text:
LIFELIFE Magazine is the treasured photographic magazine that chronicled the 20th Century. It now lives on at LIFE.com, the largest, most amazing collection of professional photography on the internet. Users can browse, search and view photos of today's people and events. They have free access to share, print and post images for personal use. |
Términos y frases comunes
1847 Rogers Bros Acushnet Albania American April atoms Balkan ballet beach beauty believe benzene biggest Bill Bose Bran Flakes Britain CAMILLE MAUCLAIR Chicago Close-Shaver cockfighting Congress cost coupon cream Dali dandruff dealer DEGAS democracy Dodge City Dromedary Dry Scalp ELGIN engineers Erika exile famous favorite females fight Gandhi German girls give Golden Goodrich Greyhound Hair Tonic HANSEL MIETH Hildegarde Hitler hull Ipana Italian Italy Joseph Kansas keep Langley Field Lincoln-Zephyr Listerine Listerine Antiseptic living look low-priced car Mann's March ment molecules Munich Mussolini Muzz Patrick nations Neutrality Act Pabst Blue Ribbon painting PALMOLIVE photographer plane Plymouth Post's Bran Flakes Princess Royal propeller ride ROUTE Ruth San Francisco Sealex seals seaplane shaves shirt Silvertown Sirs speed stars Stop-and-Go streamlined teeth tests THOMAS MANN tire Tripuri tunnel UNION PACIFIC Vaseline Virginia Key VITAMINS West wings World's Fair York


text:
Here in the Era of 3-Sigma Results, we tend to get excited about hints of new physics that eventually end up going away. That's okay -- excitement is cheap, and eventually one of these results is going to stick and end up changing physics in a dramatic way. Remember that "3 sigma" is the minimum standard required for physicists to take a new result at all seriously; if you want to get really excited, you should wait for 5 sigma significance. What we have here is a 3.5 sigma result, indicating CP violation in the decay of D mesons. Not quite as exciting as superluminal neutrinos, but if it holds up it's big stuff. You can read about it at Résonaances or Quantum Diaries, or look at the talk recently given at the Hadronic Collider Physics Symposium 2011 in Paris. Here's my attempt an an explanation. The latest hint of a new result comes from the Large Hadron Collider, in particular the LHCb experiment. Unlike the general-purpose CMS and ATLAS experiments, LHCb is specialized: it looks at the decays of heavy mesons (particles consisting of one quark and one antiquark) to search for CP violation. "C" is for "charge" and "P" is for "parity"; so "CP violation" means you measure something happening with some particles, and then you measure the analogous thing happening when you switch particles with antiparticles and take the mirror image. (Parity reverses directions in space.) We know that CP is a pretty good symmetry in nature, but not a perfect one -- Cronin and Fitch won the Nobel Prize in 1980 for discovering CP violation experimentally. While the existence of CP violation is long established, it remains a target of experimental particle physicists because it's a great window onto new physics. What we're generally looking for in these big accelerators are new particles that are just to heavy and short-lived to be easily noticed in our everyday low-energy world. One way to do that is to just make the new particles directly and see them decaying into something. But another way is more indirect -- measure the tiny effect of heavy virtual particles on the interactions of known particles. That's what's going on here. More specifically, we're looking at the decay of D mesons in two different ways, into kaons and pions. If you like thinking in terms of quarks, here are the dramatis personae:
D0 meson: charm quark + anti-up quark
anti-D0: anti-charm quark + up quark
K-: strange quark + anti-up quark
K+: anti-strange quark + up quark
π-: down quark + anti-up quark
π+: anti-down quark + up quark
Let's look at the D0 meson. What happens is the charm quark (much heavier than the anti-up) decays into three lighter quarks: either up + strange + anti-strange, or up + down + anti-down. If it's the former, we get a K- and a K+; if it's the latter, we get a π- and a π+. Here's one example, where D0 goes to K- and K+.
Of course the anti-D0 can also decay, and the anti-charm will go to either anti-up plus strange plus anti-strange, or anti-up plus down plus anti-down (just the antiparticles of what the D0 could go to). But if you match up the quarks, you see that the decay products are exactly the same as they were in the case of the original D0: either K- and K+, or π- and a π+. Here's where the search for CP violation comes in. If you take a D0 meson and "do a CP transformation to it," you get an anti-D0, and vice-versa. So we can test for CP violation by comparing the rate at which D0's decay to the rate of anti-D0's. That's basically the way Cronin and Fitch discovered CP violation, except that they started with neutral kaons and anti-kaons and watched them decay. One problem is that the LHC itself doesn't treat particles and anti-particles equally. It collides protons with protons, not protons with anti-protons. (It's easier to make protons, so you get a higher luminosity [more events] if you stick with just protons.) So you end up making a lot more D0's than anti-D0's. In principle you can correct for that if you understand everything there is to understand about particle physics and your detector, but in practice we don't. So the LHCb experimentalists did a clever thing: rather than just measuring the decay of D0's and anti-D0's into either kaons or pions, they measured them both, and then took the difference. This procedure is meant to cancel out all of the annoying experimental features, leaving only the pristine physics underneath. (If there is a nonzero difference in the CP violation rates between decays into kaons and decays into pions, at least one of those decays must itself violate CP.) And the answer is: there is a noticeable difference! It's -0.82%, plus or minus 0.24%, for a total of 3.5 sigma. (82 divided by 24 is about 3.5.) And the prediction from the Standard Model is that we should get almost zero for this quantity -- maybe 0.01% or thereabouts. So what could be going on? As Jester says, this is a surprising result -- there aren't a lot of models on the market that predict this level of CP violation in D0 decays but not in any of the other experiments we've already done. But the general idea, if you wanted to come up with such a model, would be to add new heavy particles that gently interfere with the process by which the charm quark in the above diagram decays into lighter quarks. If I were to guess, I'd put my money on this result going away. But it stands a fighting chance! If it does hold up, to be honest it would be a bit frustrating -- we would know that something new was going on, but not have too much of an idea what exactly it would be. But at least we'd know something about where to look, which is a huge advantage. Truth in advertising notice: folks who write articles or press releases about CP violation are contractually obligated to say that this will help explain the matter-antimatter asymmetry in the universe. That might be true, or ... it might not. My strong feeling is that we should be excited by discovering new particles of nature, and not rely on the crutch of relating everything to cosmology.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Huahine casts a spell over you from the moment you arrive. Only a 40-minute flight from the island of Tahiti, the enchanted Huahine, with its lush forests, untamed landscape and quaint villages, is one of The Islands of Tahiti's best-kept secrets, a place where you can live like a local. A deep, crystal-clear lagoon surrounds the two islands that comprise Huahine, while magnificent bays and white-sand beaches add drama to the experience. Relatively unchanged by the modern world, Huahine offers the slower, more tranquil pace of old Polynesia. With only eight small villages scattered across the island, the few residents welcome visitors with great kindness. Not surprisingly, this fertile world offers a rich soil providing the local farmers a bountiful harvest of vanilla, melons and bananas.
Also commonly referred to as the "secret island," the "authentic island" and the "secluded island," many charming adjectives come to mind when mentioning Huahine, and for obvious reasons. The island is a delicious cocktail of Polynesian sceneries and ambiance. Find natural beauty, experience intense encounters with the population, explore the infinite possibilities for adventure and relaxation, alike. Huahine is an island "to live," an island "to feel." The famous local singer and painter Bobby Holcomb has chosen this small piece of land where joy and smiles are always around.
Maeva, North-East of Fare, is located close to the largest of the two lagoons, called Fa'una Nui. It is famous for its farming activities. Stone fish traps – an ancestral legacy that's still used – along with numerous marae and other archeological remnants are concentrated around this authentic village. A small educational museum was set up under a fare pōte'e (a house where the local knowledge, sacred traditions and rituals were taught) to exhibit objects and other remnants found during the various archeological digs (paddles, axe blades, fish teeth pendants, pestles, tattoo combs….). In Faie, get close to the huge blue eyed eels.
Beautiful white sand beaches lie in the districts of Fare and Parea. Go on a lagoon ride on the unreal colored lagoon, explore the underwater world (reef walls, fishy caves and coral gardens) and one of the largest archeological areas of The Islands of Tahiti, enjoy a sunset cruise, deep-sea fishing, surfing, hiking, horseback riding, trekking and kite boarding. Water and land activities abound around the island.


text:
If you're a parent, it can be a challenge to convince kids to do their chores. (Or so I'm told.) It's even harder to make them genuinely excited. But a startup called HighScore House says it has found a way.
The company is part of the latest class of companies incubated by 500 Startups, and it made its pitch to investors this afternoon as part of 500 Startups Demo Day. Co-founder Kyle Seaman says the company has been operating on an invite-only basis, but it's starting to open up to a wider audiences, and it's already getting excited messages from parents whose children are actually asking to do more chores.
So what's the company doing? Games and rewards. HighScore House offers a website and an iPad app where children can track and earn points for their chores. Those points, in turn, can be redeemed for rewards — Seaman says the most popular rewards involve something that makes the child feel special, like ice cream for breakfast or riding shotgun in the car.
Of course, you don't need a website to reward your kids for chores. But HighScore High should make it a lot easier. Even though the families set up the chores and rewards, the site makes suggestions so you don't have to think of things from scratch or wonder, "Should this be worth 100 points or 1,000 points?" It also makes it easier for kids to understand the expectations and to track their progress. Ultimately, Seaman says he wants to do for families what Zynga did for social networks and gaming.
HighScore House has raised an angel round from Jason Bailey (general manager of Virtual Currency at Super Rewards), Kay Luo (who led PR at LinkedIn and Square), Dan Martell (co-founder of Flowtown), and James Levine (former CTO at SimplyHired). It plans to make money by charging a subscription fee (it's free while in beta testing), by selling digital goods for kids to decorate their virtual rooms, and by facilitating some of the rewards (for example offering gift cards and taking a cut).


