Smart Meters Not About Energy Usage

Janis Fullilove is right.

The Memphis Council woman who has had various run-ins with the law, accusations of inebriation and part of the everyone-white-must be a racist philosophy actually is correct about something. She has decided against MLGW’s smart meters.

According to the Commercial Appeal, Fullilove wants hers removed. She said her utility bills were higher, her in home display unit never worked and she fears the meters will catch fire as they have done in other parts of the country. As chairman of the MLGW committee on the city council, she has taken an unpopular stance, according to the newspaper.

The CA claims that 95% of the 1,200 homeowners in the pilot study have embraced this arm of the government sitting in their homes. MLGW claims about $42 a year is saved by customers. They want to expand the program by 60,000. One Memphian gushed that he had saved more than $100 with the smart meter. “There are no drawbacks that I know of. It is both behavior changing and more realistic billing,” said user Chris Morton.

Exactly. Behavior changing is the key, isn’t it? With this tool, the government can tell a lot about you and what you’re doing.

Opponents have a website, that gives a different side to the story:

Smart Meters thus have two primary areas of contention. First, they are a bold invasion of privacy and purport to have authority to gather data and modify behavior and consumption patterns of unwitting power consumers and market data to third parties and government and policing agencies. Second, they are a Class 2b Carcinogen even by WHO standards, and the mountain of toxic data is mounting that Smart Meters are thousands of times more toxic than even cell phones, causing cancer, insomnia, and numerous medical problems. The biological basis is energy transferred to cell membranes and molecules that open calcium and other ion channels and disrupt the non-covalent Van der Waals hydrogen bonds that hold the fragile double helix of DNA intact and cause 4D enzyme active site disruption with disturbed enzyme KMax and nutrient-enzyme interactions and cellular communications.

Judge Andrew Napolitano, no conspiracy theory nut, has addressed this:

If this all sounds unlikely, consider the woman who was recently arrested because she refused to have a smart meter put in her house. Arrested. If that doesn’t send chills down you, you aren’t paying attention. It happened in – where else – Illinois.

TheBlaze reports:

Jennifer Stahl was at a friend’s house when she received the call from her husband that the utility workers had arrived. She was home within 15 minutes and saw they were at a neighbor’s house. Her neighbors were not home, but they had signs stating they did not permit the new meter to be installed.

Stahl said she waited on her porch for the workers to arrive at her house. When they did, she refused them access to her backyard through her locked gate. The police — including the police supervisor, a sergeant — were called. Stahl said the sergeant explained the workers had authorization to access the meter, but Stahl stood her ground saying she didn’t approve it. The sergeant continued to try and convince Stahl to comply and said if she didn’t, he’d arrest her.

The city has always had and maintains the right to access our equipment, and today we were simply exercising that right,” City Manager Doug Kreiger told the Chicago Tribune, which reported Wednesday’s events.

The lock on Stahl’s fence was cut, and when Stahl wouldn’t step away from the meter, she was lead away by an officer, cuffed and waited for a marked squad car to arrive to take her to the department. When asked why she was being arrested, she was told it was for interfering with a police officer.

If smart meters are all about personal energy use, why go to this extreme for one person refusing it in her home? Wouldn’t the company be OK with her agreeing to pay a little more of her own money if that was what it was about?

No, because it’s about more than that. It’s about privacy and a few other “little” issues.

The CA does mention a few “negatives” about the smart meters – at the end of the article. “‘The thing that didn’t work well was the in home displays,’ said MLGW’s strategic marketing coordinator Becky Williamson. Because of programming bugs, one in home display projected a participant’s monthly bill at $50,000.” Yes, that does seem like a problem when you’re going for accuracy.

Bill Hawkins, assitant business manager with the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 1288, warned of the little matter that smart meters have caught fire in certain parts of the country. He is quoted as saying, “There’s a real safety issue for the public. There are enough of them to cause alarm.”

MLGW dismisses this problem.

The greater issue, though, is the government’s pushing this on homeowners. They make it seem that only the most Neolithic of Americans could object to better energy usage, savings and helping the environment. Of course, that’s not what it’s about. Once you let someone or something in your home, it’s there to stay and it or they will monitor you.

It’s part of the UN Agenda 21 plan to control Americans via energy usage. People in 26 states have rebelled, setting up organizations to battle the smart meter. In Tennessee, the contact is: with

This invasion needs to be stopped. Janis Fullilove is right.

s our equi”

... Leave a Reply