Council uses spy plane with thermal imaging camera to snoop on homes wasting energy

[-Cp]

WTH?

Now snooping on the public has reached new heights with local authorities putting spy planes in the air to snoop on homeowners who are wasting too much energy.

Thermal imaging cameras are being used to create colour-coded maps which will enable council officers to identify offenders and pay them a visit to educate them about the harm to the environment and measures they can take.

A scheme is already under way in Broadland District Council in Norfolk, which has spent £30,000 hiring a plane with a thermal imaging camera.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/03/23/article-1164091-06810BD60000044D-722_468x286.jpg
A council has spent £30,000 using a spy plane carrying a thermal camera to determine which homes are wasting energy. (File photo)

It said the exercise has been so successful other local authorities are planning to follow suit.

But critics have warned the crackdown was another example of local authorities extending their charter to poke their noses into every aspect of people's lives.

Read the rest at:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1164091/Council-uses-spy-plane-thermal-imaging-camera-snoop-homes-wasting-energy.html

[actsnoblemartin]

socialism :poke:


WTH?

Now snooping on the public has reached new heights with local authorities putting spy planes in the air to snoop on homeowners who are wasting too much energy.

Thermal imaging cameras are being used to create colour-coded maps which will enable council officers to identify offenders and pay them a visit to educate them about the harm to the environment and measures they can take.

A scheme is already under way in Broadland District Council in Norfolk, which has spent £30,000 hiring a plane with a thermal imaging camera.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/03/23/article-1164091-06810BD60000044D-722_468x286.jpg
A council has spent £30,000 using a spy plane carrying a thermal camera to determine which homes are wasting energy. (File photo)

It said the exercise has been so successful other local authorities are planning to follow suit.

But critics have warned the crackdown was another example of local authorities extending their charter to poke their noses into every aspect of people's lives.

Read the rest at:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1164091/Council-uses-spy-plane-thermal-imaging-camera-snoop-homes-wasting-energy.html

[5stringJeff]

Brits. Is it any wonder we told them to piss off back in 1776?

[Yurt]

i don't believe that is legal in the US, i think they tried to get pot growers that way and lost due to the 4th am.

[Mr. P]

i don't believe that is legal in the US, i think they tried to get pot growers that way and lost due to the 4th am.

They use "special" cameras on helicopters here to spot pot all the time. Holds up in court as far as I know...it must they continue to do it.

[Yurt]

They use "special" cameras on helicopters here to spot pot all the time. Holds up in court as far as I know...it must they continue to do it.

infrared heat detecting?

i know that high power cameras work and flying over is ok, but i believe they struck down infrared heat detection on private homes without a warrant...i can't remember the case, but i think it is a 2001-2003 scotus decision.

will see if i can find it

[Yurt]

KYLLO v. UNITED STATES
533 U.S. 27 (2001)

certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit


No. 99-8508. Argued February 20, 2001--Decided June 11, 2001


Suspicious that marijuana was being grown in petitioner Kyllo's home in a triplex, agents used a thermal imaging device to scan the triplex to determine if the amount of heat emanating from it was consistent with the high-intensity lamps typically used for indoor marijuana growth. The scan showed that Kyllo's garage roof and a side wall were relatively hot compared to the rest of his home and substantially warmer than the neighboring units. Based in part on the thermal imaging, a Federal Magistrate Judge issued a warrant to search Kyllo's home, where the agents found marijuana growing. After Kyllo was indicted on a federal drug charge, he unsuccessfully moved to suppress the evidence seized from his home and then entered a conditional guilty plea. The Ninth Circuit ultimately affirmed, upholding the thermal imaging on the ground that Kyllo had shown no subjective expectation of privacy because he had made no attempt to conceal the heat escaping from his home. Even if he had, ruled the court, there was no objectively reasonable expectation of privacy because the thermal imager did not expose any intimate details of Kyllo's life, only amorphous hot spots on his home's exterior.


Held: Where, as here, the Government uses a device that is not in general public use, to explore details of a private home that would previously have been unknowable without physical intrusion, the surveillance is a Fourth Amendment "search," and is presumptively unreasonable without a warrant. Pp. 3-13.

[Mr. P]

infrared heat detecting?

i know that high power cameras work and flying over is ok, but i believe they struck down infrared heat detection on private homes without a warrant...i can't remember the case, but i think it is a 2001-2003 scotus decision.

will see if i can find it

Not sure of the technology, yurt. They use it here to detect outdoor plots, not in homes, at least not that I know of.

