Icky economics of the smart grid

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 from Patricia Burke.
The presentation is available as a PDF below.
A few other materials provided to this docket and others are also listed below, including excellent reports. Clearly, however, 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.**
Please consider making a donation to support future research work and writing – finding new information does take time, even if not visible until much later and easily scooped once published.


Year 2020
20-69 PDF Presentation: Smart Grid_DPU_20-69
20-69 Greenfield Recorder: A Thousand-Plus Residents Oppose Smart Meters (by me)
20-69 Reply Comments
20-69 Joint Statement


Year 2021
Summary Statement – Dockets 21-80, 21081, 21-82 (Note that ‘Conservation’ America heavily promoted this infrastructure)
Joint Statement & Report – Dockets 21-90, 21-91, 21-92
Costs & Resources Report – Not posted at DPU because the docket number is listed incorrectly


*Testimony as far back as 2014:
12-76-A – Radiation risks testimony (partial)

*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Your email address will not be published.

− 2 = 3

Kirstin Beatty