text:
Operating nuclear power plants requires sophisticated technical, industrial, institutional, and legal capacities. Even the most advanced countries can struggle to manage nuclear power when things go wrong, as emphasized by the accident at Japan's Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station—so less advanced nations, such as Iran with its Bushehr facility, can generate grave concerns within their borders and throughout their regions when they adopt nuclear energy. Below, Pervez Hoodbhoy of Pakistan, Yun Zhou of China, and Sulfikar Amir of Indonesia debate this question: How should developing nations balance their growing electricity needs against concerns over their capacity to operate nuclear power sectors?
Experts from emerging and developing countries debate crucial, timely topics related to nuclear energy, nuclear proliferation, and economic development. Each author contributes an essay per round, for a total of nine essays for the entire Roundtable. This feature was made possible by a three-year grant from the Norwegian Foreign Ministry.
Needed: Ability to manage nuclear power
Round 1
Good reasons to worry
Before reactors, appropriate systems
When the public doesn't trust you
Round 2
Conspiracy-mindedness and nuclear machismo
Building public acceptance
Reducing risk through good governance
Round 3
How to get away with almost anything
Reprocessing: Only where appropriate
The transnational dimensions of nuclear risk
Round 1
Good reasons to worry
After the accident at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station, many observers expected that countries seeking to establish nuclear power sectors, or expand existing ones, would ask this question above all: How safe is nuclear energy? Instead, many developing countries still claim that nuclear energy is a solution to their energy woes and have dismissed Fukushima as a freakish, tsunami-induced disaster. Several developing nations—including Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, and Iran—are forging ahead toward the installation of new reactors.
Pakistan, my own country, suffers from severe energy stresses. Blackouts occur daily. Electricity riots have left the government feeling shaken. So Islamabad, buoyed by a $6.5 billion soft loan from China, has just inked a contract to purchase two 1,100-megawatt reactors from the China National Nuclear Corporation for $4.8 billion apiece. The two reactors are slated to operate in close proximity to Karachi, a city whose estimated population is 23.5 million.
The type of reactor that Pakistan will purchase, the ACP-1000, is a new design that has never been installed before or even tested, but the Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission is confident that Karachi faces no danger. Although the Pakistani government places deep faith in Chinese nuclear technology, some Chinese are not so sanguine. A former vice president of the China National Nuclear Corporation was recently quoted as saying, "Our state leaders have put a high priority on [nuclear safety] but companies executing projects do not seem to have the same level of understanding."
Untested reactor designs are by no means the only reason to worry about reactor safety in Pakistan. Another concern is a terrorist attack against a reactor—which, even if officials discount the possibility, is a distinct worry. Religious terrorists have carried out successful attacks on many of Pakistan's highly-guarded military institutions, including the general headquarters of the army, the Mehran naval base, and the Kamra air force base. There is no reason to believe that nuclear reactors would be invulnerable to attack.
Another worrying possibility, though it is also dismissed by officials, is operator error. At a nuclear power plant, there is simply no way for people outside the plant to know about bad practices within it. Indeed, the Chernobyl disaster was the result of imprudent actions on the part of reactor operators, and it underscored the vulnerability of nuclear power plants to poor judgment. These problems could be exacerbated at a Chinese-designed, Pakistani-operated reactor because operators would lack the intimate knowledge of design and software issues that they might have at an indigenous reactor.
Another issue of concern is the prevalence of industrial accidents in Pakistan. Though the country has suffered no single incident on the scale of the 1984 gas leak at Union Carbide's facility in Bhopal, India, industrial accidents occur frequently—partly because individuals who ignore safety standards are rarely punished. Disaster response capabilities such as firefighting are very limited and mobility is hampered by frequently clogged roads.
Even taking all this into consideration, the probability of a serious accident is still low. But what if such an accident were to occur? How well would the machinery of the state respond? On this count, there is ample reason to worry.
The government's response to past disasters has often been poor. Amid the country's 2010 floods, which left one-fifth of Pakistan inundated, the president and prime minister displayed a notable lack of urgency. The National Disaster Management Authority performed sluggishly. Populations downstream from the floods were not given the warnings they needed. Pakistan's ubiquitous armed jihadist groups substituted for the state in many places, just as they had done following the country's 2005 earthquake.
All this bodes ill for Pakistan if a serious accident at a nuclear reactor near Karachi forces an evacuation—which would be extremely chaotic and very different from Japan's disciplined evacuation of the Fukushima area. Pakistan suffers from sharp divisions between haves and have-nots, so widespread looting would be probable. Many people would therefore refuse to evacuate, preferring to wait out the danger. Emergency and law enforcement personnel, who are often poorly trained and demonstrate low motivation, might simply disappear from the scene. Pakistan also suffers from deep ethnic and religious tensions, and it is likely that members of minority groups would receive less help than others during an evacuation (as was true during the floods)—if in fact they received any help at all.
The Pakistani public's awareness of radiation hazards is nearly non-existent. Television stations freely propagate unsubstantiated rumors when reporting on both political and technical matters, so ill-informed views might become widespread during a nuclear disaster, resulting in either complacency or panic. To top things off, low consciousness of safety issues is simply an element of Pakistani culture. Pakistanis often accept high levels of risk and are satisfied to place their faith in God as their protector. Evacuation of Karachi amid a nuclear disaster is a terrible prospect to imagine.
Opaque and surreptitious. To argue against nuclear power in Pakistan is not to deny the severity of the country's electricity challenges, which are entrenched and multifaceted. To begin with, though Pakistan's installed electric capacity of 20 gigawatts is adequate in principle to meet daily average power demand of around 17 gigawatts, a mere 14.3 gigawatts, on average, are actually generated. That is, because of a financial management problem known as circular debt, about 30 percent of existing capacity is not used. Worse, Pakistan's distribution system is both leaky and subject to widespread theft, and these problems can eat up a staggering 25 to 30 percent of total production.
