By Arielle Hardy
As utilities across the country modernize electrical infrastructure, Liberty Utilities has begun replacing traditional analog meters with wireless “smart meters” across parts of its service territory. Smart meters are digital electric meters that measure electricity use and transmit the information wirelessly to the utility company. The devices allow utilities to monitor electricity usage remotely and automate meter readings, but the rollout has raised questions among some residents about cost, safety, health effects, and environmental impacts. According to the company, this technology “is designed to enhance reliability, efficiency, and your overall energy experience.” Their website states that “all Liberty customers will be receiving the new meter. Residential customers who choose to opt out and have their meter manually read will be charged monthly fees for the manual readings. In its 2025 General Rate Case, Liberty proposed a monthly manual meter read fee of $52.96, with a 50% discount for CARE customers. The rate case is currently pending approval by the CPUC, and a decision is expected by mid-2026. To opt out of an advanced meter being installed on your premises, please call the Liberty Customer Contact Center at 1-800-782-2506.”¹ The projected rollout dates for the service area of Portola, Loyalton, and Verdi are estimated to have an end date of March 2026.¹
Supporters say the technology improves grid efficiency, allows utilities to respond faster to outages, and helps integrate renewable energy systems. Critics say the transition raises questions about long-term health research, cybersecurity, electrical safety, environmental impacts, and consumer choice. As utilities continue installing smart meters, communities across the country are weighing these concerns while deciding whether to participate or opt out.
Many smart meter systems operate using a wireless mesh network. Instead of sending information directly to a central tower, the meters communicate with one another across neighborhoods. In a mesh system, the meter records electricity usage, the data is transmitted wirelessly, and if the signal cannot reach the utility directly, it is passed to a nearby meter. That meter then relays the data until it reaches a central collection point, where the data is then transmitted to the utility’s servers.²
Because of this structure, each smart meter may function not only as a transmitter for its own household but also as a relay node for nearby meters. Utilities say mesh networks make the system more resilient and efficient, but critics say the structure also raises questions about cybersecurity and privacy.²
In some reported cases, smart meters have been investigated as potential ignition sources in structure fires. Documented electrical failures raise questions about fire risk, and multiple jurisdictions have experienced overheating, arcing, or meter failures. These sometimes result in visible damage to meter bases and exterior fires. In 2014, the Canadian province of Saskatchewan ordered the removal of more than 100,000 smart meters after several fires were linked to defective equipment.³ Lawsuits in the United States have also alleged that smart meters contributed to house fires.⁴ Concerns have also surfaced in regulatory hearings. In 2012, a former Pacific Gas & Electric meter reader, Patrick Wrigley, testified during a California Public Utilities Commission proceeding and alleged that smart meters posed electrical fire risks during deployment.⁵ Electrical experts often point out that the greatest risk may involve aging meter sockets, loose electrical connections, and worn wiring infrastructure. Replacing a meter can sometimes reveal weaknesses in older equipment that had previously gone unnoticed.
For many residents, the debate isn’t about convenience. It’s about involuntary exposure to radiofrequency (RF) and electromagnetic fields (EMF) from the meters. Utilities claim that RF exposure from meters is generally well below Federal Communications Commission (FCC) safety limits; however, critics argue that those limits may be outdated. The United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC) adopted the current RF exposure limits in 1996.⁶ Those limits were largely based on scientific research from the 1980s and early 1990s, and they primarily focus on preventing thermal effects, meaning the heating of human tissue from strong radiofrequency exposure.⁶
Critics argue that these guidelines may not fully account for long-term chronic exposure, cumulative exposure from multiple wireless sources, or possible biological effects that occur below the level that causes tissue heating. In 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that the FCC had failed to adequately address evidence in the scientific record regarding potential health and environmental impacts of wireless radiation when it chose to keep the 1996 limits unchanged, directing the agency to provide a more thorough explanation of its decision.⁷ The FCC has maintained that the existing limits remain protective of public health.