text:
Let us know how we can help you and a Cintas representative will contact you shortly:
Let us know how we can help you and the Cintas Talent Acquisition Team will contact you shortly.
Thousands of companies across North America trust their business and brand image to the power of the Cintas Uniform. See the positive impact our uniforms can have on your customers and staff and keep them Ready for the Workday®.
My Company Store
Enter your Cintas-provided MyCintas ID, Account Number or Work Email Address.
Order Tracking
Please enter your Cintas order number and the zip code of the ship-to address on your order.
Work uniforms speak volumes when it comes to maintaining a consistent, professional image for your employees, which is key to attracting guests and differentiating your business from the competition. Uniforms make a positive impact and are what customers expect.
Since 1929, Cintas has grown to clothe more than 5 million people every workday.
Read more
Fortune magazine has listed Cintas among America's Most Admired Companies for nine years!
Each week, we pick up your dirty uniforms and deliver professionally cleaned ones...
Our revolutionary TruCount garment tracking system is truly one of a kind.
With a Cintas full-service uniform rental program, there is no laundry to do, no uniforms to buy, and no repairs or maintenance to waste your time and money — and that means no worries!
Work shirt options for all job types – from customer facing to the dirtiest jobs.
Comfortable work pants available in many styles to fit your business needs.
Warm and comfortable jacket options to keep you ready in cold conditions.
Cintas provides workwear and uniforms designed especially to fit women comfortably.
Only Cintas can deliver Carhartt workwear in an easy and affordable rental program.
Cintas is proud to partner with Chef Works to deliver a dependable, affordable, first-of-its-kind rental program.
To promote workers safety, Cintas offers two types of Visibility garments – High Visibility and Enhanced Visibility.
Cintas FRC products are more durable, more comfortable, and lighter than any other.
Hassle free access to clean, quality scrubs.
Reduce exposure to contaminants with a Cintas Isolation Gown Program.
Explore our new rental uniform finder experience to view collections built for your uniform needs. Or you can browse our full rental garment line to find product offerings, colours and size availability.
go >
Get help logging into your company store or inquire about invoices, order status, catalog purchases, delivery, exchanges or returns.
See more Cintas products and services.
A Cintas Catalog is a great resource — get one suited for your needs and industry.
The Power of the Uniform
Let us know how we can help you by calling
Thank You. We have received your request. Please expect a customer service representative to contact you within the next 48 hours. Thank you for your interest in Cintas. We look forward to speaking with you soon.


text:
Birth bonding is the beginning of the formation of a close personal relationship between parents and their newborn child. More accurately, it is a continuation of the relationship that began while the child was in the womb, as evidenced by the emotional trauma experienced after a miscarriage or abortion.
How can we encourage it?
There are a number of things parents can do to give their relationship with their child a strong head start, both during labour and delivery and immediately afterwards. This foundation will continue to be built on in the days, weeks, and years to come.
Labour and delivery
During labour and delivery, gentle birth practices will provide a two-fold benefit to birth bonding: bonding will be enhanced immediately postpartum, and, on the other side of the coin, there is a significantly greater chance that actions that may interfere with bonding will be avoided.
Gentle birth practices can include, as far as circumstances allow, the following:
- the use of non-pharmacological means of pain relief
- external fetal monitoring (preferably intermittent) rather than internal
- natural rather than augmented progression of labour
- avoidance of forceps or vacuum extraction
- instinctive/spontaneous pushing
- a peaceful birth environment - quiet and warm with low lighting
- skin-to-skin contact and access to the breast immediately after birth
- delayed or declined routine postpartum procedures
- leaving a male infant's penis intact
These practices can help enhance postpartum bonding. The lack of pharmacological drugs in both mother and baby will provide greater clarity of mind and responsiveness between the two. Baby will feel calm and alert.
These practices can also decrease the likelihood of a number of interventions that may interfere
with postpartum bonding. By labouring as naturally as possible, the mother has a far greater chance of avoiding the common L&D cycle of pain medication --> stalled labour --> labour augmentation --> decreased fetal heart rate --> emergency c-section.
To provide the most natural, gentle and peaceful birth for the infant, with the lowest opportunity for unnecessary medical intervention, expecting mothers with low-risk pregnancies may wish to give serious consideration to choosing a midwife-attended homebirth and/or waterbirth.
Immediately postpartum
Once the baby is born, there is widely thought to be a "sensitive period" of 30 to 90 minutes in which the newborn baby is most alert and able to form a strong bond with his or her mother. Parents can take advantage of this window of time by insisting on (as far as circumstances allow) a chance to hold, stroke, kiss, breastfeed, smile at, and talk to their baby before routine postpartum procedures (weighing, cleaning, eye drops, vitamin K shot, and so on) are performed. Immediate medical interference disrupts this period of strongest bonding instinct and may also impair the infant's rooting reflex. It is particularly helpful if the parents can be alone with their new child during this time.
For infants born in a hospital and staying for a couple days before being taken home, the best place for the child is with the parents in the mother's hospital room. The hours and days following the birth should be sensory-rich for both parent and child. Look at the child, gazing into her eyes and examining her hands and toes. Hold the child, providing as much skin-to-skin contact as possible. Smell the child, breathing in his intoxicating newborn scent. Listen to the child, the little coughs and tinny wails and precious sneezes. Likewise for the infant, allow him to see, hear, touch, smell, and taste (nurse) as often as possible, encouraging the deepest bond between child and parent.
Breastfeeding plays a noteworthy role in mother/baby bonding. Oxytocin is released during breastfeeding, reducing the stress hormone cortisol and facilitating bonding. (More about breastfeeding later on in the Attachment Parenting Series.)
What if it doesn't happen?
There are times when this opportunity for early bonding is disrupted or does not happen. Sometimes this is due to extenuating circumstances such as medical complication or adoption. Other times, the mother simply does not feel that instant bond with her child. Fortunately, birth bonding is not the be all and end all of a parent/child relationship, but rather a head start in the long series of bonding opportunities.
Extenuating circumstances
Circumstances may arise which prevent early bonding between parent and child, whether by chance (emergency medical situation) or by design (adoption). It is important in either case that parents not feel as though they have missed an essential element in the parent/child relationship. "Catch-up bonding" should begin at the earliest opportunity. In the case of an infant, this bonding should look similar to the birth bonding described above, with a particular emphasis on the senses (touching, gazing, talking, smelling, nursing). A method of parenting which promotes attachment can compensate for this loss of early bonding.
Not "love at first sight"
There are times, however, when even in the best circumstances, a parent does not feel an instant bond with the newborn child. This is something we don't tend talk about in our society, and so there is a significant sense of shame and pressure in parents who don't feel that "love at first sight" when handed their child.
This feeling (or lack thereof) is well within the variation of normal. Postpartum feelings are widely varied and individual, with no one reaction being the "correct" one. Parents should not fear that this feeling will last; the baby is uniquely designed to draw the parents into a lasting relationship (his or her survival depends on it!).
Sometimes a mother may need some time to rest and recover after the birth before she feels ready to turn her attention to the task of mothering and bonding with her child. It is important in the meantime that the baby be allowed to bond with the father, or even a grandparent if need be, rather than left lying alone in a bassinet.
Other times, the feeling of a lack of connection with the baby may linger for the first days and weeks. In this case, as in the case of extenuating circumstances, the opportunities for bonding should be frequent and sensorial.
If a lack of interest in or negative feelings towards the baby persist beyond the first month, postpartum depression may be a concern and should be discussed with a doctor.
Our experiences
My older son was born in a hospital, without pharmaceutical pain relief or medical intervention. We were left alone to focus on the labour other than the occasional fetal monitoring or internal check. When he was born, the doctor expressed some concern over his colour and began to take him to the other side of the room. Our nurse stopped him, noted that his colour was improving, and told him to give the baby to his mother. The doctor acquiesced and handed me my son. I was given the opportunity to hold him, talk to him, and nurse him before he was taken, accompanied by his father, to the other side of the room for routine postnatal procedures.
When I first looked at my son, I had the strangest sense that I was looking at a stranger. I didn't feel like this was the same baby I had carried in my womb for the past nine months. Even though I knew in my head that of course he was mine, of course he was the same baby, my heart actually mourned the "loss" of this "other" baby. It is a difficult sensation to describe.
I used the rest of our two-day hospital stay to get to know this new little one. We nursed steadily to bring in my milk. He slept snuggled close to my side at night, tucked in the crook of my arm. I spent the rest of my time exploring this strange creature - his perfect lips, his tiny fingernails, his wrinkled feet, his grey eyes, his full head of hair, his birthmarks, his sweet newborn smell, his mews and wails, his button nose, everything.
And despite all of that - our natural birth, the immediate chance to hold and nurse him, the steady sensorial exploration of my new little boy - it took me the first four weeks of his life to feel as though I truly knew him.
While I have no regrets over the labour and delivery and while it was ultimately a positive experience, there are some things I would choose to do differently if I were to have a hospital birth again.
But with our younger son, I chose not to have a hospital birth at all. We decided, for a number of reasons, to have a homebirth instead.
Although his birth was fast and furious and nothing at all like I had envisioned, I did not have the same sense of holding a stranger when I first picked him up. He was born into the trembling hands of my mother-in-law and laid on a towel, while I, shocked and exhausted, leaned against the edge of the tub for a few much-needed deep breaths. Having caught my breath and refocused my thoughts, I peeked back to see that I had a son. My mother-in-law handed him to me and, gazing down at him, I immediately thought oh! There you are! There was that instant connection that I hadn't felt with my older boy.
We moved from our bathroom where he was born to our own bedroom where we snuggled down for the night. His transition into our lives felt very natural and smooth, lacking the marked split between "before" and "after" that I had experienced after our hospital birth with our firstborn. Our first days were spent in the same way - nursing, exploring, and snuggling together at night - but without the same sense of him being a stranger rather than the same baby I had carried in my womb. Whether/to what extent our homebirth played a role in that difference, I can only speculate.
Birth bonding should be considered a head start rather than an essential element in the parent/child relationship. Because it does have a number of benefits, however, we should seek to encourage birth bonding as much as possible. This can be achieved through gentle birth choices and through an immediate postpartum opportunity to bond that takes advantage of the infant's "sensitive period" of quiet alertness.
This immediate bonding does not always happen, however. Extenuating circumstances may temporarily prohibit such an opportunity, in which case bonding should begin or resume as soon as circumstances allow. It is also within the range of normal for a parent to not feel an immediate attachment to the child, in which case actions that encourage bonding should be continued as the relationship slowly develops.
Birth bonding allows the natural attachment-promoting behaviors of the infant to join with the intuitive caregiving qualities of the parent. It allows the parent and child to get off to the right start at a time when the pair is most primed for such an attachment. Ultimately, however, we must remain mindful that early bonding with a newborn is only one factor in the complex relationship between parent and child.
Recommended Reading:
What Your Pediatrician Doesn't Know Can Harm Your Child by Susan Markel, MD
Bonding: Building the foundations of of secure attachment and independence by Marshall Klaus, MD
Bonding with Your Newborn by Dr. Sears
Bonding Period by Robbie Davis-Floyd, PhD
Now it's your turn! Add your link using the Mister Linky below to share your thoughts, experiences, resources, or struggles as they relate to birth bonding. I look forward to reading them! See you next Monday for our second installment - Breastfeeding!


