PUCO’s “Power Forward” Smart Grid: Do You Consent?

In 2015, the United Nations released their 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development with its “17 goals for people, for planet.” Clean, “green” energy creation is the thematic throughline, and a complete restructuring of power grids (“Smart grids”) lies at the heart of this theme. To this end, the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio (PUCO) held a 2018 “workshop” called Power Forward which featured 127 speakers and over 100 hours of presentations on grid modernization, rate-making regulation, and customer experience. A complete overhaul of Ohio’s energy grid is well-underway, and it is all predicated on the Smart meter infrastructure rollout. While powerful energy industry players are lobbying hard for this continued grid overhaul, consumer advocates and activists are pointing out dangerous flaws in the plan. Let’s dig through all of the flashy PUCO public relations jargon and see what Power Forward actually means for Ohioans.

Much of Power Forward’s language centers around the importance of delivering a top-notch, modernized product for a modernized customer who seeks affordability and convenience. Former PUCO chairman Asim Z. Haque said, “The underlying premise of Power Forward is that we hope to pair innovation with the concept of enhancing the customer electricity experience.”

According to Rodger Smith, Senior VP and GM at Oracle Utilities, “Customers now want the utility providers to provide the same instant access to their most up to date information on the platform of their choice that they receive from their other service providers.” The "Internet of Things" – an infrastructure where a customer’s home is full of Wi-Fi-enabled devices such as Smart thermostats, Smart refrigerators,  and Smart washer/dryers, is what Smith envisions.

While a real-time, detailed breakdown of personal energy usage information may be a nifty perk, that two-way information flow gives unknown third parties 24/7 access to the information as well. Jerry Day of freedomtaker.com, says, “Your smart meter data shows a vivid profile of your personal living patterns…This is about as big brother as it gets.”

A strong argument for Smart grids, however, was made by David Owens, former Executive VP, Business Operations Group and Regulatory Affairs, Edison Electric Institute while speaking at Power Forward. Owens, who was involved in the energy industry response to Superstorm Sandy, highlighted the importance of efficient power restoration after a storm. “Some states in the Northeast…didn’t have smart meters,” Owens said. “We didn’t know what customers were out.” The three biggest benefits of the Smart Grid, according to Owens, are “…reliability, sustainability, and affordability.”

Smart meters have been “sold” to the public largely on the premise that they will allow for greater customer knowledge of their energy usage patterns (leading to greater energy efficiency). They also eliminate the need for human meter readers. For these reasons, we have been told adamantly that lower bills are to be expected. But, as IT expert Vince Welage discovered in his in-depth study of Duke Energy bills in SW Ohio, the savings have far-from materialized. Power Forward’s plan repeatedly highlights the need for greater customer choice However, as Welage found, the Smart meter rollout not only penalizes those who decide they do not want the meters, but it has created many new PUCO-approved tariffs (“riders”); most, if-not-all of which are not itemized on a customer’s bill.

The Ohio Environmental Council, in a summary of Power Forward, states, “…the Commission [PUCO] is also recommending cost caps on grid modernization plans to protect against concerns that the utilities will use grid modernization efforts to ‘gold plate’ the grid (i.e., charging customers for investments that maximize capital investments that deliver earnings for shareholders but do little to nothing to benefit customers).” Unfortunately, Welage’s research and bill study reveal that this “gold plating” may be exactly what’s taking place.

Another concern with Smart grids – one acknowledged by the likes of former CIA Director James Woolsey – is that of cybersecurity. Wireless networks are inherently more hackable than wired ones, and Smart grids require incredibly sophisticated mesh networks on the local and national level (much of the technology is reliant on artificial intelligence). Woolsey said, “There is not a power meter or device on the grid that is protected from hacking – if not already infected – with some kind of Trojan horse that can cause the grid to be shut down or completely annihilated.”

And then there is the issue of health. In 2016, five doctors sent a letter to the North Carolina Utilities Commission (NCUC) imploring the agency not to approve monthly punitive measures against Citizens who chose to opt-out of Smart meter installation on their homes, citing known health effects of pulsed electromagnetic frequency (EMF) radio frequency radiation (RFR) given off by Smart meters.  The letter states, “An individual can choose whether or not to use a cell phone and for what period of time. When smart meters are placed on a home the occupants have no option but to be continuously exposed to RFR.” They added, “Smart meter pulses can average 9,600 times a day, and up to 190,000 signals a day. Cell phones only pulse when they are on.”

Duke Energy spokesperson Jeff Brooks said, “We have not seen any indication that the smart meters have an adverse impact on human health. Lots of studies have been done on these technologies.” And yet, despite this claim, the biological harm caused by EMF is now well-documented. First-hand accounts of electromagnetic sensitivity (EMS), insomnia, and chronic headaches being brought on by Smart meter installation are now quite common; accounts like the one Ohio resident Jennifer Manzler gave to The Ohio Roundtable in a recent piece. Scientists, doctors, and engineers are among the over 300,000 signatories to the International Appeal to End 5G on Earth and in Space, and Smart meters are seamlessly integrated into this new mesh network of wireless frequencies coming at us from literally all angles.

PUCO lauds Power Forward as “An enhanced experience of the customer’s choosing on the application side, whether for reasons arising from financial, convenience, control, environmental or any other chosen consideration.” They claim they are “…interested only in innovation that will enhance the electricity experience for customers.” But, as we can see, Power Forward’s plan may not be so straight forward. Do you consent?