... in Canada? Pity!
In Canada, smart meters are mandatory. And there are no savings to consumers. The (publicly-owned) power companies save money by laying off (= making redundant) the meter-readers, but electricity rates continue to rise, to pay for boondoggles and executive bonuses (in grateful thanks to the genius execs, who may also have received support from the manufacturers and marketers of the smart equipment, in appreciation of the non-existent savings predicted by smart meter proponents. Predict savings, receive bonus, don't revisit matter when savings fail to materialize). I don't have proof of allegations, just that the publicly-owned power companies, in the most populous provinces, went for smart meters while say in Britain and other places it's taken longer or not gone forward--for the obvious reason that a) it doesn't save money and/or b) insufficient incentives were provided. The utilities commission in New Brunswick (population 776,000) denied in 2018 as an unjustifiable expense smart meters to NB Power, but in bigger provinces the utilities commissions either lack that say or are already smart.
In some jurisdictions, you can get a smart meter with the transmitter turned off, but you have to pay $65 bi-monthly for Hydro to read the meter (even though they were typically estimating or interpolating the bills even before smart meters). In Canada, the electric company is called "Hydro". Oh yes, you see on the digital readout that the transmitter is turned off. I am reminded of an old Irish song.
Yes, I am peeved. Call me a dingbat, but smart meters have not been demonstrated to be safe. They are assumed to be safe because the levels involved do not ionize or cook you. It's a bit like in the 19th century industrial revolution, cigarettes could be deemed to be safe because the air was full of bronchial baddies from the burning of coal anyway. A bit like that. I agree, it's not a precise analogy.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