text:
Welcome Home
Providence Homes offers an impressive variety of affordable new homes in Northwest Indiana. If you're planning to buy a new home, visit one of our communities in Crown Point, Winfield, Schererville, Merrillville, Lowell, Valparaiso, or Porter County for the best home values in Northwest Indiana. You'll love to come home to a Providence home.


text:
Financial Risks of Coal Energy Investment
Since 2005, a large number of coal-fired power plant proposals in the U.S. have been cancelled or rejected, due to opposition from grassroots opponents and national environmental organizations (such as Sierra Club). However, a large number of coal-fired power plant projects that faced little or no political opposition have also been cancelled in the past two years. This article lists a number of factors which have made coal energy increasingly unattractive to potential project sponsors and investors, and which have thus led many companies to decide that building a coal-fired power plant is not a sound business decision at this time.
Mandatory U.S. CO2 emissions caps are a political certainty
The past five years have witnessed a sea change in public opinion and political discourse on the issue of climate change. Each of the three potential U.S. presidential candidates supports mandatory CO2 emissions caps:
- Barack Obama supports "a market-based cap-and-trade system to reduce carbon emissions… 80% below 1990 levels by 2050."[1]
- Likewise, Hillary Clinton would "reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 80% from 1990 levels by 2050."[2]
- John McCain supports reducing carbon emissions by 60% by 2050, using mandatory caps.[3]
Likewise, members of Congress from across the political spectrum are increasingly pushing for carbon caps. In Oct. 2007, Sens. John Warner (R-VA) and Joe Lieberman (I-CT) introduced the America's Climate Security Act of 2007, which would create a cap-and-trade system that would reduce carbon emissions to 63% below 2005 levels by 2050.[4] Numerous such proposals have been made in Congress in the last decade; however, over time, the proposed cuts in carbon emissions have become increasingly stringent, and their support has become increasingly broad and bipartisan. Thus, it is not a question of whether emissions caps will be implemented, only of when.
In 2005, 32.8% of U.S. CO2 emissions came from coal-fired power plants. If the U.S. is going to be cutting its CO2 emissions by 60-80% by 2050, there is no way this would be done without drastically limiting emissions from burning coal in the U.S.
Other energy companies are increasingly recognizing this reality. Xcel Energy recently announced that, beginning in 2010, it will use a carbon allowance price range of $9-$40 per metric ton of CO2 in its resource planning.[5] Given the estimated 3.0 million metric tons of CO2 that would be emitted annually by an average 500-MW plant running at 85% capacity, Xcel's estimates would mean that carbon taxes would cost that plant's operators between and $27 million and $120 million per year.[6]
Disclosing the financial impacts of global warming
In 2007, New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo subpoenaed five national energy companies in an effort to publicize the financial risks of investing in fossil fuels. As a result of the action, Dynegy agreed to disclose information about how global warming may impact its business practices. The agreement calls for Dynegy to divulge in its annual reports the potential consequences if federal rules are adopted to limit carbon dioxide emissions. Dynegy also agreed to report its efforts to mitigate CO2 emissions, estimates of its financial liability in settling possible lawsuits related to climate change, and the potential impact of climate shifts on its ability to generate electricity. Xcel Energy agreed to similar terms.[7]
Social costs of CO2 emissions will make coal energy into a pariah
Strong carbon regulations will become a reality in the U.S. in the near future. However, as the devastating social costs of global climate change become more obviously apparent to the American public over the next forty years, regulatory caps on carbon emissions may well become increasingly drastic.
In Oct. 2006, at the request of the British government, Lord Nicholas Stern released a highly comprehensive, 700-page report on the economics of climate change. In that report, Stern et al conducted a detailed review of the potential economic and social costs of global climate change under a "business as usual" paradigm – including increasingly flood risks due to glacier runoff (esp. in India and China), declining crop yields due to drought (esp. in Africa), ocean acidification, displacement due to rising sea levels, and water shortages (esp. in Southern Africa, India, China, and the Mediterranean). Stern et al estimated that the combined economic and social costs caused by unmitigated global climate change would amount to $85 per metric ton of CO2 by 2050 – and he acknowledges that the potential for abrupt and large-scale "runaway" effects could drive the cost of climate change far higher in a very short period of time.[8]
The consensus view of global climate scientists[9] is that it is becoming increasingly probable that the social costs of global climate change will be dramatically horrific, and will disproportionately affect the world's poorest people; furthermore, these events would take place on the world stage of global news media coverage. Were the effects of climate change to rapidly become highly socially destructive, changes in public opinion would force drastic responses by U.S. policymakers, and a massive political backlash against carbon-intensive energy producers would ensue. This possibility presents a huge potential risk for sponsors of any new U.S. coal-fired power plant. Potential investors in coal energy production should ask themselves: Are we willing to gamble on the potential effects of global climate change? Are we capable of paying even a fraction of the full social costs of the plant's carbon emissions?
Carbon capture and sequestration is a false solution
Many coal energy producers are relying on the future development of carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) technologies in order to reduce the future costs of CO2 emissions regulations. However, CCS is a highly experimental process, and it would be highly irresponsible for companies to stake their financial viability on an unproven, experimental process that would need to overcome a number of highly complex technical problems in order to become commercially viable.
A number of significant challenges must be overcome before CCS can be implemented on a large enough scale to make sequestration of carbon emissions from U.S. coal-fired power production possible:
- Unpredictable problems with CO2 leakage. A 2007 Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) study – by a group of researchers who are strongly supportive of CCS – acknowledged that "there is the possibility of leakage from storage sites. … If the leak is into a contained environment, CO2 may accumulate in high enough concentrations to cause adverse health, safety, and environmental consequences. For any subsurface injected fluid, there is also the concern for the safety of drinking water. … The state of science today cannot provide quantitative estimates of… likelihood [of these risks]. … In terms of risk, leakage from wells remains the likeliest and largest potential risk."[10]
- Shortcomings in knowledge about CO2 injection. Current simulations of CO2 injections are highly inadequate; to cite a few examples, current research fails to adequately understand: (1) the geomechanical response of injection; (2) the possibility of seismic events caused by injection; (3) the long-term impact of CO2 on reservoir fluids and rocks; and, especially, (4) methodology to conduct comprehensive quantitative assessments of risks to human health and the local environment.[11][12]
- Massive increases in water usage. The National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) estimates that CCS power plants will use 2.16 times as much water as non-CCS plants. The availability of this water will be an added challenge, especially in light of increasing water shortages in the southeastern U.S.[13]
- Potentially massive costs. Most importantly, CCS is a hugely expensive set of technologies:
- A 2007 NETL study found that adding CCS technology to a supercritical plant would increase auxiliary loads by 30-117 MW; thus, a 580 MW gross supercritical coal plant would produce 87 MW less power if CCS mechanisms were added.[14]
- Pursuing CCS on a large scale would necessitate a massive network of CO2 pipelines, which would be cost a great deal to construct, operate, and maintain, and would trigger large-scale environmental regulatory response.[15]
- The potential costs of leakage monitoring strategies and requirements for CO2 injection sites – and the nature and structure of liability for injection sites – have not been adequately assessed.[16][17]
- Four existing comprehensive reports have given estimates for how much electricity prices would increase in total due to the addition of CCS technology; their estimated power price increases range from 61-81%.[18] That said - even given these potential problems - estimates of CCS costs are still highly hypothetical; in the end, attempting to predict the realistic costs of CCS involves a great deal of guesswork (as all CCS studies acknowledge), and CCS costs may end up being much higher.
- Potential public opposition. As the IPCC report on CCS (which is strongly pro-CCS) acknowledges, "the technology may still be rejected by some as too 'end of pipe', treating the symptoms not the cause, delaying the point at which the decision to move away from the use of fossil fuels is taken, diverting attention from the development of renewable energy options and holding potential long-term risks that are too difficult to assess with certainty."[19]
The severity of these challenges contributed to the failure of the FutureGen CCS pilot project in Illinois. In 2003, at the behest of President Bush, the U.S. Department of Energy and 11 leading coal production and energy corporations initiated the FutureGen project: an experimental 275-MW coal plant with CCS technology. In Jan. 2008, the Department of Energy pulled out of the project, citing costs that had already ballooned to $1.8 billion, more than a year before construction had even been scheduled to begin.[20]
In a statement before the Louisiana Public Service Commission, an Entergy representative summed up the company's assessment of these uncertainties:
"To date, carbon capture and sequestration has not been demonstrated commercially on any power plant in the United States. Even today, pilot scale projects are only now being developed in the United States. The Company does not believe that this technology is commercially and reliably viable on a utility scale at the current level of technology development. Significant research and development in the performance, cost, and reliability of carbon capture technology remains to be completed. In addition, further research is also required on underground sequestration of carbon, including costs, permitting, and technological advancement such as appropriate geological formations and appropriateness for long term storage of carbon dioxide and the transportation of CO2 gas."[21]
- Entergy Louisiana executive, Testimony before the Louisiana Public Service Commission, 2007
It's possible that CCS will become commercially viable within the next decade. Alternatively, it's possible that the technical problems acknowledged by Entergy will prove insurmountable, and CCS technologies will never become commercially viable. Potential investors in coal energy production should ask themselves: are we willing to gamble our financial future on a highly experimental and potentially unworkable technology?
Carbon emissions aside, rising costs make coal power unsustainable
Even without the massive question marks of potential carbon caps and CCS uncertainties, numerous other factors make coal-fired power an increasingly bad investment:
- Dramatically rising coal prices. Coal, once touted as a consistently cheap source of energy, has already risen substantially in cost in the past few years, and it will only become more expensive in the years ahead. In March 2008, Merrill Lynch predicted that coal contract prices for power plants will rise as much as 200% by the end of the year, after supply disruptions resulted in a severe global shortage.[22] However, increased consumption had already been driving up the global price of coal: the Central Appalachian spot price rose from under $40/ton in early 2007 to over $90/ton in early 2008.[23] Massive construction of coal plants in China and India will contribute to a dramatic increase in coal consumption: according to the Energy Information Administration, global coal consumption will increase by 74% between 2004 and 2030.[24] Thus, recent increases in coal prices will only become more severe.
- Escalating coal power plant construction costs. In at least ten of the coal-fired power plant project cancellations that occurred in 2007, construction costs were cited as one of the most important reasons for cancellation. Increased construction in China, India, Europe, and the U.S. is driving a huge increase in global demand for coal power plant design and construction resources. In July 2007, Siemens President Randy Zwirn estimated that the cost of constructing an average new coal-fired power plant had risen 25-30% in the past 18 months alone.[25] And, in some instances, price increases have been even more dramatic: for example, Duke's Cliffside Project, which was originally estimated at $2 billion to build two 800 MW units, has risen to $1.8 billion for one 800 MW unit, before construction has even begun.[26]
Major energy producers are abandoning coal
Increasingly, many of the biggest coal-fired power producers are recognizing that coal power is too risky of an investment. Out of the fifteen biggest private U.S. coal energy producers, nine – AEP (the #1 coal energy producer in the U.S.), Ameren (#4), MidAmerican (#5), Exelon (#6), FirstEnergy (#10), Reliant (#12), DTE (#13), Progress (#14), and Allegheny (#15) – are not currently moving forward with plans to build any .[27] And many of the companies that are building new coal plants are increasingly realizing that coal energy has become too dangerous of an investment: Xcel Energy (the #7 coal energy producer in the U.S.) has acknowledged that the Colorado Comanche 3 plant may be the last coal-fired power plant the company will ever build.[28]
In Nov. 2007, in a letter to the Public Service Commission of Utah, PacifiCorp explained its decision to cancel two proposed coal plants:
"Within the last few months, it has become apparent that Congress will enact some restriction upon carbon emissions, but the project cost impact upon new coal generation is currently within such a wide range as to make meaningful risk assessment futile. … Within the last few months, most of the planned coal plants in the United States have been cancelled, denied permits, or been involved in protracted litigation. … While the Company is not excluding new coal generation ownership from its 20 year options, absent some change in conditions, it cannot be determined at this time whether new coal generation will satisfy the least cost, least risk standards that would enable us to consider it as a viable option within our ten year plans."[29]
- PacifiCorp, letter to the Public Service Commission of Utah, Nov. 2007
Coal power plant projects are dropping like flies
Since 2005, increasing numbers of energy utilities have recognized that coal power is too risky of an investment, and coal power plant projects have been dropping like flies. In 2007 alone, fifty-nine new coal-fired power plant projects were abandoned, put on hold indefinitely, or rejected by regulatory agencies. Of these 59 cancellations, only 15 were due to rejection by regulators; 44 of these projects were canceled by the project's sponsors.
Some of the most high-profile examples:
- In Feb. 2007, private equity firms that had recently purchased Texas energy firm TXU announced that they were canceling plans for eight new coal plants in Texas, totaling 6,800 MW. According to the New York Times, within TXU "the controversial plan to build a raft of coal plants had become so damaging to its stock price that its board had been privately weighing a plan to scrap part of the project."[30]
- In Dec. 2007, PacifiCorp cancelled plans for two coal-fired power plants in southwest Wyoming; a company spokesperson stated that "coal projects are no longer viable."[31]
- In Nov. 2007, Southern Company cancelled plans to build the Stanton IGCC Plant in Florida – two months after breaking ground on the project – citing "uncertainty about potential state regulation on greenhouse gas emissions."[32]
- In June 2007, Tenaska canceled plans to build a coal-fired plant in Oklahoma, citing rising equipment costs; a Tenaska manager stated that "we looked at the price of the power that would be produced because of those higher prices and equipment and it just wouldn't be a prudent business decision to build it."[33]
- In Dec. 2007, Rentech announced that it was canceling plans to build a coal gasification plant in Illinois, citing "uncertainty surrounding proposed greenhouse gas legislation," among other factors.[34]
- In Aug. 2007, SouthWestern Power Group switched its proposed 1000-MW Bowie Power Station from coal to natural gas, citing "market economics" and "regulatory uncertainty."[35]
- In Oct. 2007, Kansas state regulators rejected an air permit for Sunflower Electric Power's proposed coal plant in Holcomb, arguing that "it would be irresponsible to ignore emerging information about the contribution of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases to climate change and the potential harm to our environment and health if we do nothing."[36]
This spate of cancellations reflects companies' realizations, due to the factors listed above, that coal is no longer a financially viable energy source in the United States.
2011 report on financial risks
A March 2011 report, "A Risky Proposition: The Financial Hazards of New Investments in Coal Plants" by the Union of Concerned Scientists laid out the following risks with investing in new coal plants or pollution upgrades:
- Demand for coal power is being steadily eroded by competition from energy efficiency and renewable energy, which are benefiting from rising policy support, growing public investment, advancing technologies, and often-falling prices.
- Coal power faces much stronger competition both from new and existing natural gas plants.
- United States coal prices are rising and could be driven much higher by soaring global demand and shrinking reserves.
- Construction costs for coal plants remain high, and many of the external costs of coal may soon be passed on to the power supplier.
- Coal plants, new and old, are losing the cost advantages they once had, and lack the operational flexibility that will be valuable as the power grid evolves to integrate more sources of power.
- Coal power faces the financial risks posed by its many environmental and health impacts, such as mercury, soot, and smog, which are a major financial liability.
- Coal plants emit air pollutants that still kill thousands of people yearly, costing society over $100 billion per year, by one estimate (Clean Air Task Force 2010).
- Coal plants create vast quantities of toxic coal ash, with public groups seeking federal regulation.
- Huge cooling-water withdrawals by coal plants strain our increasingly vulnerable water bodies.
- Much of the nation's coal fleet is already old, inefficient, and ripe for retirement. Rather than retrofit them, it makes greater economic sense to close them.
- There is financial risk associated with coal's critical role in destabilizing the global climate.
- ↑ Obama '08 website, retrieved April 2008.
- ↑ Hillary for President website, retrieved April 2008.
- ↑ "McCain Differs With Bush On Climate Change", New York Times, May 13, 2008.
- ↑ S. 2191: America's Climate Security Act of 2007, GovTrack website.
- ↑ "Don't Get Burned: The Risks of Investing in New Coal-Fired Generating Facilities", Synapse Energy Economics, 2008, p. 17.
- ↑ "Carbon Dioxide Emissions from the Generation of Electric Power in the United States", Energy Information Administration, 2000.
- ↑ "Spelling out global warming costs," TimesUnion, October 24, 2008.
- ↑ Nicholas Stern et al, "Stern Review Executive Summary", HM Treasury website, p. xvi.
- ↑ "Lighting the Way: Toward a Sustainable Energy Future", InterAcademy Council, 2007.
- ↑ John Deutch, Ernest Moniz et al, "The Future of Coal: Options for a Carbon-Constrained World", Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2007, pp. 50-52.
- ↑ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, "Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage", Cambridge Univ. Press, 2005, p. 264.
- ↑ "The Future of Coal", pp. 51-52.
- ↑ "Don't Get Burned", p. 32.
- ↑ "Don't Get Burned", p. 30.
- ↑ "Don't Get Burned", pp. 30-32.
- ↑ "Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage", p. 264.
- ↑ "The Future of Coal", p. 58.
- ↑ "Don't Get Burned", p. 31.
- ↑ "Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage", p. 258.
- ↑ "Plan for Carbon Storage Dropped", Washington Post, Jan. 31, 2008.
- ↑ "Don't Get Burned", p. 29.
- ↑ "Coal Price Seen Rising Three Fold, To Hit Record – Merrill", Reuters India, Mar. 7, 2008.
- ↑ "An Export In Solid Supply", New York Times, Mar. 19, 2008.
- ↑ Energy Information Administration, International Energy Outlook 2007, Chapter 5.
- ↑ "Costs Surge for Building Power Plants", New York Times, July 10, 2007.
- ↑ "Don't Get Burned", pp. 35-40.
- ↑ "Existing Electric Generating Units in the United States, 2005", Energy Information Administration website, accessed April 2008.
- ↑ "Comanche Smokestack a Lightning Rod", Denver Post, Nov. 20, 2007.
- ↑ "Don't Get Burned", p. 9.
- ↑ "A Buyout Deal That Has Many Shades of Green", New York Times, Feb. 26, 2007.
- ↑ "PacifiCorp Cancels Wyoming Power Projects", Wyoming Tribune-Eagle, Dec. 11, 2007.
- ↑ "Southern Company Scraps Florida Advanced Clean-Coal Plant", Environmental News Network, Nov. 14, 2007.
- ↑ "Tenaska Blames Costs", Fort Smith Times-Record, July 9, 2007.
- ↑ "Rentech Announces Plan for First Commercial Ultra-Clean Synthetic Fuels Plant That Will Lower Costs and Reduce Carbon Emissions", Rentech press release, Dec. 4, 2007.
- ↑ "Bowie Power Station Announces Plan to Run Solely On Clean Natural Gas", Bowie Power Station press release, Aug. 31, 2007.
- ↑ "Power Plant Rejected Over Carbon Dioxide for First Time", Washington Post, Oct. 19, 2007.
Related GEM.wiki Resources
External links
- David Schissel and Lucy Johnston, "The Financial Risks to Old Dominion Electric Cooperative's Consumer-Members of Building and Operating the Proposed Cypress Creek Power Station," Synapse Energy Economics, April 22, 2009


