Massachusetts’ largest electric utility
courageously declares truth: 
“There is no rational basis for the implementation of AMI” 
(Advanced Metering Infrastructure = ‘smart’ meters/infrastructure)

To view this Newsletter in the original Constant Contact format CLICK HERE  

Lawn Sign




Join Our Mailing List
Northeast Utilities’ comments on Department of Public Utilities docket to mandate ‘smart’ meters in Massachusetts:
  • “there is no cost justification that can support the implementation of AMI.” [‘smart’ meters/infrastructure]
  • (smart) “Meters do not reduce the number of outages” 
  • (smart) “metering systems are not necessary to integrate distributed resources” (wind & solar)
  • “AMI (‘smart’ meters/infrastructure)introduces a brand new portal into the [NStar/WMECo]’ information systems, significantly increasing the cyber-security risk. 
  • “mandated implementation of AMI [‘smart’ meters/infrastructure] is not a prerogative within the [DPU]’s discretion”
See  NStar’s DPU Docket 12-76 comment: 

HMSM highlighted version or original NStar doc.  National Grid comments are not quite as succinct:  National Grid DPU doc  

Report Polarizes Worcester City Council
Public Health Division’s verbal comments to City Council (video)
  • “There are people with electrical sensitivities and we’ve heard from some tonight, it’s a tragic problem to have…”

  • “We’re not proposing ridding ourselves of all peanut products in the environment to affect those few who are so severely effected by peanuts. That analogy (comparing ‘smart’ meter and its three data network microwave exposure) applies here.”  (HMSM comment.  Peanut butter is not spread on the walls of allergy suffers, also peanuts are not allowed in many schools, no longer served on airplanes, etc.)
  • “We didn’t find anything in the literature or in the experience of other practitioners, either medical or in the radiation field that would indicate that the risk of this process of ‘smart’ metering outweighed the benefits to the community in the regard of being better able to serve our needs as far as the power grid went so we submitted the report as you read it.”
    (HMSM comment. What benefits did the Health Division attribute to ‘smart’ meters that outweigh the benefits that NStar declared do not exist?  See above)
Worcester ‘smart’ Health Report (excerpts):
“the radiation emitted from smart meters is Extremely Low Frequency ELF radiation which is not at the level of intensity that damages tissue.”  Note, the above statement is inaccurate and a readily identifiable indicator that the report is flawed. ELF is 3 – 3,000 Hz (wavelengths of 62,000 miles to 62 miles). Worcester ‘smart meters transmit in the microwave portion of the RadioFrequency (RF) portion of the Electromagnetic Spectrum at 902 – 928 MHz (wavelengths of about one foot) and 2.4 GHz ( wavelength of about 5 inches). 

The difference between ELF and microwaves is extraordinary and basic.

Your old rabbit ear TV antennas were that size to absorb TV signals. Size matters.

  • “The BioInitiative Report published after the IARC statement explains that though studies of long term exposure to low levels of RF radiation and brain tumors exist they have been occupational studies. As previously explained occupational exposure limits are higher than public exposure limits and therefore a causal relationship between smart meters and brain tumors has not been established.”  Note, David Carpenter, M.D., Director, Institute for Health and the Environment University at Albany and co-author of the Bioinitiative  responded to the Worcester’s Health Division’s report via  email on 2/4/14:  “The statement about the Bioinitiative Report is totally false.”
A number of ‘orders’ requesting information were approved at the meeting, see 11(a) through 11(j) in the  1/12/14 Council minutes.  Orders that did not pass included a request that the Massachusetts Dept. of Public Health issue an opinion and a request for the 15,000 addresses of deployed meters.  Note Orders 11(v) through 11(bb) from the 9/17/13 Council minutes were never addressed.
Editorials and Beyond
Look & listen verrry carefully
‘Smart’ meter deployments have far exceededDPU and City approved  areas.  Who gave National Grid permission to deploy wherever they please regardless of prior approval?
– Beyond science (2/7/14 editorial) “smart meters are grounded in good science and will contribute to the public good” (See above)  &
– Worcester gets a jump on smart energy technology (2/9/14 editorial of article – you decide) “National Grid is covering the cost of the meters and other technologies…”  &  “A review was recently conducted by the city’s Division of Public Health, which found no conclusive evidence of public health dangers associated with the program.”(See above) & (Note, every cent will be recouped from ratepayers) (Also, T&G published expanded deployment area map without noting area far exceeds City or

DPU approval see map.
WCCA TV Channel 13
– Forum video: “What is “Smart Grid” & Why Should We Care? A Community Event at Clark University”
Beyond Worcester
Burlington & Beyond, a Conservative (1 hour) Cable show with HMSM
What can YOU do?
Just a few minutes can help right DPU’s misguided political agenda
  • Please contact HMSM if you have access to high profile 2014 candidates.  
  • Are you be willing to invest five minutes:
    • Join HMSM “Media Comment Task Force”
    • Email friends, officials and the media.
    • Donate to HMSM
  • Write or forward information to your local newspaper’s editor.  It seems to take people three exposures to this complicated issue before they begin investigating and forming their opinion. 
  • Last but not least, if you live in a deployed community demand the AMI (say “AMI” ‘smart’ meter be removed (Worcester, National Grid pilot: 855-377-7627)
Not here, not now, 
Not Mass., no how.
We stand apart,
We say “NO!’ to ‘smart”
(metering infrastructure ).
Instant removal with SafeUnsubscribe™ | Privacy Policy. | PO Box 25 | Wayland | MA | 01778

Leave a Reply