Some researchers and advocacy groups argue that newer studies suggest possible links between RF exposure and biological responses such as oxidative stress or neurological effects.⁸ Oxidative stress occurs when cells produce more reactive oxygen species, sometimes referred to as free radicals, than the body’s antioxidant systems can neutralize. Reactive oxygen species are normal byproducts of cellular metabolism, but elevated levels can damage cellular structures such as DNA, proteins, and cell membranes. Mitochondria are often called the “power plants” of cells because they produce the energy needed for cellular processes. Some experimental studies have suggested that oxidative stress triggered by EMF exposure may affect mitochondrial function, potentially altering cellular energy production, metabolic balance, and signaling pathways involved in cell repair.⁸
When mitochondria are disrupted, cells may generate additional reactive oxygen species, creating a cycle that can contribute to cellular stress. Some laboratory studies have reported that exposure to certain EMFs can increase markers of oxidative stress in cells and animal models.⁸
Some researchers suggest this could occur through interactions between EMFs and voltage-gated calcium channels in cell membranes, which may alter cellular signaling pathways. Oxidative stress and mitochondrial dysfunction are closely linked to inflammatory responses in the body. Inflammation is a natural immune response designed to protect tissues from damage, but chronic inflammation has been associated with a wide range of health conditions. Some researchers studying electromagnetic fields have proposed that repeated oxidative stress responses could contribute to cellular inflammation, changes in gene expression, and altered neurological signaling. However, scientists emphasize that much of this research comes from laboratory or animal studies, and translating these findings into real-world human health impacts remains an area of active research.⁸
Some individuals report symptoms such as headaches, sleep disruption, heart palpitations, and tinnitus after installation of a meter. On human health, the RF debate is polarized partly because different researchers interpret the same body of evidence in different ways, and because the exposure landscape has changed rapidly. What’s clear is that the International Agency for Research on Cancer has classified RF electromagnetic fields as “possibly carcinogenic to humans.”⁹ Because smart meters often transmit pulsed RF in 900 MHz and/or 2.4 GHz bands, the concern raised by the pro-harm literature is that repeated, involuntary, close-proximity bursts could act as a chronic stressor that, via oxidative stress and mitochondrial disruption, might contribute to inflammatory signaling, fertility endpoints, and neuro/sleep effects in susceptible individuals. Several scientific and policy groups have noted that children’s bodies can interact differently with electromagnetic radiation than adult bodies, particularly because their tissues and skulls are still developing.¹⁰
Beyond human health concerns, some researchers are investigating whether EMFs from modern wireless technologies could affect wildlife, particularly pollinators such as bees, which rely on sensitive navigation systems to forage and return to their hives. Scientists have long known that bees can detect and respond to electrical charges produced by flowers.¹¹ When bees fly, friction between their wings and the air causes them to accumulate a small electric charge. Flowers also maintain subtle electric fields, which help bees detect whether a flower has recently been visited by another pollinator.¹¹
Because bees use these delicate electrical cues while foraging, some researchers have questioned whether human-generated EMFs might interfere with these natural signals. Several laboratory and experimental studies have examined how electromagnetic fields may influence bee behavior. Experiments have reported changes in foraging patterns, navigation ability, colony communication signals, and stress responses. In one controlled experiment published in Science Advances, researchers observed that exposure to electromagnetic fields altered honeybee pollination behavior and reduced the number of successful flower visits in the experimental setup.¹²
Pollinators are essential to global food systems. According to agricultural and ecological research, roughly 75% of flowering plants depend on animal pollination, and about one-third of the world’s food crops rely on pollinators to produce fruits, vegetables, nuts, and seeds.¹³ Honeybees, native bees, butterflies, moths, bats, and birds all contribute to this process. Because of this critical role, even small changes in pollinator health or behavior can have cascading effects on ecosystems and agriculture.
Scientists have also studied how radiofrequency signals may affect birds. Many bird species navigate using Earth’s magnetic field, a process known as magnetoreception. Laboratory experiments have shown that certain radiofrequency signals in the megahertz range can disrupt birds’ magnetic compass orientation under controlled conditions.¹⁴ While one individual meter may not have a large impact singularly on the environment, a system of smart meters in a community might play a more dramatic role in the environment.
Residents who want more information before allowing the installation of a smart meter may consider asking Liberty several questions. These include: what model and manufacturer of meter is being installed? What RF levels does the device transmit? Will the meter relay data from neighboring homes? What inspections are performed before installation? What cybersecurity protections are in place for customer data? While many residents do not want to pay the opt-out fee, there are several factors to consider, including the cost of fire risk, health, and impacts on the environment.
References
As utilities across the country modernize electrical infrastructure, Liberty Utilities has begun replacing traditional analog meters with wireless “smart meters” across parts of its service territory. Smart meters are digital electric meters that measure electricity use and transmit the information wirelessly to the utility company. The devices allow utilities to monitor electricity usage remotely and automate meter readings, but the rollout has raised questions among some residents about cost, safety, health effects, and environmental impacts. According to the company, this technology “is designed to enhance reliability, efficiency, and your overall energy experience.” Their website states that “all Liberty customers will be receiving the new meter. Residential customers who choose to opt out and have their meter manually read will be charged monthly fees for the manual readings. In its 2025 General Rate Case, Liberty proposed a monthly manual meter read fee of $52.96, with a 50% discount for CARE customers. The rate case is currently pending approval by the CPUC, and a decision is expected by mid-2026. To opt out of an advanced meter being installed on your premises, please call the Liberty Customer Contact Center at 1-800-782-2506.”¹ The projected rollout dates for the service area of Portola, Loyalton, and Verdi are estimated to have an end date of March 2026.¹
Supporters say the technology improves grid efficiency, allows utilities to respond faster to outages, and helps integrate renewable energy systems. Critics say the transition raises questions about long-term health research, cybersecurity, electrical safety, environmental impacts, and consumer choice. As utilities continue installing smart meters, communities across the country are weighing these concerns while deciding whether to participate or opt out.
