In response to this letter the following letter was drafted but can't be posted with the Post Register as they believe they need to impose a 250 word count limit... OK! read it here instead!
Mr. Taule, the only true victims of technology are those that allow implementation in ignorance. Aside from releasing the meter readers into a poor job market (to feed their families), what exactly are we writing about here? Bragging about how secure your job is?
Now let's become more informed. In the City of Idaho Falls 2012 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) page 14 under Business-type activities we read
From this usurp I find myself concerned about why the federal government is interested in little old Idaho Falls' power grid. There are 56,000 people in Idaho Falls; let's say that equates to 14,000 homes. Now let's take 4 million dollars and divide it by 14 thousand... that is $286 dollars per meter to install. How is this cheaper then keeping the existing meters? $60 dollars to replace as needed and not all at once.
- The electric light utility has received a 50 percent matching federal grant for the development and installation of a smart metering program within the City. During the year the utility was reimbursed $1,970,850 under this grant.
Oh and ratepayers have already spent 1.9 million on smart meters that last 5 years before needing replacements. The old meters last for 20 years easy and up to 80 years. In 5 years do you think the federal government will send more money to off set the cost again?
OK, now reason with me.
"'Smart' meters will save ratepayers money -- $600,000 annually on readers and another $300,000 through improved efficiency."
What does this really mean? That $600,000 will be no longer circulating in the Idaho Falls economy as the meter readers are laid off? This doesn't sound like a good deal for the City, less money in circulation for local businesses. Now a big one, the city of Idaho Falls has to operate on $300,000 less per year at the inconvenience of the power users. How is this a good thing?
"Idaho Falls Power officials believe fully modernizing the system will pay for itself in five years"
The smart meters only last 5 years so, they will be paid for in time to buy new ones? At 4 million again? Yet again another big problem.
"could save as much as $1.4 million annually, money that can be used to lower rates or offset future increases."
Now, if I understand correctly... the old meters have an over head of $0.9 million dollars a year. The smart meters are going to save me $1.4 million a year? How is this so? Are we really increasing our power overhead to $2.3 million and marking it down to $1.4 on sale? Or (my favorite) the city is paying us $0.5 million to run Smart meters! Wow! free power and a paycheck too!
I know my own usage because I can read my own meter. It doesn't take rocket science to write down the reading and then do it again at a fixed time past to know my power consumption straight from the meter. I do it often now. You don't think I trust the City straight up do you?
As to disliking the new system, let me show the list of problems besides the cost problems addressed above.
1.. Smart meters illuminate your house in radio waves like an x-ray or ultra sound machine. If you know the frequency of the Smart meters you can see through the walls, your skin, and your hiding places in and on your body and home.
2.. The federal government can count your heart beats and tell if you're stressed before breaking down your door. And this is just the analog data Smart meters expose.
3.. Smart meters operate at the ionizing frequency of calcium creating positive ions. Calcium is used in 4 ways in the body and at least 37 body functions. Exposing your body to a constant stream of ionizing radiation eventually will cause body functions relying on calcium to fail.
4.. Smart meters record digital data that can be sold cheap to municipal corporations (AKA federal government). The big new data collection building in Utah will most likely be used to collect your buying habits, power consuming habits, and your cash value to the municipal company. If your value isn't good enough well, you really don't need that life saving procedure do you. Obama-care and federal spying is just getting started.
As I see it, the new smart meters are the meters that are in need of subsidizing. Don't get me started on the real cost of a hybrid. As per "saving money using a hybrid"... well, the vehicle only gets the miles per gallon that the on-board computer says it gets just like all new cars. Should we not mention the extra hazards of repairing it for the technicians or the cost of the batters and the extra waste it causes in the land fills. Hybrids remind me of an old slogan from the 50's I heard about Dina-Flow automatic transmissions "All show no go Dina-Flow"
We can adjust a 57 Chevy to a greater MPG then a hybrid will ever see. We can also fix it in a pinch in the back yard. Oh, and we don't sacrifice horsepower, passenger seats, or load capacity. We don't need to slowdown on hills. Last, a 57 Chevy won't fold in a crash. Haven't you ever wondered why the government wants the older cars crushed so badly?
"It's hard to have much sympathy, however, when those who" sacrifice their freedom for convenience, scientific fraud, and subjection to global corporatism are forced to take a pill instead of seeing a doctor when a Smart meter finally catches up to them and their government's assessment of their personal value expires.
Thank you Mr. Obama for following the global banker into slavery and taking us along. We love the high gas prices, lack of jobs, and forced compliance to federal mandates you gave us. If we are lucky maybe we will see hunger personally also due to your policy.
Mr. Taule, I suppose it is hard to stay a top the latest real news when your job is owned by a local government corporation that is in compliance with the federal corporation.
Mr. Taule's writings are a good reason I choose not to carry the paper. Speaking of obsolete jobs, news papers companies are approaching their shelf life soon too. What would we ever do without them?
John Taylor