text:
Framing the Picture
Happy birthday to us! It's been ten years now since I started the Ladybug Letter. Writing about food, farming, and life on the land has been therapeutic, and the discipline of research and self-editing prompts me to think about why I farm. Writing has also been valuable for the insight it's given me into how the news business works. A few years ago I got written up in the Wall Street Journal as one of three of America 's "celebrity farmers." I kid you not! That brush with notoriety didn't get me a stretch limo or the conga line of dancing girls I'd always imagined that celebrity grants to those it blesses, but my mom was impressed. At least I didn't catch the Journal's attention for securities fraud.
Last year the New York Times did a story on "farmers that write," and they sent out a photographer. His editors wanted a picture of me astride a huge tractor or combine. As a small-scale vegetable grower I don't have a huge tractor or a combine, but even if I did, it would have been dishonest of me to climb on for a photo. It's been six years since I've been the tractor driver, so the photographer had to settle for a heroic head shot of me looking into the future. Actually, I couldn't even find the keys to the tractor that day to lip sync being a tractor driver. I'd told the tractor driver to hide the keys so that my landlord's adventurous eight year old son didn't come across them accidentally on purpose and try to start the motor. Natanael Espana drives the tractor on Mariquita Farm. He's worked with me since 1994 and he's grown to be a far better tractorista than I could ever be. As a modern farmer I'm hardly alone in delegating farm tasks to employees, and it's not my problem if the way I run my business runs counter to the image of agriculture that the New York Times wishes to project.
Or maybe it is my problem! The fact that farm workers are almost invisible to the people looking down from high atop the food chain is a political problem that affects us all. This country is a democracy, but our politicians can hardly be expected to craft intelligent agricultural policies if the public views farming through a warped rear view mirror. It's a good sign that the New York Times wants to do stories about farmers, but it would be a public service if they didn't compose and frame the scenes they photograph from inside their cubicles. Sophisticated New Yorker image makers have a lot to learn about what actually happens down on the ground in "flyover" America . One of the reasons I put my stories out for free on the internet is that it's the best way I can think of to connect with the people in the jet planes overhead and start a conversation about where we're all heading in the United States with our agriculture.
One of the most "revealing" experiences I've had dealing with the media happened because a major national food and lifestyle magazine did an article on Mariquita Farm for their annual summertime "Produce Issue." Actually, they intended to write about an organic vegetable farmer down in San Diego County who also grew tomatoes, eggplant, and peppers. Unfortunately, at the last minute the other farmer was arrested because his organic vegetable farm was a front for his hallucinogenic mushroom farm. Whoops! The major national food and lifestyle magazine didn't want to feature a felon. The editrix was familiar with our farm through my writing. The only problem was that by the time the problem made itself manifest and she called it was already October and summer was drawing to a close.
Production deadlines are necessarily far out ahead of magazine release dates, so photos need to be taken months in advance. I told her that I was happy to be interviewed, but if they wanted photos they'd better come quickly before it rained or frosted and our growing season ended. The court photographer for the major national food and lifestyle magazine was off taking pictures of food and farmers in India , (we'll call her Chloé) so she was unavailable. New York photo editors don't like to count on unknowns from the sticks for pictures of tomatoes and eggplants, but given the gravity of the situation and the looming deadline, the major national food and lifestyle magazine took the risk and contracted out the photo shoot to a professional from San Francisco . (We'll call her Alessandra.)
Alessandra showed up at the farm early in the morning under a black sky as the first storm of the season threatened the late hanging tomatoes and the last of the red and gold peppers. She brought her friend, Pia, with her to serve as an assistant. Alessandra was slender and stylish with cool glasses and loose, baggy paratrooper pants. The sun poked through the clouds and the two women went at the work hard, Alessandra snapping pictures of the tomatoes, peppers, and eggplants while Pia adjusted the mirrors and screens and umbrellas they used to manage the glare and filter the light. Both women were happy to be outside in the fresh air on the farm because they'd just spent five weeks on top of a grill shooting for a barbeque cookbook and they were tired of wiping a film of smoke and atomized grease off their camera lenses every evening after work.
By noon, when the sun was high in the sky and there wasn't much contrast, Alessandra and Pia retreated into the shade of the cottonwoods at the edge of the field to take some "cornucopia" shots the vegetables we'd gathered for them. We have a sorting table out there where Alessandra and Pia were working, and next to the table there's a steep sided levee that rises up by the riverbank, all covered in tall weeds. Alessandra wanted to take some shots from above, looking down on the table at her tableaux of mixed summer veggies, so she scrambled up the bank. I was in the middle of the field with the guys from our harvesting crew when we heard Alessandra scream in terror. "Oh $#!%!," I thought. "She's stepped on a rattlesnake!" I ran to help.
"There's a rat in my pants!" she squealed. She'd pinched off a big wad of her parachute pants in her fist about mid-thigh and I could see the captured critter wiggling through the fabric. Pia wasn't helping her because she was hopping around down by the cameras and the tomatoes, swatting at herself, trying to make sure she didn't get a filthy rodent up her own pants.
The only way for Alessandra to get rid of the animal was to take her pants off and shake them out. She sure didn't want to let go of the tuft in her britches and have the rat run down her leg, so the crew watched with great interest as I got down on my knees, fumbled with Alessandra's belt buckle, and finally slipped her pants off. Alessandra was too absorbed in the unfolding drama up to focus on being embarrassed in front of fourteen grubby farm hands, but at least her underwear were revealed to be fashionable. I shook the pants hard and out fell a little blue bellied fence lizard. Even Alessandra laughed. Then she shrieked again, but this time in rage, because she realized that in the tumult, Pia had grabbed one of the cameras and shot a sequence of images that captured the entire spectacle, from Alessandra doing a jitterbug in the weeds to the delicate removal of the pants, all the way to the discovery of the unfortunate reptile and the expressions of delight on the faces of the harvesters.
Alessandra was a good sport, and finished up her work. That night the skies opened up and it rained like the last days. Then, on a raw, cold day in February, three and a half months after Alessandra's encounter with the unhappy lizard, Chloé showed up from New York to do the official photo shoot. She stepped gingerly out of her rented car, carefully avoiding the puddles, pulled her coat tightly around her against the wind, and asked, "Where are the eggplants?" We had a crop of fava beans growing three feet high where the eggplant had once been. Then Chloé needed to pee. She was dubious about the porta-potty, so we had to ask our landlord if the New Yorker could use the bathroom in her house. How Chloé survived rural India is a mystery to me. Maybe she never left the hotel. I've seen her photos, though, and she paints a lovely picture of the country life.
Copyright 2008 Andy Griffin
Note: names have been changed to protect the innocent.
Note #2: all photos linked are taken by Andy Griffin except the lizard photo.
0 thoughts on "Framing the Picture"
Gary Boyd Hi Andy and Julia,
Just wanted to a minute to say I love your stories and look forward to each "Ladybug Letter". I stumbled upon y'all back during the spinach crisis a few years back and have been stopping in regularly ever since. Wish I lived within your localvore range so I could grab a share of the harvest.
Keep writing Andy, I for one will keep reading… -
Anna Maria Stone I just wanted to tell you how much I enjoyed your piece in the current issue of Edible San Francisco. Great reading – funny and scary.
Kate Malsbury I have to stop reading these posts at work; I'm going to get into trouble trying to stifle my giggles. As always, an entertaining, informative, and thought provoking post; makes me wish that I'd started reading from the beginning!
Podchef What a riot! The image of photographers exposed to nature in the raw under such bizarre–yet quite everyday–circumstances. As a chef and farmer who also takes photos used around the world I can't believe they wouldn't use your excellent photos. It's just another example of the disconnect between society and agriculture on all levels. Keep up the great stories!
chris link Hi Guys,
i've started going back through the archives. lots of great stories here! the New Yorker article mentions that Andy was working on a book with an editor at WW Norton. Did that ever happen?
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.


text:
Introduction to Biomaterials
IIT Kanpur, , Prof. Bikramjit Basu
Updated On 02 Feb, 19
IIT Kanpur, , Prof. Bikramjit Basu
Updated On 02 Feb, 19
Introduction to basic concepts of Materials Science; Salient properties of important material classes - Property requirement of biomaterials; Concept of biocompatibility - Structure and properties of biological cells & tissues - Cell-material interactions and foreign body response - Assessment of biocompatibility of biomaterials - In vitro biochemical assays (cellular adhesion, cellular viability using MTT, osteogenic differentiation using ALP assay; Biomnuneralisation using Osteocalcin assay) - In vivo testing and histocompatibility assessment - Genotoxicity assessment (Physical damage to DNA by biomaterial eluates) - Important biometallic alloys: Ti-based, stainless steels, Co-Cr-Mo alloys - Bioinert, Bioactive and bioresorbable ceramics - Processing and properties of different bioceramic materials with emphasize on hydroxyapatite - Synthesis of biocompatible coatings on structural implant materials - Plasma spraying of carbon nanotube reinforced hydroxyapatite on Ti-6Al-4V substrate; in-vitro cytocompatibility - Microstructure and properties of glass-ceramics - Biodegradable polymers - Design concept of developing new materials for bio-implant applications.
4.1 ( 11 )
Introduction to Biomaterials by Prof. Bikramjit Basu,Prof.kantesh Balani, Department of Materials & Metallurgical Engineering, IIT Kanpur. For more details on NPTEL visit httpnptel.iitm.ac.in
Sep 12, 2018
Excellent course helped me understand topic that i couldn't while attendinfg my college.
March 29, 2019
Great course. Thank you very much.


