to spur the nation’s transition to a smarter, stronger, more efficient and reliable electric system. This will promote energy-saving choices for consumers, increase energy efficiency, and foster the growth of renewable energy sources like wind and solar power. The $3.4 billion in investments are part of the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act, and will be matched by industry funding for a total public-private investment worth over $8 billion.
The L.A Times, in an article dated June 18, 2013, entitled “Obama Nourishes Smart Grid And Feeds His Legacy,” stated President Obama is the biggest proponent, arguing that the technological development will mitigate the effects of climate change, create more efficiencies within the grid and allow additional green electrons to cross those wires.
In Future Tense magazine, a partnership of Slate, New America, and Arizona State University, it is stated in the March 19, 2012 issue that in early March 2012, at a meeting for the CIA’s venture capital firm In-Q-Tel, CIA Director David Petraeus reportedly noted that “smart appliances” connected to the Internet could someday be used by the CIA to track individuals. If your grocery-list-generating refrigerator knows when you’re home, the CIA could, too, by using geo-location data from your wired appliances, according to SmartPlanet.
Found on the White House website entitled, “Realizing the Full Potential of Government Held Spectrum to Spur Economic Growth”, President’s Council of Advisors on Science Technology (20 July 2012) is a transcript of an interview with Barrie Trower, one of the President’s Council of Adivors who is a world-wide recognized military intelligence expert, who mentions casually that “…one of the ideas behind the Smart Meter where they put them on everybody’s homes…[is that]…They can watch every single person in that house.”
The U.S. Department of Energy Smart Grid agenda has much more to do than with just energy distribution efficiency.
J. Rick Normand: – Please don’t fall out of your chair – I congratulate and applaud you as a result of your truth telling and quantifiable sources of information in your post on the issue of Smart Meters. Great Job!!!
Could I ask you to take a second look on City Finances?
Warren Woodward, in this post/letter, does not point to specific health problems caused by the smart meters that may have occurred….?
Thank you Sharlett,
And believe me, it was very difficult to type this while lying prone on the floor looking up.
@ Frank Henry — Right you are. I did “not point to specific health problems caused by the smart meters that may have occurred” because that’s not what my letter is about!
“Smart” meters involve many issues. My letter (above) dealt only with the ones Northeast Utilities chose to discuss.
FREE EMF seminar Thursday, Feb. 27th 2014 at 11 AM Sedona time
APS will be installing Smart Meters in Sedona. For those who wants to learn more about the health effects of EMF and what to do about it.
Lloyd Burrell became electrosensitive in 2002. He suffered for years, in fact until 3 years ago he was still suffering. His body became highly receptive to the ever present electromagnetic fields in our environment to such an extent that his life became a living hell. The symptoms; a constant headache, joint pains, his ears ached and eyesight deteriorated as well as developing high blood pressure and experiencing a constant state of fatigue. The good news is that he got better.
Interviews with EMF experts – electrical engineer, scientific researcher and author Alasdair Philips.
There are 2 ways you can attend:
1. Via telephone. Primary dial in number: (425) 440-5100 and secondary dial in number: (904) 900-6992
Full list of dial in Numbers: http://InstantTeleseminar.com/Local/?eventid=52097313
Then you key in 490380#.
2. Via the web. http://instantteleseminar.com/?eventid=52097313. On the left it says “Listen in”, click on that. That leads you to a page where you can choose to just listen or you can listen & talk using your Skype.
It’s a good idea to get on the call early because even if you only want to listen without asking a question places are limited.
There’s still time to send me your questions in advance from this page http://instantteleseminar.com/?eventid=52097313
The title under Sedona Eye says “from all points of view,” yet you refused to publish my comment because it strenuously objects to the disharmonious editing of the study results and conclusions by Northeast Utilities. I shared the article with the health and safety personnel at Northeast Utilities and it made the rounds among several departments , eliciting many comments of “unbelievable,” and ” that’s not what we said or decided at all!” Mostly they thought it was pretty funny, but totally expected because of all the weirdos and fanatics here.
Ms. Seeley: We did publish your comment and if you review the article to which it was posted, others responded to it. We do print all points of view. We thank you for yours. @Editor
Submitted on 2014/03/04 at 9:05 am P Seeley Council Tosses Sedona Under Tax Revenue Bus
I have never seen the likes ot this scare campaign, which was in fact begun by a Teamsters local who were protecting meter reader jobs and it mushroomed. People love hysteria and conspiracies. The latest masterful editing job of Northeast Utilities’ review of an opt in-opt out program for “smart” meters is quite an artful unfortunately successful job of selecting out words and phrases to make it appear that the utility was not in favor of the installations. Quite the contrary.
The Electric Power Research Institute program 62 for health and safety has spent many years and millions of dollars investigating health claims and is not shy about telling its utility members what the science actually says. Unfortunately, most of the public never made it into college physics so they don’t really understand how science establishes exposure and what risk is. In fact the electric power industry is far ahead of its counterparts in oil and gas in addressing public and consumer health issues.
This issue just totally lacks merit. It is simply an issue of dosage quantity, duration and distance. Your digital dishwasher, clock radio, and digital TV and other devices with digital displays are have far higher exposures and are right next to you , on all the time. Radio frequencies are around us all the time–there were scare stories about the unseen and hazardous radio waves in the 1930′s. They are not hazardous either. If you are really concerned you should be after the city council to prevent business establishments from having WIFI routers in public places, or to eliminate cell phone towers. They are not hazardous either. IN fact Van Allen when asked about his microwave oven said he was prepared to sit on it for 24 hours a day. I’m with Van Allen. Risk–hazard evaluation–exposure. Not scary stories that are total fiction. Not just because it’s on the internet or in a hyped up movie does it become true.
In my letter above it is very clear that I quoted extensively from Northeast’s statement. No sliced and diced quotes, misquotes or “disharmonious editing”. Basically I let Northeast tell the story in their own words.
The link to the full Northeast document is given at the end of my letter. Anyone can read it and verify what I have written is true.
To Ms. Seeley,
I remember reading Your comment some time ago. It was in fact Printed here.
Sedona Eye is very fair to All.
You owe the Editor an apology.
I did not see it. I do sincerely apologize. I stand by my comments and Mr. Warren’ s conclusion. Is in error.