Advanced Meter Technology - Science and the Law Wins in Maine
by Mason PUD 3 on
March 24, 2017
In Maine, when "gut feelings" collided with science and the law... science won.
There’s a vast amount of evidence, testing, benchmarks, and peer-reviewed articles supporting the safety of advanced meters.
A case heard before the Maine Supreme Court in 2015 has the benefit of laying out the contrast between scientific research and anecdotal claims. Science wins.
READ IT HERE: Ed Friedman vs. the Maine Public Utilities Commission
Mr. Friedman asserted that when the Maine PUC ruled that Central Maine Power Company’s advanced meters were safe, it did so without adequate evidence.
The Maine Supreme Court disagreed, saying that when the PUC announced advanced meters are safe, its statement was based on two-and-a-half years of extensive investigations, research, expert testimony, and review of thousands of pages of peer-reviewed studies.
Simply put, the court said, "the plaintiff argues that the Commission’s findings that smart meters are safe is not supported by substantial evidence in the record. Contrary to the plaintiff’s contention, the record is replete with evidence supporting the commissioners finding that smart meters do not pose a credible threat the health and safety of CMP’s customers under reasonable operational scenarios." (emphasis added)
The court further stated, “The commission made its finding based upon a wealth of evidence.”