Smart meters send signals, but so do Wi-Fi systems

Over the past year, smart meters have been a major topic of discussion in B.C. as B.C. Hydro set about modernizing the province's electrical grid and updating its aging infrastructure [“Smart-meter concerns keep coming forward”, December 1-8].

With old-fashioned analogue electrical meters—the kind most people are familiar with—an electrical utility has no way of knowing how much electricity is actually being consumed along the grid (or where) at any given moment in time. To ensure that there is enough electricity available to reliably meet consumption, utilities must therefore put more electricity onto the grid than they expect will be used. If more is put onto the grid than is being used, a significant amount is wasted. And depending upon the time of year, this ranges from eight to 14 percent.

With digital smart meters, however, electrical utilities are able to receive real-time measurement data about the electricity demands being placed on the distribution grid. This information allows utilities to gauge more precisely how much electricity actually needs to be placed on the grid (and where) at any given moment, while still maintaining reliability of service.

The result is a significant reduction in wasted electricity because better data leads to less wasted energy, while also helping to avoid the capital cost of new generating, transmission, and distribution infrastructure.

> David Field / B.C. Citizens for Green Energy


Anyone who wonders about health risks in relation to B.C. Hydro's smart meters should be much more concerned about the imminent implementation of a Wi-Fi network in Vancouver. Super Wi-Fi systems use an extremely strong signal, which can penetrate concrete structures.

There has been no relevant safety testing of the rapidly developing Wi-Fi technologies. Existing standards are based on less powerful signals, and measure their effect on adult bodies with a maximum exposure of six minutes. There is absolutely no evidence that prolonged—or in the case of Wi-Fi networks 24/7—exposure is safe. As a parent, I am profoundly concerned about the unavoidable exposure of children, whose small, rapidly growing bodies are particularly at risk of environmental health impacts.

Martin Blank, a Columbia University professor of physiology, has stated: “The scientific evidence tells us that our safety standards are inadequate, and that we must protect ourselves from exposure to EMF.”

> Katherine Taylor / Vancouver




Dec 29, 2011 at 6:56pm

Saying that we shouldn't worry about smart meters because WiFi is more dangerous is quite misleading. Both are dangerous. Both emit RF radiation and we should not be exposed to either. Smart meters do not do anything that is needed that cannot be done safetly. Why not have wired meters? Why must they be wireless? Why must they have spymeters (zigbee chips) which will communicate with new appliances all day everyday emitting radiation through our homes? To measure lost electricity that amounts to a small amount, that is why we're spending billions and risking our health and privacy? Doesn't make good business sense except for the corporations who will reap the benefits. This program is dumb, just as is the WiFi system throughout our cities. Do we really need to be connected all day everyday? Do we really want to be connected all day everyday? The only thing green about these programs is the money flowing from our pockets into the major corporations'.

Charyl Zehfus

Dec 29, 2011 at 7:38pm

Obviously, both smart meters and super Wi-Fi are both a concern, just as wireless National Broadband in the U.S. should be. Please see the book Wireless Radiation Rescue by Kerry Crofton, PhD for basic, practical ways to try to protect your family. It is a good book to give people just becoming aware of the issue.

Wireless radiation proliferation is like a tsunami coming at us. We can only link hands and do what we can against it for the future of our children and of life on earth.

V. McIntyre

Dec 29, 2011 at 9:06pm

Yes, Vancouver's planned WiFi network may finally bring real estate prices down. Or maybe people will start assessing their rock-bottom values. My laptop or my life? The only research saying wireless radiation is safe is industry-funded and Health Canada seems to be in industry's pocket. We're on our own. Try Citizens for Safe Technology.Org for information.


Dec 29, 2011 at 9:41pm

1. Must-See 4-minute youtube video on Smart meters


2. The WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION May 31 2011 placed the Non-ionizing radiation coming from Wireless smart meters (& some other wireless devices) on the Class 2-B Carcinogen List.

3. The NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF HEALTH Feb 2011 found biological changes in the brain after only minutes of exposure to non-ionizing radiation.


(1) Human Cell Damage

(2) DNA Chain Breaks

(3) Breaches in the Blood-Brain Barrier

from levels of non-ionizing radiation lower than emitted by WIRELESS Smart meters.

5. INSURANCE COMPANIES Hired Independent Laboratory Scientists and they also observed Cell Damage and DNA Chain Breaks. Now Insurance Companies will NOT Insure Liability damage from Wireless Smart meters and other wireless devices.
 TV Video (3 minutes)

Cell Phone use and other devices are Voluntary and can be shut off at the user’s discretion, but Smart meters mounted on homes are emitting radiation 24/7 and can not be shut off.

 Video Interview: Nuclear Scientist, Daniel Hirsch, (5 minutes)

Video Interview: Dr. Carpenter, New York Public Health Department, Dean of Public Health, (2 minutes)

 2-page Press Release

9. RADIATION MEASURED FROM SMART METER MOUNTED ON A HOME (once active in the utility system) SHOWS RADIATION TRANSMISSION PULSES APPROXIMATELY ONCE EVERY FOUR SECONDS 24 HOURS PER DAY traveling through the bodies and brains of the inhabitants of that home. 
Youtube Video (6 minutes, 1st minute is sufficient)

PG$E, California’s Utility Monopoly, recently admitted that each smart meter mounted on a home transmits radiation between 10,000 and 190,000 times each day.

This admission corrected previous false statements repeated often by many utility companies across the country.