text:
I spent most of the month of March planning and preparing for a surprise baby shower for my little sister. I'm excited to say it went off without a hitch and best of all, she was completely surprised! Along with my other three sisters, and our Mom, we snuck into my youngest sister's house while she and her family were at church. We did a quick sweep through the house, seet up lunch, and prepared baby themed activities for them to do.
I used a combination of the Little Boy Blue and Little Bo Peep collections to create decorations for the neutral gender shower. So, it's only fitting that I also used those lines in this month's Project Life spread.
I used a large amount of punched circles from the different pattern papers to create banners and table decorations at the shower, so I wanted to mimic that in my scrapbook by creating this banner for my title area.
You may also notice I created little picks for our sandwiches (shown in the photos above). I used extras I had on hand and incorporated them into my page as well.
And, incase you're wondering, they welcomed a healthy baby boy on March 29th. It was one of the most amazing things I've ever got to photograph.


text:
Crunchy Sesame Cookies (Adapted from CL)
1 1/2 cups all-purpose flour
1 1/2 tablespoons cornstarch
1 teaspoon baking powder
1/2 teaspoon baking soda
1/4 teaspoon salt
1 cup packed brown sugar
1/3 cup tahini
2 tablespoons toasted sesame oil
1 tablespoon Lyle's Golden Syrup (or light corn syrup)
2 teaspoons vanilla
1 large egg
2 tablespoons granulated sugar
Preheat oven to 375
In a medium bowl, whisk together flour, cornstarch, baking powder, baking soda and salt.
In a large mixing bowl, beat together brown sugar, tahini and oil until well combined. Beat in syrup, vanilla and egg. Gradually add flour mixture, mixing just until combined.
Evenly divide the dough into 1" to 1 1/2" balls. Roll the balls in the granulated sugar and place on parchment lined baking sheets. Flatten each slightly with the bottom of a glass.
Bake until lightly browned, about 10 minutes. Remove and let sit on the baking sheet for 2 minutes before transferring them to a wire rack to cool completely.
Makes about 26 cookies.
Just found the recipe? Click here to see where we talked about it!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)


text:
California Transparency in Supply Chains Act
The California Transparency in Supply Chains Act of 2010 requires companies doing business in California to make disclosures regarding their efforts to eradicate slavery and human trafficking from their supply chain. The following represents our disclosure statement required under the act:
Extron shall require suppliers to sign a statement that they will comply with Extron's Supplier Code of Conduct. This Code of Conduct forbids the use of child labor, forced labor, involuntary prison labor, indentured servitude, or labor from the victims of human trafficking or slavery.
Extron employs a team of Supplier Quality Engineers that routinely audit our international suppliers for compliance with Extron Quality, Manufacturing, and Supplier policies. A record will be kept of these audits in the Extron International Purchasing Department. Audits will not be conducted by a third party.
Extron has, as a part of the Supplier Code of Conduct, consequences for violation of the Code. These include the requiring of a corrective action plan to mitigate violations of the code or the termination of the relationship with the violating supplier.
Extron will provide training to the Extron employees that have direct responsibilities for Supply Chain Management on eliminating the risks of human trafficking and slavery in the Extron Supply Chain of products and components.


text:
In The Naked Island from Kaneto Shindô we see a pair of peasants growing crops on an island.
Some of their crops seem to be some kind of wheat. But they seem to grow something else, too.
What do they grow on the naked island?
You can watch the film on Youtube.
A small bushy plant(to her left, not the big ones to the right):


