Tuesday, October 18, 2011

Cost of green energy 40% higher than government estimates: new study

TORONTO — Ontario residents could end up paying some of the highest costs for electricity in the developing world because providing wind and solar energy will cost about 40 per cent more than government estimates, according to a new study.

Ratepayers should expect their electricity bills to rise by 65 per cent by 2015 and 141 per cent by 2030 — substantially more than current government predictions of 46 per cent and 100 per cent, the study found.

The average residential user’s annual bill, which currently stands at $1,700, will exceed $2,800 by 2015 and be over $4,100 by 2030, it predicts.


Monday, October 17, 2011

Outrage at 733 per cent rise in energy companies’ profits

From the UK, unfortunate for them, but a great model for us to avoid:

The Big Lie About the ‘Big 6′

In spite of their having campaigned tirelessly over the last few decades for more expensive and less efficient forms of energy production — ‘sustainable energy’ — many of a greenish hue are getting heated up about about UK energy market regulator OFGEM’s latest report. The Left Foot Forward blog reports,

Outrage at 733 per cent rise in energy companies’ profits

There was anger today at the news this morning that energy companies’profits had soared eight-fold from £15 to £125 per customer per year.Friends of the Earth said it was “outrageous” the energy fat cats were raking in the profits while people face “rocketing” bills and “shiver in cold homes”.

As discussed here recently, it’s just a bit rich that FoE are complaining about rising energy prices. Few organisations have done more to make using energy more difficult for poorer people in the UK than FoE.

Rising bills and increasing levels of ‘fuel poverty’ have embarrassed the UK government. And perhaps for the first time, the UK public is finding itself exposed to the realities of climate change policies. In other words, climate change policies just got political. They are now part of people’s daily lives, exactly as the green NGOs wanted. Now everybody has to think before they turn their lights and heating on. Everybody is now forced to think of ways to cut their fuel consumption. And as a consequence, Quangos, NGOs, government departments, and their ministers past and present are trying to distance themselves from those consequences, by pretending to champion the interests of the consumer. “It wasn’t us”, they scream.

Sunday, October 16, 2011

Letter To McGuinty on Smart Meters

4 October 2011

Rt. Hon. Dalton McGuinty
Premier of Ontario
Legislative Building
Queens Park
Toronto, Ontario
M7A 1A1

Dear Premier McGuinty,

I request that you initiate a criminal investigation and a public inquiry into the Ontario Smart Meter initiative, which your government introduced. This legislation and the careless way that it was implemented may have been the most harmful and wasteful political decision ever made in Ontario.

Smart Meters have now been installed in virtually every Ontario home. When transmitting information about energy usage, they emit strong bursts of microwave radiation. In some homes those bursts may be every few minutes, in others it may be every few seconds, depending on location and distance to the wireless receiving point. There are thousands of scientific studies that show that electro magnetic radiation, such as is transmitted from Smart Meters, causes a vast array of adverse biological effects, even at low exposure levels. Many of those studies have been referenced in The Bioinitiative Report, which can be located at http://www.bioinitiative.org/ .

Many Smart Meters have been thoughtlessly installed on places where strong bursts of microwave radiation penetrate walls and expose residents to considerable radiation inside their homes. These installations have been done without consideration for the health and safety of the residents. I have seen dangerous installations on bedroom walls, living room walls, kitchen walls, and in basements, where residents are subjected to high exposure levels. On some homes and apartment buildings, several meters have been installed together, causing even higher exposure and more significant danger to those exposed. On the outside of homes, meters have been installed on porches and decks where residents spend much of their outdoor leisure time. Many meters are located where children play in their yards, exposing them to strong radiation.

I have taken videos of some of these dangerous installations in my home town of Stratford. They can be viewed at these links:





You can hear each time there is a wireless burst and see the strength of the radiation on the meter. When the meter reads “one”, it means the radiation is over 2000 microwatts per square meter, which is the upper limit of this good quality meter.

If Smart Meters were really “smart”, they would store information and only send the relevant usage information when the information is needed, perhaps only once a month. They should probably be referred to as “Dangerous Meters”, because of the long term harm that they will cause to our health and the environment. The meters do not help to make the Ontario electrical system “green”, as they have added an additional danger caused by the radiation they emit. Perhaps the last thing that should have been added to the electrical distribution system is more high frequency electrical pollution.