Many smart meter systems operate using a wireless mesh network. Instead of sending information directly to a central tower, the meters communicate with one another across neighborhoods. In a mesh system, the meter records electricity usage, the data is transmitted wirelessly, and if the signal cannot reach the utility directly, it is passed to a nearby meter. That meter then relays the data until it reaches a central collection point, where the data is then transmitted to the utility’s servers.²
Because of this structure, each smart meter may function not only as a transmitter for its own household but also as a relay node for nearby meters. Utilities say mesh networks make the system more resilient and efficient, but critics say the structure also raises questions about cybersecurity and privacy.²
In some reported cases, smart meters have been investigated as potential ignition sources in structure fires. Documented electrical failures raise questions about fire risk, and multiple jurisdictions have experienced overheating, arcing, or meter failures. These sometimes result in visible damage to meter bases and exterior fires. In 2014, the Canadian province of Saskatchewan ordered the removal of more than 100,000 smart meters after several fires were linked to defective equipment.³ Lawsuits in the United States have also alleged that smart meters contributed to house fires.⁴ Concerns have also surfaced in regulatory hearings. In 2012, a former Pacific Gas & Electric meter reader, Patrick Wrigley, testified during a California Public Utilities Commission proceeding and alleged that smart meters posed electrical fire risks during deployment.⁵ Electrical experts often point out that the greatest risk may involve aging meter sockets, loose electrical connections, and worn wiring infrastructure. Replacing a meter can sometimes reveal weaknesses in older equipment that had previously gone unnoticed.
For many residents, the debate isn’t about convenience. It’s about involuntary exposure to radiofrequency (RF) and electromagnetic fields (EMF) from the meters. Utilities claim that RF exposure from meters is generally well below Federal Communications Commission (FCC) safety limits; however, critics argue that those limits may be outdated. The United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC) adopted the current RF exposure limits in 1996.⁶ Those limits were largely based on scientific research from the 1980s and early 1990s, and they primarily focus on preventing thermal effects, meaning the heating of human tissue from strong radiofrequency exposure.⁶
Critics argue that these guidelines may not fully account for long-term chronic exposure, cumulative exposure from multiple wireless sources, or possible biological effects that occur below the level that causes tissue heating. In 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that the FCC had failed to adequately address evidence in the scientific record regarding potential health and environmental impacts of wireless radiation when it chose to keep the 1996 limits unchanged, directing the agency to provide a more thorough explanation of its decision.⁷ The FCC has maintained that the existing limits remain protective of public health.
Some researchers and advocacy groups argue that newer studies suggest possible links between RF exposure and biological responses such as oxidative stress or neurological effects.⁸ Oxidative stress occurs when cells produce more reactive oxygen species, sometimes referred to as free radicals, than the body’s antioxidant systems can neutralize. Reactive oxygen species are normal byproducts of cellular metabolism, but elevated levels can damage cellular structures such as DNA, proteins, and cell membranes. Mitochondria are often called the “power plants” of cells because they produce the energy needed for cellular processes. Some experimental studies have suggested that oxidative stress triggered by EMF exposure may affect mitochondrial function, potentially altering cellular energy production, metabolic balance, and signaling pathways involved in cell repair.⁸
When mitochondria are disrupted, cells may generate additional reactive oxygen species, creating a cycle that can contribute to cellular stress. Some laboratory studies have reported that exposure to certain EMFs can increase markers of oxidative stress in cells and animal models.⁸
Some researchers suggest this could occur through interactions between EMFs and voltage-gated calcium channels in cell membranes, which may alter cellular signaling pathways. Oxidative stress and mitochondrial dysfunction are closely linked to inflammatory responses in the body. Inflammation is a natural immune response designed to protect tissues from damage, but chronic inflammation has been associated with a wide range of health conditions. Some researchers studying electromagnetic fields have proposed that repeated oxidative stress responses could contribute to cellular inflammation, changes in gene expression, and altered neurological signaling. However, scientists emphasize that much of this research comes from laboratory or animal studies, and translating these findings into real-world human health impacts remains an area of active research.⁸
