[Sustain] [SFGP-A] PG&E: Hundreds Of Dollars Per Customer To Opt Out Of Smart Meters

[Eric Brooks]

Not if it gives people higher cancer risk and raises their bills because 
PG&E as a private corporation is gaming the meters to jack up rates. 
PG&E has no intention whatsoever of using these meters to lower 
electricity use; and it will do everything in its power to obfuscate 
their use for that purpose (making them bad for conservation goals).

If the meters were hooked into a more environmentally and health safe 
fiber optic system and run by the city instead of the corporation, 
-then- smart meters would be good and effective. Until we get PG&E out 
of the picture, its smart meters will be a bad thing.

And the best way to reduce electricity use,

is to use less electricity...

On 3/25/2011 8:17 AM, Martin Zehr wrote:
> This is such nonsense. We need to support measures for accurate and 
> timely monitoring and measurement if we really want to reduce 
> electricity use.
>
>
>
>
>
> Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 00:18:29 -0700
> From: brookse32 at aim.com
> To: active at sfgreens.org; sustainability at sfgreens.org
> Subject: [SFGP-A] PG&E: Hundreds Of Dollars Per Customer To Opt Out Of 
> Smart Meters
>
> http://www.baycitizen.org/pge/story/pges-plan-smartmeters-opt-out-pay/
>
> Thursday, March 24, 2011
>
>
>   PG&E's SmartMeter Plan: Opt Out, Pay a Premium
>
> Customers who choose to turn off radio signals could pay as much as 
> $270 up front plus $14 a month
> By: John Upton <http://www.baycitizen.org/profiles/john-upton/>
>
> Pacific Gas and Electric Company plans to charge customers hundreds of 
> dollars on top of their regular gas and electricity bills if they 
> choose to switch off radio signals emitted by SmartMeters, which are 
> being installed in businesses and homes throughout Northern California.
> SmartMeters are being installed by PG&E as part of an industry-led 
> effort to replace the nation's aging electrical infrastructure with 
> digital equipment that can track and manage customers' energy 
> consumption. Already, PG&E has replaced 7.7 million analog electricity 
> and gas meters with the new devices.
> Following years of public outcry about rollout of the meters, which 
> some customers say have caused serious illnesses and incorrect energy 
> consumption readings, the California Public Utilities Commission 
> earlier this month ordered PG&E to allow customers to opt out 
> <http://www.baycitizen.org/pge/story/pge-customers-can-now-opt-out/> 
> of using the technology.
> PG&E submitted a proposal to the CPUC Thursday that, instead of 
> allowing customers to continue using analog meters, would see radio 
> signals switched off from their SmartMeters. The SmartMeters would 
> continue to monitor a customers' energy use, but they would not 
> transmit the results to PG&E through radio signals. Instead, a PG&E 
> official would visit the customers' home to manually read the meter 
> for billing purposes.
> Customers who select the “radio-off” option would pay a $135 up-front 
> fee followed by a $20 monthly charge, or a $270 up-front fee followed 
> by a $14 monthly charge, PG&E proposed. Low-income customers would pay 
> 20 percent less.
> Instead of the fixed monthly fee, customers could choose to pay a 
> monthly rate that varies with the amount of gas and electricity that 
> they use. That option could be less expensive for customers who use 
> little electricity or gas.**
> PG&E justified the seemingly high rates by saying that its anticipated 
> costs in deploying the “radio-off” option for an expected 146,000 
> opt-out customers would exceed $80 million over two years.
> "We wanted to make sure that those who elected that option would bear 
> the costs associated with that option, as opposed to the rest of our 
> customers," PG&E spokesman Jeff Smith said.
> The opt-out program costs will include expenses associated with 
> turning customers’ SmartMeter radios off; switching radios back on if 
> customers change their mind or new tenants move into the premises**; 
> modifying PG&E’s existing SmartMeter-related information technology 
> programs and radio networks; and communicating with customers about 
> alternatives to the opt-out option, PG&E told the CPUC in the proposal 
> <http://bayc.it/dDpY/>.
> Consumer advocates, meanwhile, characterized the rates as just another 
> cash grab by a malevolent corporate monopoly.
> “I’m definitely going to ask for the data to support their forecasts 
> for how much it’s going to cost to do all this stuff,” said Marcel 
> Hawiger, energy attorney for The Utility Reform Network, a consumer 
> watchdog.
> Hawiger said that PG&E should give its customers the option of reading 
> their own meters instead of paying PG&E a monthly fee. Some customers 
> with dogs and fences already read their own meters, he said, 
> suggesting that program be expanded.
> Public hearings will be held in the coming months to discuss the 
> proposal, and a CPUC ruling on PG&E's proposed opt-out pricing system 
> is expected by mid-September.
>
>
> _______________________________________________ San Francisco Green 
> Party Active Members List To unsubscribe or edit your options, go 
> here: https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/active = 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.sfgreens.org/pipermail/sustainability/attachments/20110325/0f4434d2/attachment-0001.html>