Here are some important video links that help to explain the dangers caused by Smart Meters:





Many people suffer from Electro Hyper-Sensitivity (EHS), a condition/disability that is known and recognized by the World Health Organization and the Canadian Human Rights Commission. I am in contact with many persons in Ontario and around the world who suffer from this condition. The Smart Meter initiative has virtually made Ontario into a no-go area for EHS sufferers because of the adverse health effects that it causes and the resultant difficulties it creates in their lives. Suffering from EHS can be painful, fatiguing, nauseating, and sometimes a life threatening experience, and the Ontario Government and Hydro One and other electricity providers should not be creating this distress. This Global television documentary about Wi Fi, demonstrates some of the adverse health effects caused by microwave radiation: http://www.youtube.com/safeschool#p/u/3/KN7VetsCR2I.

I suspect that there are many more Ontario citizens whose health has been badly affected, but have not realized that Smart Meters are the real cause.

For safety reasons, many people in Ontario have chosen to eliminate all possible wireless exposure from their property and their lives. With Smart Meters installed on their homes, they face high radiofrequency exposures in their homes 24 hours a day. EHS sufferers who attempt to alleviate their symptoms by moving to remote locations to avoid wireless systems and antennas are still subjected to strong pulses of microwave radiation from the provincially mandated Smart Meters. This radiation significantly affects hearts, brains, and neurological systems, which may cause long term damage to health. Some of the symptoms known to be caused by relatively low levels of microwave radiation are headache, sleep disruption, restlessness, tremors, cognitive impairments, tinnitus, increased cancer risk and cardiac problems.

To understand how dangerous it is to subject people and other living things to Smart Meter wireless radiation, please view this video interview with Barrie Trower, a retired electronic weapons scientist: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjZZ29TtkJI&NR=1. Please watch the other ten parts of the interview as well, which can be accessed from the panel on the right hand side of the screen.
There are many other aspects of the Smart Meter initiative that cause serious concerns, such as:

· Cost

· Negligible electricity savings

· Privacy issues

· Electromagnetic interference

· Smart Meters causing fires

While you and your government may have had good intentions when the Smart Meter initiative was envisioned, your lack of public consultation, the false information that was presented about the safety aspects, and the way that this was hurriedly implemented at great expense to Ontario residents, have resulted in a terrible political decision that must be corrected.

It appears that your government may have been provided with false information about the potential benefits and the safety of Smart Meters and, because of that, there is a need for a Criminal Investigation. If you ask yourself why Hydro One themselves did not provide the safety evaluation report for the smart meters, and why they thought that one was needed, it should raise some serious questions. The massive electrical wiring system around Ontario is essentially the largest antenna system in the province it interacts with wireless signals and high frequencies. In order to operate the Hydro One system, it is essential to know about high frequencies, how they affect people and electrical equipment, and how to mitigate the problems they cause. As a large public corporation employing thousands, there is a duty and responsibility to know how high frequency pollution affects customers, employees, animals, and the environment. There are many scientific papers that describe the adverse health effects of wireless radiation and high frequency pollution. Hydro One has access to this research and should be fully aware of health implications. Hydro One has also received many public complaints about people and animals being harmed by electro magnetic radiation. Furthermore, an employee of the former Ontario Hydro, Karel Marha, practically “wrote the book” on how electro magnetic energy harms people and animals. He co-authored a book entitled Electromagnetic Fields and the Life Environment by Marha, Musil and Tuha, Institute of Industrial Hygiene and Occupational Diseases, Prague, printed by San Francisco Press Inc.

You need to examine the reason why Hydro One did not write the report about the safety of the proposed Ontario Smart Meters and why a small US consulting company, Richard Tell Associates, was used: http://www.hydroone.com/MyHome/MyAccount/MyMeter/Documents/Smart_Meters_Report_on_RFE.pdf.
The Tell website states, “Our surveys are considered by many to be the most informative, detailed and comprehensive in the industry”. But, look at the information and try to find any references to the thousands of scientific documents that indicate adverse biological effects, or cancer from this type of radiation. The most important information about health is either ignored or greatly downplayed and, instead, the report simply references Safety Code 6, an outdated Health Canada guide that does not adequately protect Canadians from biological effects. The Tell document is not a detailed and comprehensive report. Rather, it appears to be a rubber stamp for a dangerous technology. Part of the Tell report states,“The small transmitters that are used in this system transmit with very low power and transmit very infrequently”. This is simply false, as you can see from the videos above and this report - http://sagereports.com/smart-meter-rf/?p=343. The transmissions are quite powerful and frequent, enough to harm and seriously affect many people. Why was the report updated in 2010 and the original removed from the Hydro One web site? Surely the purpose of the report was to show system safety before implementation, not make excuses afterwards?