Some individuals report symptoms such as headaches, sleep disruption, heart palpitations, and tinnitus after installation of a meter. On human health, the RF debate is polarized partly because different researchers interpret the same body of evidence in different ways, and because the exposure landscape has changed rapidly. What’s clear is that the International Agency for Research on Cancer has classified RF electromagnetic fields as “possibly carcinogenic to humans.”⁹ Because smart meters often transmit pulsed RF in 900 MHz and/or 2.4 GHz bands, the concern raised by the pro-harm literature is that repeated, involuntary, close-proximity bursts could act as a chronic stressor that, via oxidative stress and mitochondrial disruption, might contribute to inflammatory signaling, fertility endpoints, and neuro/sleep effects in susceptible individuals. Several scientific and policy groups have noted that children’s bodies can interact differently with electromagnetic radiation than adult bodies, particularly because their tissues and skulls are still developing.¹⁰
Beyond human health concerns, some researchers are investigating whether EMFs from modern wireless technologies could affect wildlife, particularly pollinators such as bees, which rely on sensitive navigation systems to forage and return to their hives. Scientists have long known that bees can detect and respond to electrical charges produced by flowers.¹¹ When bees fly, friction between their wings and the air causes them to accumulate a small electric charge. Flowers also maintain subtle electric fields, which help bees detect whether a flower has recently been visited by another pollinator.¹¹
Because bees use these delicate electrical cues while foraging, some researchers have questioned whether human-generated EMFs might interfere with these natural signals. Several laboratory and experimental studies have examined how electromagnetic fields may influence bee behavior. Experiments have reported changes in foraging patterns, navigation ability, colony communication signals, and stress responses. In one controlled experiment published in Science Advances, researchers observed that exposure to electromagnetic fields altered honeybee pollination behavior and reduced the number of successful flower visits in the experimental setup.¹²
Pollinators are essential to global food systems. According to agricultural and ecological research, roughly 75% of flowering plants depend on animal pollination, and about one-third of the world’s food crops rely on pollinators to produce fruits, vegetables, nuts, and seeds.¹³ Honeybees, native bees, butterflies, moths, bats, and birds all contribute to this process. Because of this critical role, even small changes in pollinator health or behavior can have cascading effects on ecosystems and agriculture.
Scientists have also studied how radiofrequency signals may affect birds. Many bird species navigate using Earth’s magnetic field, a process known as magnetoreception. Laboratory experiments have shown that certain radiofrequency signals in the megahertz range can disrupt birds’ magnetic compass orientation under controlled conditions.¹⁴ While one individual meter may not have a large impact singularly on the environment, a system of smart meters in a community might play a more dramatic role in the environment.
Residents who want more information before allowing the installation of a smart meter may consider asking Liberty several questions. These include: what model and manufacturer of meter is being installed? What RF levels does the device transmit? Will the meter relay data from neighboring homes? What inspections are performed before installation? What cybersecurity protections are in place for customer data? While many residents do not want to pay the opt-out fee, there are several factors to consider, including the cost of fire risk, health, and impacts on the environment.
References
- Liberty Utilities. Advanced Metering Infrastructure Program and Customer Opt-Out Information. Liberty Utilities website and regulatory filings.
- Itron Inc. Wireless Mesh Networking for Smart Grid Infrastructure. Technical documentation on smart meter communications networks.
- Government of Saskatchewan (2014). Smart Meter Safety Investigation and Removal Order.
- ABC30 News. “Lawsuits claim faulty PG&E smart meters started house fires.”
- California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) Proceedings, Santa Rosa hearing, testimony of former PG&E meter reader Patrick Wrigley (2012).
- Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Guidelines for Evaluating the Environmental Effects of Radiofrequency Radiation, adopted 1996.
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Environmental Health Trust et al. v. FCC, 2021 ruling.
- Yakymenko, I. et al. (2016). “Oxidative mechanisms of biological activity of low-intensity radiofrequency radiation.” Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine.
- International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans: Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields (2011).
- Gandhi, O.P., Morgan, L.L., et al. “Exposure limits: The underestimation of absorbed cell phone radiation in children.” Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine.
- Clarke, D., Whitney, H., Sutton, G., Robert, D. (2013). “Detection and learning of floral electric fields by bumblebees.” Science.
- Favre, D. (2011) and subsequent EMF-bee behavioral studies; related pollination behavior experiments reported in Science Advances.
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). Pollinators and Food Production.
- Ritz, T. et al. (2014). “Magnetic compass of birds is disrupted by radiofrequency electromagnetic fields.” Proceedings of the Royal Society B.