text:
This article was written for the Unz Review
The collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 did mark the end of the longest experiment in Communism in recent history. Many saw this event as the proof that Communism (or Marxism-Leninism, I use these interchangeably here) was not a viable ideology. After all, if in Russia Communism was formally ended in 1991, the Chinese quietly shifted away from it too, replacing it with a uniquely Chinese brand of capitalism. Finally, none of the ex-Soviet "allies" chose to stick to the Communist ideology as soon as they recovered their freedom. Even Chavez' brand of Communism resulted in a completely bankrupt Venezuela. So what's there to argue about?
Actually, a great deal, beginning with every single word in the paragraph above.
Communism – the past:
For one thing, the Soviet Union never collapsed. It was dismantled from above by the CPSU party leaders who decided that the Soviet nomenklatura would split up the Soviet "pie" into 15 smaller slices. What happened after that was nothing more than the result of in infighting between these factions. Since nobody ever empowered these gangs of Party apparatchiks to dissolve the USSR or, in fact, to reform it in any way, their actions can only be qualified as a totally illegal coup. All of them, beginning with the Gorbachev and Eltsin gangs were traitors to their Party, to their people and to their country. As for the people, they were only given the right to speak their opinion once, on March 17, 1991, when a whopping 77.85% voted to preserve the "the USSR as a renewed federation of equal sovereign republics in which the rights and freedom of an individual of any nationality will be fully guaranteed" (see here for a good discussion of this now long-forgotten vote). There was no collapse. There was a coup or, even more accurately, a series of coups, all executed by traitors from the Party apparatus in total illegality and against the will of the people. Some will object that the fact that the Communist Party was full of traitors. But unless one can explain and prove that Communism systematically and somehow uniquely breeds traitors this accusation has no merit (as of Christians did not betray Christianity, democrats democracy or Fascists Fascism).
Second, is Communism a viable ideology? Well, for one thing, there are two schools of thought on that topic inside Marxists ideology. One says that Communism can be achieved in one country, the other says that no, for Communism to become possible a world revolution is necessary. Let's first set aside the first school of thought for a while and just look at the second one. This will be tricky anyway since all we have to judge its empirical correctness is a relatively short list of countries. I already hear the objection "what? Ain't Soviet Russia, Maoist China, PolPot's Kampuchea and, say, Kim Il-sung's DPRK not enough?". Actually, no. For one thing, according to the official Soviet ideology, Communism as such was never achieved in the USSR, only Socialism. This is why the country was called the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Communism was seen as a goal, Socialism as an unavoidable, intermediate, transitional phase. To say that Communism failed in the USSR is just about as logical as to say that a half-built building failed to provide a comfortable shelter. China, of course, has not "failed" to begin with, Pol Pot's Kampuchea as probably a (horrific) attempt at building a truly Communist society almost overnight, but that by itself contradicts the Historical/Dialectical Materialist Theory of Marxism which states the need for a transitional Socialist phase. As for the DPRK, it's ideology is not Marxism or Communism, but Juche, at most a distant relative. So no, these few examples are hardly representative of anything, if only because the form a sample too small to be relevant and because none of them qualify as "test case".
Now coming back to "Communism cannot be achieved in one country" argument, let's look at it from a pure red-white-n-blue kind of Merican ideological position and remember that the proponents of US-style capitalism like to remind us that Reagan's arms race is what bankrupted the Soviet Union which could not keep up with it. Other proud American patriots also like to say that, well, the USA brought down the price of oil, making it impossible for the Soviets to continue spending and that thois fall in prices is what made the Soviet economy collapse. Personally, I find these arguments both stupid and ignorant, but let's accept them as self-evidently true. Does that not show that the USSR collapsed due to external factors and not due to some inherent internal flaw?
Modern training (I don't call it "education") does not really emphasize logic, so I will rhetorically ask the following question: if we accept that Capitalism defeated Communism prove that Communism was not viable or that Capitalism is superior? To the many (alas) who will answer "yes" I would suggest that if you lock a hyena and a human being in a cage and force them to fight for resources, the human is most unlikely to win. Does that prove that the human is not viable or the hyena "superior"?
Marxism-Leninism clearly states that Capitalism is build on the oppression of the weak and that imperialism highest stage of Capitalism. We don't have to agree with this argument (though I personally very much do), but neither can it be dismissed simply because we don't like it. In fact, I would argument that disproving it should be a key element of any serious refutation of Communism. But to keep things short, all I will say is this: any person who has actually traveled in Asia, Africa or South America will attest that the Communists (USSR, China, Cuba) actually sent immense amounts of aid including raw materials, technologies, specialists, doctors, military advisors, agronomists, water-sanitation engineers, etc. In contrast, ask anybody in these continents what Capitalism brings, and you will get the same answer: violence, exploitation and the support for a local Comprador ruling gang. To anybody arguing with this I could only recommend one thing: begin traveling the world.
[Sidebar: So yes, using the hyena as a symbol of Capitalism in my allegory above is fair. As for the 'cage' – it is simply our planet. What I do think is wrong is equating Communism with a human being. But that at this point of our conversation is my own private opinion and not an argument at all. I have been an anti-Communist my entire life, and I still remain one, but that is hardly a reason for me to accept logically flawed and counter-factual anti-Communist arguments].
At this point in the conversation my typical Capitalist interlocutor would bombard me with a fully or short slogans like "dude, in every Communist society people vote with their feet, have you forgotten the Boat-People, the Marielitos or the folks jumping over the Berlin Wall?" or "every single country in Eastern Europe rejected Communism as soon as the Soviet tanks left – does that not tell you something about Communism?". Usually the person delivering these slogans gets a special glee in the eye, a sense of inevitable triumph so it is especially rewarding to observe these before debunking all this nonsense.
Let's begin with the feet-voting argument. It is utter nonsense. Yes, true, some people did run away from Communist societies. The vast majority did not. And please don't give me the "their families were held hostage" or "the secret police was everywhere to prevent that". The truth is much simpler:
On the "push side": All the famous waves of people emigrating from Communist societies are linked to profound crises inside these countries, crises which have had many causes, including mostly external ones.
On the "pull side": In each case, a powerful Western propaganda system was used to convince these people to emigrate promising them "milk and honey" if they ran.
I am sorry if I have to burst somebody's naïve illusions, as somebody who has worked for several years as a interpreter-translator interviewing applicants for the status of political refugee I can attest that the vast majority of political refugees are nothing of the sort: they mostly are economic refugees and a few are social refugees, meaning that some personal circumstances made them decide that emigrating is better than staying. I have interviewed hundred of refugees from the Soviet Union and all their stories of political repression were laughable, especially to a person like me who knew how (the very real) political repression in the Soviet Union actually worked. To those who would claim that, well, Communism inevitably results in economic crises I would just refer to the discussion above about what, if anything, we can conclude from the few examples of Marxist societies in history.
[Sidebar: Unlike 99.99% of the folks reading these words, I actually spent many years of my life as an well-known anti-Soviet activist. I traveled to various ports where Soviet ships were anchored to distribute anti-Soviet literature, I made list of buildings where Soviet diplomats used to live to deliver anti-Soviet documents into their mailboxes, I helped send money to the families of Orthodox Christians jailed in Soviet prisons and labor camps, I arranged illegal contacts with Soviet citizens traveling abroad (truckers, artists, naval engineers, clergy, circuses – you name it). And there are things which I did which I still cannot publicly discuss. And while I never took part in any violent action, but I sure did everything I could in the domain of ideological warfare to bring down Communism in Russia. As a result, the (now-defunct) KGB had me listed as a dangerous provocateur and posted my photo in the offices of specific Soviet offices abroad (like the Sovhispan in Spain) to warn them about me. And let me tell you the truth – most of those Soviet citizens who disliked the Soviet system never even tried to emigrate. The issue here is not hostage families or the "almighty KGB' but the fact that you love your country even when you hate the regime in power. Worse, most of those who did defect (and I personally helped quite a few of them) were mostly miserable once they came to the West, their illusions shattered in less than a year, and all they were left with was a ever-present nostalgia. For that reason, I personally always advised them not to emigrate. If they insisted, some did, I would help. But I always advised against it. Now, many years later, I still think that I did the right thing].
Finally, as to the Soviet "allies" in Eastern Europe their rejection of Communism is as logical and predictable as their embrace of Capitalism, NATO, the EU and the rest of it. For decades they were told that the West was living in peace and prosperity while they were living in oppression and misery, and that the evil Russians were the cause of all their unhappiness. The fact that, when given the chance, they then rushed to embrace the American Empire was as predictable as it was naïve. Remember, history is written by victors and only time will really tell us what legacy Communism and Capitalism will leave in Eastern Europe. What we do know is that even though the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan resulted in a horrible and vicious war, and even though the people of Afghanistan also appeared to fully embrace the "kind patronage" of the USA and its allies, things are now already beginning to change and that the years of secular rule and even the Soviet occupation are now being re-visited by an increasing number of historians and Afghan commentators who now see it in a much more nuanced way than they would have in the past. Just a simple comparison of the daily life of Afghans before and after the Soviet invasion or a comparative list of what the Soviets and the Americans actually built in the country tells a very different story (even the Americans today are still using Soviet-built facilities, including the now infamous Bagram air base). Careful for the logically-challenged here: I am not making an apology for the Soviet invasion here, all I am saying that the wisdom of "embracing the other side" cannot be judged in the immediate aftermath of a "switch" in allegiance – sometimes several decades or more are needed to make an balanced assessment of what really took place.
My point in all of the above is simple: the official imperial propaganda machine (aka "the media" and "the educational system") has tried to present a simple narrative about Communism when, in reality, even a small dig a tad deeper than the superficial slogans immediately shows that things are much, much, more complicated than the crude and comprehensibly false narrative we are being presented with.
Communism – the future:
Here I will immediately lay down my cards on the table and state that I believe, and even hope, that Communism is not dead and that, in fact, I think that it still have a long and most interesting future. Here are a few reasons why.
First, the Communist ideology, as such, has never been comprehensibly defeated, if only because no other ideology comparable in scope and depth has emerged to challenge, nevermind refute or replace, Communism. For one thing, Communism is a *huge* intellectual building and just destroying some of its "top floors" hardly bring the entire edifice down. Let's take a simple example: the Marxist slogan "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs". Marx did not really invent it, he just popularized it. Some sources say that the original author was August Becker in 1844, Louis Blanc in 1851 or Étienne-Gabriel Morelly 1775. Other say that it was Pierre-Joseph Proudhon but with slightly different version "From each according to his ability, to each according to his work". This was the version accepted in the USSR as being applicable to the socialist transitional phase on the path to the full realization of Communism. Then, of course, there is the famous New Testament quote by Saint Paul "if any would not work, neither should he eat" (Thess 3:10) and the words of Christ Himself about "to every man according to his ability" (Matt 25:15). This all gets very complex very fast, but yet this is hardly an excuse to ignore what is one of the basic tenets of Marxism-Leninism. And there are many such key tenets because Communism cannot be understood, nevermind evaluated, outside a much broader discussion of Dialectical Materialism, itself an adaptation of Hegelian dialectics to historiography, all of which serve as a foundation for Historical Materialism which, in turn, offers a comprehensive critique of the nature of Capitalism. There is a reason why a good library on Marxism-Leninism could easily include a full floor dedicated solely to the teaching and criticism of Marxism-Leninism: this body of teaching is huge, and incorporates history, sociology, economics, philosophy and many other disciplines. Just Materialism itself includes a huge corpus of writings ranging from the Pre-Socratic philosophers to Nietzsche's "God is dead" to, alas, Dawkins sophomoric writings. If we honestly look carefully inside Marxism-Leninism we will see that there are such philosophical pearls (or challenges, depending on how you look at them) on most levels of the Marxist-Leninist building. Before we can declare that "Communism is dead" we have to deal with every "floor" of the Marxist-Leninist building and bring down at the very least all the crucial ones least we be (justly) accused of willful ignorance.
Second, the Communist ideology offers us the most comprehensive critique of the globalist-capitalist society we live in today. Considering that by now only the most deliberately blind person could still continue to deny that our society is undergoing a deep crisis, possibly leading to what is often referred to as "TEOTWAWKI" (The end of the world as we know it) I would question the wisdom of declaring Communism dead and forgetting about it. After all, informing ourselves about the Communist critique of Capitalism does not imply the adoption of the Communist solutions to the ills of Capitalism any more than pay attention to a doctor's diagnosis implies a consent to one single course of treatment. And yet what our society has done is to completely reject the diagnosis on the basis that the treatment has failed in several cases. How stupid is that?
Third, the corpus of Communist and Marxist-Leninist teachings is not only immense, it is also very diverse. Leninism itself is, by the way, a further development of Marxist ideas. It would be simply illogical to only focus on the founding fathers of this ideology and ignore or, worse, dismiss their modern followers. Let's take a simple example: religion.
It is a well-known fact that Marx declared that "religion is the opium of the people". And it is true that Lenin and Trotsky engaged in what can only be described as a genocidal and satanic amok run against religion in general, and Orthodox Christianity especially, while they were in power. For decades rabid atheism was a cornerstone of the Marxist-Leninist ideology. And yet, if you look at the various Marxist regimes in Latin America (including Cuba and Venezuela) you rapidly see that they replaced that rabid atheism with an endorsement of a specific type of Christianity one could loosely describe as "Liberation Theology". Now, for a hardcore Orthodox traditionalist like myself, Liberation Theology is not exactly my cup of tea (full disclosure: politically, I would describe myself as an "People's Monarchist" (народный монархист) in the tradition of Lev Tikhomirov, Feodor Dostoevsky, Ivan Solonevich and Ivan Ilyin). But the point here are not the inherent qualities of the Liberation Theology (or lack thereof) but the fact that Latin American Marxists have clearly ditched atheism. And whether they did that out of a deep sense of spiritual rebirth and renewal or out of cynical power politics consideratons is irrelevant: even if they had to cave under pressure, they still did something which their predecessors would never have done under any circumstances. So now instead of denouncing religion as reactionary, we have leaders like Hugo Chavez declaring that "Jesus Christ was an authentic Communist, anti-imperialist and enemy of the oligarchy". Sincere? Possibly. Important? Most definitely. I submit that if such a central, crucial, tenet as militant atheism could be dropped by modern Marxists they are probably willing to drop any other of its part they would conclude are wrong (for whatever reason). To conflate 21st century Communists with their 19th century predecessors is unforgivably stupid and ignorant.
Fourth, modern Communism comes in many original and even surprising flavors. One of the most interesting one would be the in the form of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Of course, modern Iran is hardly a copy of the old German Democratic Republic. Ramin Mazaheri, the Paris correspondent for Press TV put it best when he wrote "Europe came to socialism through industrialization, theory and war, but Iran came to socialism through its religious and moral beliefs". And make no mistake, when Mazaheri compliments Iran on its "socialist" achievements, he does not oppose the notion of socialism to the one of communism (Mazaheri is a proud and self-avowed Communist) nor does he refer to the "caviar Socialism" of the French Left. Instead he refers to "socialism" as a set of underlying values and principles common the the Marxist and Islamic worldviews. It is often forgotten that one of the main ideologues of the Iranian Revolution, Ali Shariati, was clearly influenced by Socialist and even Marxist ideas.
Iran, by the way, is not unique in the Muslim world. For example, the writings of Sayyid Qutb 1906-1966 contain plenty of ideas which one could describe as Marxist. I would even argue that Islam, Christianity and Confucianism all include strong elements of both universalism and collectivism which are typically associated with Marxist idea, especially in contrast to the kind of bloated hyper-individualism underlying the Capitalist worldview (which I personally call "the worldview of me, myself and I"). Sure, the modern doxa wants to label all forms of Islam as retrograde, medieval and otherwise reactionary, but in truth it would be far more fair to describe Islam as revolutionary, social and progressive. But let's not confuse the nonsense spewed by the Zionist propaganda machine at those poor folks still paying attention to it with reality, shall we? Surely we can agree that the worst possible way to try to learn anything about Islam would be to pay attention to the US Ziomedia!
Communism – the challenge:
It is not really surprising that the Americans, who have not defeated anybody or anything in a very long time, might be strongly inclined to adopt the notion of having won the Cold War and/or having defeated Communism. In a country were adult and presumably educated people can declare with a serious face that Obama is a Socialist (or even a Communist) such nonsense will very rarely be challenged. This is a reflection of the poor state of education of a nation which fancies itself as "indispensable", but which has no real interest in understanding the rest of the world, nevermind its history. We can now make fun of the putatively dumb Commies, their "scientific Communism" and their university chairs of Marxism and Leninism, but it remains undeniable that in order to understand the Communist propaganda you needed to have a minimal level of education and that this propaganda exposes you to topics which are now practically dead in western societies (such as philosophy or history). When I see the kind of nonsense nowadays which passes for political science or philosophy I can only conclude that the once proud western world now lacks the basic level of education needed to understand, nevermind refute, Marxist ideologues. And that is a crying shame because I also believe that Marxism and Communism are inherently both very attractive and very toxic ideologies which must be challenged and refuted.
[Sidebar: What I personally think about Marxism is not really the topic today, so I will limit myself to saying that like all utopian ideologies, Marxism promises a future which cannot ever happen. True, this is hardly a sin unique to Marxism. Amongst modern ideologues Hitler should be commended for his relative modesty – he "only" promised a 1000 year long Reich. In contrast Francis Fukuyama promised a communism-like "end of history". This is all par for the course coming from atheists who are trying to simultaneously reject God while (unsuccessfully) imitating Him: a utopian society is what Satan offered to Christ during the temptation of Christ in the desert (Matt 4:1-11) and also the reason why some Jews rejected Him for offering them a spiritual kingdom rather than then worldly kingdom they were hoping for. Right there there is plenty enough, at least for me, to reject this and any other ideology promising some kind of "heaven on earth". In my opinion all utopian ideologies are inherently and by definition Satanic].
Can the huge corpus of the Marxist/Communist ideological building be convincingly refuted? I think that it can and, assuming mankind does not destroy itself in the near future, that it eventually will. But that will require an effort of a completely different nature and magnitude then the collection of primitive slogans which are currently hurled at Marxism today. In fact, I also believe that Orthodox Christianity already has refuted Marxism by preemption, many centuries before the birth of Karl Marx, by denouncing all its underlying assumptions in the Scripture, the writings of the Church Fathers, the sayings of the Desert Fathers, the Lives of the Saints, its liturgical texts and icons, but in our post-Chrstian society that refutation is accessible only to the tiny minority of those who are exposed to it and who are educated enough to understand it (a good example of such a person would be Fedor Dostoevskii).
For the foreseeable future Communism has a very bright and long future, especially with the ongoing collapse of the Anglo-Zionist Empire and the subsequent debate on the causes of this collapse. Living in the United States one might be forgiven for not seeing much of a future for Communism, but from Southeast Asia to the Indian subcontinent and from Africa to Latin America the ideals, values and arguments of Communism continue to have an immense appeal on millions of people. When Donald Trump, during his recent UN speech, presumed to have the authority to lecture the world on Socialism he really only showed that ignorance is no impediment to arrogance and that they really usually go hand in hand. If his intention was to speak to the domestic audience, then he probably made a few folks feel good about themselves and the political system they live in. If he truly was addressing a foreign audience, then the only thing he achieved was to reinforce the worst anti-American clichés.
For the time being, the the spectre of Communism will continue to haunt much of our planet, especially in those parts were education and poverty are high. In the basically illiterate but wealthy world Communism will remain pretty much as it is today: universally ignored and therefore unknown. But when the grand edifice of Capitalism finally comes tumbling down and its victims rediscover the difference between propaganda and education – then a credible modern challenge to the Communist ideology will possibly arise. But for the time being and the foreseeable future Communism will remain not only alive, but also quite undefeated.