On May 31, 2011, ,the International Agency for Research on Cancer of the World Health Organization classified radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as “possibly carcinogenic to humans” (Group 2B). At about the same time, a health committee of the Council of Europe examined scientific evidence and recommended significant precautions for exposure to electromagnetic radiation and, in particular, reduction of exposure to children. The recommendations were ratified by the forty-six member countries. At a time when important warnings are being given about electromagnetic radiation, Ontario is just finishing final installations, ensuring that Ontario residents will have no-where to go to avoid this great danger.

I suspect that Hydro One knew about the dangers of microwave radiation, but were not willing to write a false report to state that Smart Meters were safe and do not cause biological harm. If they had written such a report, they would be lying and would be subject to Canadian Criminal Law. If Hydro One officials were, indeed, not aware of the health effects of electro magnetic radiation, then they should not be trusted to manage a light bulb, let alone the entire electrical distribution system in Ontario. The fact that Hydro One has failed to warn the Ontario Government about the dangers of microwave radiation from Smart Meters and proceeded with the installation of these devices throughout Ontario indicates that officials should be investigated for the offence of criminal negligence.

The installation of dangerous smart meters throughout the province has been a huge financial cost to the citizens of Ontario, but there may yet be an even bigger cost to health and the health care system as a result of this plan. An investigation should look carefully at those involved in the Smart Meter initiative to determine who pushed the ideas forward, their motives, who may have profited, and whether “kick backs” were involved.

As for a Public Inquiry, it is needed to:

1. Discover the best method of making the electrical system as safe as possible

2. Find out who was responsible for this ill conceived initiative

3. Make up for the lack of public consultation at the beginning of the process

4. Consider whether money can be retrieved from those who have profited

Regardless of the election results on Thursday, there is a need to make Ontario safe again from the danger introduced from Smart Meters. Your government created this dangerous situation and you have a duty to start the clean-up process.

Will you initiate a criminal investigation and a public inquiry?

Yours sincerely,

Martin Weatherall


Wednesday, October 12, 2011

Britain's Green Poverty Crisis: Pressure mounts to abandon green energy plans to ease burden of soaring fuel bills

One in four households will be driven into fuel poverty if the Government pursues controversial green energy targets, ministers have been warned. ‘Radical policy change’ may be necessary to protect millions of struggling families from biggest household price shock since the 1970s, according to City analysts. The warning comes as middle-income homes are already suffering an ‘unprecedented collapse’ in living standards as inflation and poor wages wipe thousands off incomes. --Sean Poulter, Daily Mail, 12 October 2011

WHEN people on average earnings start to fall into “fuel poverty” it is clear that Britain is in the grip of a living standards crisis. Such a situation demands radical government action. Politicians must ensure they are doing everything possible to relieve the burden on hard-pressed families rather than adding to it. So it is time for Britain to abandon unilateral and unrealistic targets for cutting CO2 emissions, especially where they will only be achieved by investing a fortune in prohibitively expensive “renewable” sources of energy. --Daily Express, 12 October 2011

The Government should now consider a complete moratorium on green energy legislation that threatens to impose huge additional costs on all those who are already facing spiralling power bills. -–Benny Peiser, Daily Mai, 9 July 2011

I believe there is going to be a U-turn because I believe the government is listening and they’re going to have to face reality. --Ann Robinson, Uswitch, Financial Times, 11 October 2011

One way for the government to make a real difference to energy costs would be to abandon the “renewables obligation” and the carbon floor price. This would cut bills by 13 per cent from 2015, according to Deutsche Bank. --David Blair, Financial Times, 11 October 2011

A steady rise in electricity and gas charges could force the government to reconsider its energy policy, said analysts, particularly an official target to spend £200bn on new infrastructure by 2020, including a big expansion of wind power. “If the rate of increase continues, it would concentrate minds even further and energy costs would rise potentially to the top of the public’s agenda and therefore of the political agenda,” said David Hunter, energy analyst at M&C Energy Group, a consultancy. Mr Hunter described the cost as “eye-watering” and said investors would weigh the possibility of the government reneging on its proposed incentives. --David Blair, Financial Times, 11 October 2011

Are we absolutely certain that the main cause of global warming is carbon and has nothing to do with the output of the Sun, or any of the other theories? With the credibility of some of the data of those dealing with climate change at least open to question, are we absolutely certain that we can afford all these precautions that may not even turn out to be necessary? It would be unfortunate if history recalled that we solved a problem that in the end did not require a solution by tipping the economy into depression. --Lord Young, The Times, 12 October 2011

Monday, October 10, 2011

Who are really behind the smart meters?

