Maybe they just don’t want to listen to the complaints anymore.
Searching for a reason why the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors continues to give in to a smallish, but vocal, group protesting the installation of wireless utility meters is like trying to figure out why highway drivers keep switching lanes even in gridlock conditions. They just want to do something. But continuing an unenforced moratorium against PG&E’s installation of SmartMeters also seems like tilting at wireless windmills.
SmartMeter opponents have been fighting the devices for several years and have made it tough on the crews hired to install them. They’ve also said they want to recall the county sheriff because he is not enforcing the moratorium — a threat that so far has not changed the sheriff’s stance.
Meanwhile, the installations have continued, with about 80 percent of utility customers in the county already set up with SmartMeters.
The same arguments were heard when cellphone towers began to be proposed. Opponents’ main concerns are health related, but there’s also an element of free choice. Consumers have a choice, for instance, whether to install a wireless router in their homes or offices, but PG&E was putting in wireless meters regardless of homeowners’ preferences — and regardless of SmartMeter installation moratoriums enacted by the county and the cities of Watsonville and Capitola. The utility is regulated by the California Public Utilities Commission, which has given permission for the SmartMeter installations.
In response to the criticism, PG&E has proposed an opt-out option for customers who don’t want SmartMeters. The catch, however, is this would cost an additional $10 a month plus a $90 upfront fee.
To add to the confusion probably felt by some PG&E customers, the county’s top health official, Dr. Poki Namkung, weighed in Tuesday with a report that questions the safety of SmartMeters. It’s confusing because several reputable organizations have found no health or safety concerns with the devices.
Namkung’s report, cited by county staff in recommending the temporary moratorium continue through spring, 2013, discusses the potential concerns around electromagnetic field radiation, and notes, “Much of this exposure is beyond our control and is a matter of personal choice; however, public exposure to RF (radio frequency) fields is growing exponentially due to the proliferation of cell phones, and wireless fidelity (Wi-Fi) technology.”
Namkung goes on to say there is “no scientific data to determine if there is a safe RF exposure level” and that further studies are needed because the potential impacts “could be huge.”
A well-publicized study done in 2010 by the California Council on Science and Technology found SmartMeters to be safe — but there has also been conflicting information about potential health hazards associated with extensive cellphone use, adding to the suspicions about wireless technology, even if radio transmissions from SmartMeters aren’t on the same scale.
Choice aside, the supervisors are wading into a magnetic field tough to escape. People can yearn for a time without cellphones, iPads or laptop computers, microwave ovens, medical MRIs or even flat-screen home theater setups. But that’s not the world we live in.
SmartMeters, which are also being installed by a MidCounty water district, allow real-time monitoring of energy use by customers, which the utility company says could lead to significant energy savings.
PGE’s opt-out proposal, while costly, allows those customers who want to live wirelessly an opportunity to do just that. The county has enough other public health problems without taking up a dubious cause.
This post will be the Santa Cruz Sentinel’s Editorial for Jan. 26, 2012.
