Chance to weigh in on smart meters

In 2008, many utilities nationwide used stimulus funds to pay for smart meters, which are electric meters with built-in transmitters, similar to a cell phone and Wi-Fi router. These meters eliminated jobs and created problems like fires, overbilling and also a surprising number of health complaints.

Public Service Company of New Mexico at the time was against using smart meters, but in 2015 evidently realized its shareholders would benefit if customers paid for new smart meters, plus the allowed profit percentage. The Public Regulatory Commission rejected that $95 million project, ruling there was no public benefit.

In 2020, PNM helped write the Grid Modernization Act, a law intended to ensure New Mexicans have safe, affordable, reliable and green electricity. The current PRC hearing examiner has interpreted the law to mean that smart meters must have a public benefit, banning as irrelevant experts who would state otherwise. In a subsequent ruling the hearing examiner wrote the statute does not authorize the PRC “to evaluate how much death and suffering will occur” due to smart meter deployment (per Order 3/8/2023 22-00058-UT).

The PRC has ordered PNM to file a cost-benefit analysis to go with its new $330 million smart meter application, and the public now has a chance to weigh in on it. What’s in the analysis is occasionally interesting (e.g., people with time-of-use billing in the report’s pilot project didn’t shift their usage to when rates are lower; off-peak usage stayed constant).

But what’s glaring is what’s left out. There are zero costs for damages or legal expenses associated with fires, overbilling or cyber attacks. Money is included for cybersecurity, but according to Albuquerque cyber expert Dick Wilkinson, those measures will not protect us from hackers. Certainly no costs are included to reflect the controversial health and environmental effects, even though, since 2011, wireless radiation from cellphones is a listed class 2b “possible” carcinogen. Most glaringly, no costs for an engineering analysis to certify whether this newest generation of smart meters will be electrically safe in our meter sockets, on PNM’s grid. Engineering analysis must be done prior to completing a cost benefit analysis; otherwise costs of making the project safe will be left out.

I believe PNM has neglected its responsibility under the Engineering and Surveying Practices Act to put a licensed engineer in “responsible charge” of the project. Such an engineer would determine the best choice among feasible options for meeting the goals of the Grid Modernization Act and make sure we don’t have a repeat of events elsewhere in the United States and Canada, when hundreds of thousands of meters were removed due to fire hazard, billing errors or premature obsolescence.

PNM’s cost benefit analysis assumes the Linux computers inside the meters will run for 20 years without overheating, breaking, becoming obsolete or being hacked. The Grid Modernization Act requires PNM’s plan to be reasonable. You be the judge.

The public hearing on the cost benefit analysis is from 2 p.m. to 5 p.m. Thursday (to be extended as necessary). Comments up to three minutes can be made in person at 142 W. Palace Ave.; attendance over Zoom or phone can be prearranged with the PRC at public.comment@prc. nm.gov or 505-490-7910. Also, send written comments with subject 22-00058-UT to prc.records@state.nm.us.

William Bruno is a retired theoretical biophysicist, formerly with Los Alamos National Laboratory and New Mexico Consortium, and served on an expert panel convened by the Electric Power Research Institute in the wake of smart meter health complaints.