In California, we are told by PG&E that it is being  mandated by the California Public Utility Commission (CPUC). (It is probably the same in other states, but maybe their PUC has a different name.) However, it is really being mandated across the nation by the federal government, and stimulus money is providing the funding. However, one finds out that the law asking for smart meters and a smart grid, Energy Policy Act or 2005, only mandates the utilities to "offer" the meters and to install them "upon customer request.” The choice is still supposed to be ours! Smart Meters are not just in the United States. They are being mandated in Europe by the European Union, and in other parts of the world by their federal governments. By doing more research, one finds out that smart meters are part of “smart growth” or “sustainable development” or “Agenda 21,” a plan devised by the United Nations in 1992, and “symbolically” signed by President Bush Sr. Even though the U.S. Senate never ratified it, President Clinton implemented the treaty by executive order # 12852 in 1993. The ultimate goal of Agenda 21 and its various programs is to exercise more and more control over our lives and property using the excuse of “saving the environment or saving the planet.”


JRW: Please read page 88

Friday, October 7, 2011

Wind turbine FAIL – school left holding the bag for £53,000

"THE eco-dream of a village school turned into a Friday 13th nightmare when high winds destroyed their wind turbine.

Two blades flew off from the 15m tall turbine in Gorran School’s playing field during the bad weather earlier this month. The turbine was part of the school’s £53,000 plan to generate its own electricity,

On the afternoon of Friday, November 13, the school was advised to turn on the brakes to stop the turbine, but the brakes failed, causing two blades to detach in the early hours of Saturday morning.

A concerned parent said: “Thank God it happened when the children were not out on the field. Looking at the size and weight of those rotor blades, I dread to think what would have happened if they had snapped off while they were there.”


Housing energy bills leaves Brits in a financial crisis

Over a quarter of UK households are struggling to deal with energy bills, according to the latest research.

Following this year’s 21% price hike, which added an extra £224 to the annual dual fuel bill, millions of homes across the country are finding it difficult to afford both gas and electricity.

A price comparison website found that 32% of households believe energy is already ‘unaffordable’ in the UK. A further 69% said that the government has not got it right when it comes to affordable energy and ‘going green’.

More and more homes are facing financial turmoil as the cost of living soars. The government plans to invest £200 billion into a new carbon reduction policy which could result in even higher energy bills over the next decade.

Despite this, and the government’s plans to ease financial burdens on UK families, many people confessed that they could not afford an increase as low as £30 a month.

The average household energy bill now stands at £1,293 per year, which is 14% short of the affordability threshold.

£1,500 a year spent on energy would be the absolute tipping point for households as 77% confessed that any more would send them over the edge.

Ann Robinson, Director of Consumer Policy at uSwitch, commented; "This is a wake-up call and the clearest evidence yet that the UK is on the brink of an affordability crisis when it comes to household energy. We are now just £207 or 14% away from hitting an affordability ceiling after which consumers will start rationing their usage as though they are living in the third world.”

Many Brits are already stretched and 30% of people admitted they could go without adequate heating when their bill reaches £1,000 a year. This percentage almost doubled if the bill increased to £1,500 a year.

Almost 7 million UK households are living in fuel poverty and a third of people claim that energy is not affordable in the UK.


Wednesday, October 5, 2011

The $4,000 electricity bill

"The Ontario Green Act promised to create 50,000 jobs. Our study concludes that each of those jobs will require a ratepayer subsidy of $200,000 annually, which effectively means that — as the LTEP reaches fruition — $10-billion will be extracted from ratepayers each year.

For the average ratepayer, an annual electricity bill will escalate from $1,700 per year to $2,800 by 2015 and by the time the renewables envisaged in the LTEP are largely in place (expected in 2018) an average ratepayer will be paying in excess of $4,000 annually — well over a doubling. Put another way Ontario’s ratepayers will be paying in excess of 40¢ per kWh, placing them on a par with Denmark, which suffers the highest cost of electricity in the developed world."