text:
Linda Lingle on Civil RightsRepublican Governor (HI) |
H.R. 914/S. 872 the ADA Notification Act.
Republican Main Street Partnership Congressman Mark Foley (FL) introduced this legislation to protect the Americans with Disabilities Act from a growing number of lawyers who are generating huge sums in legal fees for pointing out accessibility violations by business when often simple fixes would bring properties into compliance with the ADA's accessibility standards. This variety of litigation abuse stems from the lack of any notification provision in the ADA. RMSP supports a 90-day delay between notification of an alleged accessibility violation and any legal proceedings. This notification will allow honest business owners to become ADA compliant without added legal expense while freeing up the courts to pursue legal action against bad players.
H.R. 2341/S. 1712 Class Action Fairness Act.
Class Action suits, most often claiming product defects, have increasingly become fertile ground for unscrupulous trial attorneys. Using jurisdictional loopholes, trial lawyers are suing for enormous sums with little or no payout to injured parties. Multi-million dollar interstate lawsuits filed on behalf of irrelevant plaintiffs, often unaware that a claim has been filed, are filed in state courts. This increases the volume of claims filed, and leads to multiple, expensive, settlements. H.R. 2341, supported by Republican Main Street Partnership Reps. Judy Biggert (IL), Tom Davis (VA), Porter Goss (FL), Melissa Hart (PA), George Nethercutt (WA), and Rob Simmons (CT), eases the burden of addressing interstate claims in federal court. At the federal level, courts have greater resources and uniform rules. This provides a more appropriate venue for such cases and protects legitimate claimants ability to recover losses.


text:
HHC - Content - 0,5 ml
What is HHC?
HHC, or hexahydrocannabinol, is a cannabinoid found in the cannabis plant, but only in trace amounts. It is therefore currently produced in the laboratory from CBD (cannabidiol) by the process of hydrogenation. During hydrogenation, some of the double bonds are replaced by hydrogen atoms, changing the chemical structure and stability of the molecule. This makes HHC more stable, more durable and less susceptible to heat and UV radiation. Read more about HHC production.
How does HHC work?
As for the effects of HHC, there are no studies yet available that examine the long-term effects on our bodies. We do know that HHC, like other cannabinoids, interacts with our endocannabinoid system, which regulates important bodily functions including sleep, mood, appetite, immune response and memory. Cannabinoids affect this system by binding to endocannabinoid receptors. In particular, HHC binds to CB1 receptors in the central nervous system.
What are the effects of HHC?
According to the available information, HHC can induce feelings of euphoria, relaxation and stimulant effects and alter auditory and visual perception. You can read about other effects and possible risks in our article.
The HHC offer
Here you can choose HHC oils and drops in different concentrations, HHC gummies, HHC vapes, flowers, extracts (HHC hash and dab), cartridges with terpenes from popular varieties and HHC edibles. We will be happy to help you with your selection.
You can also choose the stronger HHC variants, namely HHC-O, HHC-P or HHC-P-O Blend.


text:
This is cheerful. Health authorities want people to lead such prescriptive lives. They simply don't understand that people might want to enjoy themselves.
Record numbers of people are developing "avoidable cancers" because of their lifestyle, despite warnings.....Figures released yesterday show soaring levels of cancers caused by excessive sunbathing, obesity, alcohol and smoking.....The latest figures show almost 9,000 cases of malignant melanoma were diagnosed in 2004 - up from fewer than 6,000 in 1995.....Experts blame the rise in cheap flights to the sun for increased melanoma rates.
So stay home in the dreary English weather. Don't drink to drown your sorrows or over-eat to compensate for being cold. Don't dare have a fag to relieve the stress of it all. Exercise by walking through the endless, sameness of suburbia. And make sure you have these holiday breaks so as not to overwork.
The thing is there are no guarantees. They could still drop dead tomorrow. What is certain is they are alive right now and they are damn well going to make the most of it while it lasts.
General Debate 27 February 2024
1 hour ago


text:
HypoGel® RAM Resins
This resin is functionalized with a modified Rink Amide linker and is ideal for the Fmoc SPPS of peptide amides. Cleavage from this support is achieved with 95% TFA to give peptide amides. This resin is recommended for the synthesis of short peptide amides (10 - 15 residues).
HypoGel® is a hydrophilic gel type resin which combines high capacities with good solvent compatibility. Glycol spacers with n = 5 or 10 EO units separate the reactive sites from the polystyrene matrix and modify the hydrophobic properties of the polystyrene backbone. Due to the spacer effect the functional group shows a higher mobility which results in higher kinetic rates and high resolution NMR spectra from immobilized compounds on the bead. The resin is compatible to a wide range of solvents and in contrast to polystyrene even polar solvents like methanol or ethanol can be used.
These resins show high loading and a hydrophilicity between polystyrene and TentaGel®


text:
N.H. Diocese Supports Civil Unions as a Way to Forestall Marriage Equality
The New Hampshire House last week voted down a bill (HB 437) that would have repealed the state's marriage equality law, and you can read about the vote and the debate which preceded it in this Concord Monitor news story.
Not mentioned in the news story–and actually not mentioned in most of the coverage of this debate–is that New Hampshire's Catholic diocese of Manchester, which opposed marriage equality, has come out in support of civil unions as a way to forestall marriage. According to a PolicyMic.com article,
"Historically, Roman Catholic officials have opposed virtually every regulation, policy, and law proposed to protect LGBT people nationwide, including all proposals for civil unions. However, faced with the choice of either retaining New Hampshire's full marriage law which was signed on 3 June 2009, or else repealing it and replacing it with civil unions instead, church officials decided – for the first time ever – to endorse civil unions for LGBT people."
According to the statement on HB 437 found on the Diocese of Manchester's website:
"The Diocese of Manchester consistently has opposed legislation that would establish civil unions. However, the proposed amendment to HB 437 falls into a category of legislation which the US Bishops have previously considered: bills in civil law which may not reflect the fullness of the Church's teaching, but which nonetheless provide an "incremental improvement" in the current law and a "step toward full restoration of justice." (USCCB, Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship, 32)"
To be clear, the Diocese does not see civil unions as an ideal to be achieved, but as a step toward making sure that full marriage rights are not granted to lesbian and gay couples. Still, it is an interesting development that shows that the Catholic hierarchy can, if they want to, take a different position on the question of rights for lesbian and gay couple other than outright and total opposition to everything.
The Manchester Diocese's policy' decision comes just two weeks after the neighboring Diocese of Portland, Maine, said they would not take an active political role in that state's upcoming referendum on marriage equality. For links to stories on that decision, check out Bondings 2.0's blog posts here and here and here.
Can these decisions be a sign of things to come from other bishops? Is the hierarchy beginning to learn that opposition to marriage equality is not worth the time and investment? Stay tuned.
–Francis DeBernardo, New Ways Ministry