[glockmail]

How much energy does the plane and the rest of this program consume?

[crin63]

I figured it was my city when I saw the thread title. I hear that they are going to start monitoring water usage and penalize those using to much water.

If you water the grass more than 3 times a week or if your sprinklers are getting the street/sidewalk wet you will have neighbors come by, call you or write you letters to reprimand you as though you are being some kind of eco-terrorist.

Our police department has some kind of an infrared device on top of one their vehicles so they can see heat signatures through the walls of homes they are called too.

[glockmail]

I figured it was my city when I saw the thread title. I hear that they are going to start monitoring water usage and penalize those using to much water.

If you water the grass more than 3 times a week or if your sprinklers are getting the street/sidewalk wet you will have neighbors come by, call you or write you letters to reprimand you as though you are being some kind of eco-terrorist.

Our police department has some kind of an infrared device on top of one their vehicles so they can see heat signatures through the walls of homes they are called too.
If a City has water restrictions then I see no problem with requiring the water users to cut back. If the cops have a method of seeing behind walls to plan for a dangerous situation then I have no problem with that either.

[Yurt]

I figured it was my city when I saw the thread title. I hear that they are going to start monitoring water usage and penalize those using to much water.

If you water the grass more than 3 times a week or if your sprinklers are getting the street/sidewalk wet you will have neighbors come by, call you or write you letters to reprimand you as though you are being some kind of eco-terrorist.

Our police department has some kind of an infrared device on top of one their vehicles so they can see heat signatures through the walls of homes they are called too.

that violates the 4th amendment as outlined in the scotus case i posted a few posts above yours

[Abbey Marie]

If they are looking for heat signatures from crack pipes, go for it. :coffee:

[Mr. P]

KYLLO v. UNITED STATES
533 U.S. 27 (2001)

certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit


No. 99-8508. Argued February 20, 2001--Decided June 11, 2001


Suspicious that marijuana was being grown in petitioner Kyllo's home in a triplex, agents used a thermal imaging device to scan the triplex to determine if the amount of heat emanating from it was consistent with the high-intensity lamps typically used for indoor marijuana growth. The scan showed that Kyllo's garage roof and a side wall were relatively hot compared to the rest of his home and substantially warmer than the neighboring units. Based in part on the thermal imaging, a Federal Magistrate Judge issued a warrant to search Kyllo's home, where the agents found marijuana growing. After Kyllo was indicted on a federal drug charge, he unsuccessfully moved to suppress the evidence seized from his home and then entered a conditional guilty plea. The Ninth Circuit ultimately affirmed, upholding the thermal imaging on the ground that Kyllo had shown no subjective expectation of privacy because he had made no attempt to conceal the heat escaping from his home. Even if he had, ruled the court, there was no objectively reasonable expectation of privacy because the thermal imager did not expose any intimate details of Kyllo's life, only amorphous hot spots on his home's exterior.


Held: Where, as here, the Government uses a device that is not in general public use, to explore details of a private home that would previously have been unknowable without physical intrusion, the surveillance is a Fourth Amendment "search," and is presumptively unreasonable without a warrant. Pp. 3-13.

I predict the court will reverse on this someday. Why? Because I saw this cool lil Lazar device that reads temp from air ducts or any other surface 4 yrs ago...damn amazing, it even read the temp of a cloud....and IT'S available to the public.

[Yurt]

I predict the court will reverse on this someday. Why? Because I saw this cool lil Lazar device that reads temp from air ducts or any other surface 4 yrs ago...damn amazing, it even read the temp of a cloud....and IT'S available to the public.

scotus reverse itself...never :D

you are absolutely right, if those become common, the court will reverse that ruling with respect to thermal imaging. i had that discussion with a mentor attorney after that ruling came out, he said it would be overturned as soon as thermal imaging becomes more commonly used/available to the public.

i might be wrong but i believe they have reversed federal appellate court rulings about fly overs with airplanes a couple of decades ago....there was a split in the courts with the majority saying airplanes were not commonly used or available to the public...by the time it reached scotus airplanes were commonly used and thus fly overs do not violate the 4th...they reasoned something like...anyone can do a fly over so you have no expectation of privacy.