NOTE: many of the tests on non-ionizing radiation (the type of radiation emitted by smart meters) have been done using devices other than smart meters because smart meters have only been in people’s homes for a very short time.

But as a Wireless smart meter emits 100 times more radiation than a cell phone, it is not difficult to project. If a machine gun (smart meter) fires 100 bullets in the same time that a pistol (cell phone) fires one bullet, it is not difficult to project the harm that the machine gun can do, even if the tests were done with the pistol.

16 9Rating: +7


Dec 29, 2011 at 10:42pm

Smart meters are "green" alright - that is green $$$$ for those who
profit from pushing this far from "green" technology.

Appalled by...

Dec 29, 2011 at 11:56pm

It's appalling that some so-called environmental organizations are so blatently ignorant of the myths re. supposed eco-friendliness of dumb meters. Methinks they've been buying up too much Hydro propaganda.

What's perhaps is more appalling is their inexcusable blind eye to
the impact of these meters (and yes, blanket wi-fi meshes) on
human ecology... i.e. health.

The health of all living systems are connected. Endorsing radiation
insanity is the very antithesis to eco-consciousness, and I for one
refuse to support environmental groups that haven't connected the dots.


Jan 16, 2012 at 9:02am

Super Wifi is the same radio waves that television has been broadcasting for decades. Is there PROOF of television transmission as a health hazard? Not yet. The other thing about all the links above & fear mongering, is that, precisely like any Religion, there is NO PROOF of your fearful claims. There is not 100% proof of Cause & Effect of ANY of your claims, just as there is no proof of any Jesus or Son of God or Allah or Boogey Man. Non ioning radio wave technology can only cause a bit of heat. It is not cumulative in the very low frequencies of Wifi or smart meters. These are not 1,500 Watt micro wave ovens that are 6 inches or less away from the food. Even a microwave oven at high power does no damage at greater distances. AM/FM radio frequences have been transmitted at tens to hundreds of thousands of watts for decades. Is there proof, cause & effect that people living anywhere close or far away from these said RF emitting towers are suffering health hazards? Driving your car, eating meats, using WD40, using Duct Tape are things that are FAR FAR FAR more dangerous to you than Wifi or Smart Meter radio waves. Keep trying to scare the too busy general public with the term RADIATION rather than current unbiased scientic cause & effect proof. It's one thing to do it in a lab to get the results that you want, but where is the proof that Cell Phone X caused such and such cancer or tumor in person John or Jan Doe? You have no proof. Your Emporor wears no clothes. Stop using outdated supposed scientific studies by unknown or disrespected scientists. Where is your PROOF?

My two cents

May 16, 2012 at 10:54pm

Radio AM/FM frequencies are one-way transmission. Super Wi-Fi utilized within that spectrum will be 2-way AND pulsed, much more damaging to human cells. Saying they are the same is wrong.

Radio towers and TV towers: The Italian court sentenced Vatican to compensate for the cancer patients living close to Vatican's radio towers.

Take a look at this study "Childhood Cancer in the vicinity of the Sutro Tower, San Francisco" by Dr. Neil Cherry, one of the most respected scientists in New Zealand.

Latest studies on the harm of electromagnetic radiation? Here you go...

USA - Yale University (2012) Fetal Radiofrequency Radiation Exposure From 800-1900 Mhz-Rated Cellular Telephones Affects Neurodevelopment and Behavior in Mice
“Here we demonstrate that fetal exposure to 800–1900 Mhz-rated radiofrequency radiation from cellular telephones leads to behavioral and neurophysiological alterations that persist into adulthood...The significant trend... demonstrates that the effects are directly proportional to usage time... ”

ITALY (2012) Dept of Pediatrics, Obstetrics and Reproduction Medicine, University of Siena.
ASL 7 (Local Health Agency), Prevention Dept Physical Agents Laboratory, Siena.
CNR (Italian Research Council), Institute of Applied Physics (IFAC), Florence, Italy.
Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields From Laptop Use of “Laptop” Computers
“In the LTCs analyzed, EMF values (range 1.8–6 μT) … are considerably higher than the values recommended by 2 recent guidelines for computer monitors magnetic field emissions, MPR II (Swedish Board for Technical Accreditation) and TCO (Swedish Confederation of Professional Employees), and those considered risky for tumor development... the power supply induces strong intracorporal electric current densities in the fetus and in the adult subject, which are respectively 182–263% and 71–483% higher than ICNIRP 98 basic restriction recommended to prevent adverse health effects.”

RUSSIA (2011) Russian National Committee on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection
Psychophysiological Indicators for Child Users of Mobile Communication. Message 1: Present State of the Problem
Message 2: Results of Four-year Monitoring

"It has been shown that the children’s organism is more sensitive to this kind of exposure than the adult one. We have identified the following major trends of the psychophysiological indicators for child users of mobile communication: an increased number of phonemic perception disorders, abatement of efficiency, reduced indicators for the arbitrary and semantic memory, and increased fatigue. A steady decline of the parameters from high values to bottom standards has been found."

GREECE (2012) University of Athens
Brain proteome response following whole body exposure of mice to mobile phone or wireless DECT base radiation (* Note DECT cordless phone bases emits the SAME 2.4 GHz frequency as Wi-Fi routers and devices)
"The observed protein expression changes may be related to brain plasticity alterations, indicative of oxidative stress in the nervous system or involved in apoptosis and might potentially explain human health hazards reported so far, such as headaches, sleep disturbance, fatigue, memory deficits, and brain tumor long-term induction under similar exposure conditions."