PDA

View Full Version : Smart Meters : Is Choice Down to Landlord or Tenant?



Trevor2522
02-02-2012, 14:15 PM
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/financialservices/utilities/Business-energy/9053100/Smart-meters-for-energy-to-be-voluntary.html

As a tenant I minimise my electro-magnetic fields: no wifi or walkabout phones chez moi. A smart meter would add an extra field 24/7 and the Yanks are up in arms about this and the intrusion of monitoring usage in real time: yet another facet of the élite micro-monitoring our lives.

If the power company wishes to install a smart meter in rented accommodation, do they liaise with the landlord alone, or does the tenant have some say in the matter?

I would like to bring my preference up with the landlord well in advance and can't see he would have any objections since the supply contract is with me alone.

Do the existing water meters which send usage data employ the same technology or only transmit-on-demand?

45002
02-02-2012, 14:19 PM
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/financialservices/utilities/Business-energy/9053100/Smart-meters-for-energy-to-be-voluntary.html

As a tenant I minimise my electro-magnetic fields: no wifi or walkabout phones chez moi. A smart meter would add an extra field 24/7 and the Yanks are up in arms about this and the intrusion of monitoring usage in real time.

If the power company wishes to install a smart meter in rented accommodation, do they liaise with the landlord alone, or does the tenant have some say in the matter?

I would like to bring my preference up with the landlord well in advance and can't see he would have any objections since the supply contract is with me alone.

Do the existing water meters which send usage data employ the same technology or only transmit-on-demand?

It's down to the account holder (who ever the name is in and pays for the electric or gas) and utility company they choose

bhaal
02-02-2012, 14:38 PM
Your objections sound crazy and staggeringly ignorant of basic physics, including the fact that charged particles impact the Earth every single day, exposing you to far more electromagnetism than you would ever get from a smart meter. Unless you want to turn off the sun and every other star in the universe an extra meter in your home will make no difference at all.

JK0
02-02-2012, 15:04 PM
Your objections sound crazy and staggeringly ignorant of basic physics, including the fact that charged particles impact the Earth every single day, exposing you to far more electromagnetism than you would ever get from a smart meter. Unless you want to turn off the sun and every other star in the universe an extra meter in your home will make no difference at all.

It ain't crazy. Smart meters send data by pulsed GSM radio transmissions. The human body did not evolve in the presence of these, unlike the charged particles you mention.

If my girlfriend leaves her mobile on in my house I get a headache. Needless to say, there are no cordless items or wifi in my house, and the house itself was chosen carefully regarding mobile base station positions.

My ignorance level: A level physics grade B and HNC Electronics.

bhaal
02-02-2012, 15:16 PM
So your theory is that the human body can be harmed by electromagnetic radiation with photon energies well below that of ultraviolet, visible light and infrared not to mention the charged particles previously mentioned? Why? Isn't it a far more logical explanation that your headaches are a psychological response to something you think should happen?

Humans did evolve in the presence of electromagnetic radiation of all wavelengths - unless you think the sun wasn't shining.

JK0
02-02-2012, 15:19 PM
So your theory is that the human body can be harmed by electromagnetic radiation with photon energies well below that of ultraviolet, visible light and infrared not to mention the charged particles previously mentioned? Why? Isn't it a far more logical explanation that your headaches are a psychological response to something you think should happen?

Humans did evolve in the presence of electromagnetic radiation of all wavelengths - unless you think the sun wasn't shining.

Not pulsed radiation. It was continuous.

Regarding psychological responses, how is it that I can tell if the phone is on, and ask gf to switch it off?

bhaal
02-02-2012, 15:32 PM
I disagree, radiation from the sun to most sub-polar regions of earth is distributed in 'pulses' lasting approximately 8 hours on average, from sunrise to sunset. Even if it weren't there is no reason why pulsed radiation (which just means it turns on and off) should result in more harmful effects than continuous transmissions of the same energy. Tests of whether people can detect wireless devices being on or off without the subject knowing have been conducted and no significant correlation was found in their predictive abilities and when the device was actually on. If you think you are the exception you should call your local university science department. A Nobel prize may await you.

jjlandlord
02-02-2012, 15:34 PM
When a mobile phone is on and static (as at home) it will not transmit anything for most of the time: Basically it just sits there listening for paging (incoming calls or SMS) and periodically (every several minutes) let the network know that it is still there.

The classic thing to go if you still have a CRT TV is to put the phone next to the TV: When the phone transmits you will hear it on the TV.

Considering these infrequent, short bursts it would seem unlikely that a mobile phone would cause any affect just by being present in the room.
It could obviously be quite different during a call as it would continuously transmit and be right next to your brain...


Regarding pulsed vs. continuous, this is not really the point. What's important is the frequency of the radiation: E.g. microwave ovens use electromagnetic waves at just the right frequency to make water molecules resonate.
Frequency also directly impacts how deep the radiation can penetrate our body. E.g. visible light is basically stopped by the skin.

JK0
02-02-2012, 15:39 PM
I disagree radiation from the sun to most sub-polar regions of earth is distributed in 'pulses' lasting approximately 8 hours on average lasting from sunrise to sunset. Even if it weren't there is no reason why pulsed radiation (which just means it turns on and off) should result in more hague effects than continuous transmissions. Tests of whether people can detect wireless devices being on or off without the subject knowing have been conducted and no significant correlation was found in their predictive abilities. If you think you are the exception you should call your local university science department. A Nobel prize may await you.

I don't appreciate your attitude Bhaal.

I am sure you are aware that different genetic makeups influence susceptibility to outside influences. Why is it impossible for you to accept that some of us get headaches near mobile phones?

bhaal
02-02-2012, 15:40 PM
Because it contradicts basic physics and common sense.

Your appreciation of my (apparently uncontested) rebuttals to your arguments is irrelevant. I don't appreciate your inability to reason based on scientific evidence lowering the quality of discourse about wireless transmissions and causing mass hysteria. You are free, of course, to hold whatever views you want but you shouldn't expect those of us who don't read poorly sourced, anecdote-reliant articles to belive you. If you have any evidence that is not of this nature then please, produce it.

JK0
02-02-2012, 15:55 PM
If you have any evidence that is not of this nature then please, produce it.


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1241519/pdf/ehp0111-000881.pdf

http://dynamics.org/Altenberg/MED/CELL_PHONES/_SEARCH/Leszczynsk.pdf

bhaal
02-02-2012, 16:53 PM
Thank you, I shall read with interest and respond once I've finished. I apologise if my earlier posts caused any offense.

The OP should write to the utility supplier and inform them that they object to the installation of a smart meter. Regardless of who pays the bills you have exclusive possession of the property and entry without your consent unless in an emergency or with a court order is trespass. You could also inform them you will hold them liable for any health effects caused by exposure to increased electromagnetic radiation.

theartfullodger
02-02-2012, 17:55 PM
Because it contradicts basic physics and common sense.

...........

Aye, right....

Well I do quite a bit of hill walking & go past the mobile 'phone masts not infrequently.. After a remark from another hill-wanderer I was prompted to notice if I got headachy-feelings near them: I do, sufficiently regularly & consistently to convince me they are doing something to my brain I'm none too happy about (oh btw MA in Maths so, science education etc...)..

The dog companies and mobile 'phone newtorks spew out stuff about their being no evidence... yeah, but as Mandy Rice-Davies said, "They would wouldn't they...". Just like the fag companies used to pump stuff out about fags being good for us & there being no evidence of harm...

I guarantee there will be uncomfortable, hard evidence coming out over the next 20 years. & yes, I do have a mobile 'phone