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

[Eric Brooks]

To put it bluntly Martin, you apparently know nothing about PG&E or its 
history with these 'smart' meters (which have been causing huge rate 
spikes for some of the customers that have them installed. Frankly you 
don't know what you are talking about.

PG&E is using its 'smart' meters to raise rates both to individual 
customers, and by using them as an excuse for a general rate increase to 
cover the costs of the meters (even though they are going to save PG&E 
money).

And the way that PG&E is rolling out these meters is causing them to 
exceed federal limits for radiation exposure to customers. So the 
radiation concern is real and based on current science and standards.

Eric B

On 3/25/2011 10:45 AM, Martin Zehr wrote:
> This is simply fear mongering. At a time when San Francisco Greens 
> should be demanding monitoring of radiation from japan they are 
> working to undermine valid science and technology that would empower 
> efforts at conservation of electricity. You follow the ignorant 
> instead of leading the aware.
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 10:03:44 -0700
> From: brookse32 at aim.com
> CC: sustainability at sfgreens.org; active at sfgreens.org
> Subject: Re: [Sustain] [SFGP-A] PG&E: Hundreds Of Dollars Per Customer 
> To Opt Out Of Smart Meters
>
> 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 <mailto:brookse32 at aim.com>
>     To: active at sfgreens.org <mailto:active at sfgreens.org>;
>     sustainability at sfgreens.org <mailto: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 = 
>
>
> _______________________________________________ Sustainability mailing 
> list Sustainability at sfgreens.org 
> https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainability = 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.sfgreens.org/pipermail/sustainability/attachments/20110325/0a29434f/attachment.html>