Icky economics of the smart grid, EVs

November 20th, 2020, the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities allowed testimony on whether to allow opt outs from digital and wireless ‘smart’ meters.
I researched economic liabilities, as the Attorney General is charged with protecting ratepayers from unjustified costs and has a dedicated office for this purpose. I omitted health hazards after hearing this would be covered by Patricia Burke.
The year 2020 presentation is available as a PDF below, and, when time, I will start adding testimonies on other dockets such as the electric car infrastructure testimony below.
While testimony shows evidence to the state of good faith efforts, the time has come to move on to another avenue for change, since the DPU has refused to take action and controls an arm of the AGO’s office.**

 

Year 2021

My General Statement – Dockets 21-80, 21-81, 21-82 (Note that ‘Conservation’ America, etc., heavily promoted this infrastructure)
My Report on EV Health & Injustice Communities, Co-signed – Dockets 21-90, 21-91, 21-92
My Critique of Grid $Prices, etc. – Not posted at DPU because the docket number was listed incorrectly
Patricia Burke on DPU instruction to utilities to deploy AMI and dismiss ‘alleged concerns’ and setting smart grid mandate; Burke on utility misrepresentation of pulses;
Berkshire-Litchfield Council Report on wildlife costs
Patricia Burke on eco-costs: cite lithium battery mining & mining of oceans
Katie Singer letters #27–EV chemicals; #5–EV cradle-grave costs
Ken Gartner on AMI Frequencies & Remediation; EV Chargers & Remediation
Nina Beety on Problems of smart grid and Fire & electrical hazards
Patricia Burke on night-time loads (EVs, demand response) disrupting sleep
Helen Walker on EVs as regressive tax (I can’t find someone else’s extensive comments on how demand charges are also regressive)
🙁 MA State Representative William Strauss wrote in favor of subsidizing EVs, Senator Creem and Senator Pacheco wrote in favor as well
🙁 Tesla on Desire for EV volumetric pricing (no extra charge for high-volume loads) and for increasing loads from 15% to 30%
Electrify America on Public 350+ kW chargers requiring public & private sector investment
NStar on National need for 9.6 million chargers
Sagewell, Inc. on Use EV telematics to network/connect instead of networked chargers & support EVs that plug into 240-V outlets
MA State Sen. Michael Moore on Opt outs for Electromechanical Meters
Natural Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club, and Union of Concerned Scientists submitted Brief comments in favor of EVs

 

Year 2020
20-69 PDF Presentation: Smart Grid_Economic Costs_DPU_20-69
20-69 Greenfield Recorder: A Thousand-Plus Residents Oppose Smart Meters
20-69 My Reply Comments
20-69 My Summary Statement
Dr. Beatrice Golomb, MD, Ph.D., on Golomb Group Research Tying Illness to Smart Meters
Dr. Lisa Nagy, MD Summary
Jean Lemieux, President, Massachusetts for the Chemically Injured, on ADA and disability needs
MA Senator Diane DiZiglio on Constituents Sensitive to EMF Exposures
MA Representative David Linsky on Allowing Opt Out Provisions for Sensitives

 

*Memory Flash — Initial testimony in 2014:
12-76 – My radiation risks testimony (partial)
Dr. Robert Gilmore Pontius on Need for Worcester Pilot Health Study
Physicist Dr. William Bruno on Physics of Harm
Dr. William Rea, MD, on Case Studies of Smart Meter Harm
Dr. Amy L. Dean, Past President of the American Academy of Environmental Medicine on Sensitive Populations
Dr. Olle Johansson, Karolinska Institute, Sweden on Precautionary Principle
Document: Survey of Literature

 

*Note that resident Patricia Burke has stayed on top of the smart meter issue, more so than myself, providing first notice of hearing, etc. She has provided testimony to many dockets — many more than I. Others are also engaged. Some of their excellent testimony is cited in the reports.

** The hope that the Attorney General’s office would act appears to have been naive. While reading the statutes in 2021 I learned that the DPU hires its own lawyer to serve in the Attorney General’s office, which means that the lawyer serves at the will and interests of the DPU, not the Attorney General. I believe this plays a role in the lack of response to concerns raised. Instead of simply providing presentation to the DPU docket, even with the participation of the AGO or really the utility department of the AGO, we should have provided copies to the civil rights department within the AGO.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.

WC Captcha − 7 = 1

Kirstin Beatty