Even if it can address these problems, Pakistan will need to rely on a broad range of energy sources to meet its future needs, ranging from fossil fuels to renewable sources such as hydropower, solar, and wind—but at present, installed wind power amounts to only 50 megawatts, less than one one-thousandth of the estimated potential of the country's "wind corridors." Nuclear energy is no quick fix for these challenges, but the government behaves as if it is one.
Pakistani citizens have had little or no input on nuclear issues such as plant location and safety and the disposition of nuclear waste. This is partly because, in a country where the headlines every day concern terrorism and various other crises, citizens have little time or leisure to formulate and articulate positions on nuclear issues. But it is also because all of Pakistan's nuclear projects, whether civilian or military, are highly opaque. The authorities, pleading national security, strictly control all nuclear regulatory mechanisms and allow little scope for citizen involvement. Individuals not affiliated with the Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission or the Pakistan Nuclear Regulatory Authority are forbidden from monitoring radiation levels near any nuclear facility. People who raise questions about the safety of nuclear power plants are sometimes labeled agents of foreign powers. And when officials sought approval last year for a required environmental impact assessment report for the envisaged Karachi Nuclear Power Plants, they did so surreptitiously, without a public hearing.
No publicly available government study shows that nuclear reactors are the best or lowest-cost option to solve Pakistan's energy problems, and the case for nuclear energy is far from persuasive. But with billions of dollars at stake, commercial interests are working actively to promote these reactor sales. Concerns about Karachi's safety are being put on the back burner. One fears the consequences.
Before reactors, appropriate systems
Roughly four dozen countries that lack nuclear power are considering its adoption, but expressing interest in nuclear power and actually establishing a nuclear sector are different things. This is especially true for developing countries, as a majority of the four dozen are. Nuclear energy is a complex engineering proposition. It requires a major financial commitment. It cannot be justified unless a relatively large electricity grid is already in place. For these reasons among others, the majority of the developing countries that are contemplating the adoption of nuclear power will build no reactors in the foreseeable future.
A few will forge ahead—Turkey, for example, is now preparing for the construction of its first nuclear power facility. But most of the growth in the developing world's nuclear capacity will come in countries, notably China and India, where nuclear power already exists and where economic growth is driving strong electricity demand. In any event, developing countries that do embrace nuclear power—whether they are new entrants such as Turkey or established players such as China—face serious challenges that go beyond engineering, financing, and electricity grids. In particular, they must establish three things: a well-planned, sustainable process for nuclear development, an appropriate framework for safety, and a productive approach toward public attitudes on nuclear power.
A well-planned, sustainable development process establishes realistic expectations about the pace and scale of establishing a nuclear sector. It puts in place reliable procedures for issues such as choosing reactor designs. It encourages continuous review and improvement. Without such a development process, nuclear power programs can become very costly and time-consuming.
Well-functioning frameworks and organizations for nuclear safety can minimize the risks inherent in nuclear power plants. Though improvements in reactor design over the decades have improved safety at power plants, developing countries often must work hard to overcome shortages of qualified, experienced personnel and shortfalls in technical capability.
Public acceptance of nuclear energy is key to the expansion of nuclear sectors and also, ultimately, to their safe operation. In nations where policy making is not transparent, public opinion usually gains little attention at the early stages of nuclear development. This can become a major problem later on.
Challenges for China. The most ambitious nuclear energy state in the world today is China, which operates 20 reactors, is constructing 28 others, and is about to start construction on yet more. But China has faced, and in some cases struggled with, each of the three challenges identified above.
Regarding nuclear development and planning, China has made an extraordinary commitment to nuclear energy—even if plans have been altered somewhat by the accident at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station. In that accident's immediate aftermath, the Chinese government declared that it would not adjust its overall policy on nuclear power development. But it temporarily suspended approvals for new projects and toughened safety requirements as well. It also reduced its goal for installed nuclear capacity. The government now expects that 58 gigawatts of nuclear capacity will be installed by 2020, instead of the 80 gigawatts that were contemplated just before Fukushima. In addition, China has cut back on its plans for building second-generation reactors and has switched instead to third-generation designs. The advanced designs are safer, of course. But the switch has delayed the development of nuclear power in China, made it more expensive than expected, and significantly impacted manufacturers of nuclear equipment. And it has highlighted the fact that China's previous plans for nuclear energy depended too much on second-generation designs.
Regarding safety, China's nuclear sector has maintained a relatively clean record so far. But it is very debatable whether sound safety systems and a robust safety culture have been established within the nuclear industry. Some manufacturers of nuclear safety equipment, for example, once they have obtained all necessary certifications, can become free and easy about following regulations and implementing quality assurance procedures. They are known to purchase substandard raw materials and outsource work to unqualified subcontractors. Likewise, some utility companies neglect quality controls, accepting products from manufacturers that ought to be rejected. China's nuclear regulatory system needs improvement as well. Areas of concern include understaffed work forces for on-site safety inspections, inadequate procedures for on-site inspection and supervision, and a lack of advanced testing technologies and analytical methodologies.
China's government is centralized and its political system is closed. But that doesn't mean that public opinion about nuclear power is irrelevant. True, debate about nuclear power was scattered and disorganized before Fukushima, reflecting the public's low awareness of nuclear power (especially safety issues) and limited opportunities to participate in nuclear decision making. But after Fukushima, the public began to pay more attention. Debate intensified, protests broke out, and some local governments found nuclear projects hindered or even halted by public opposition. Going forward, enactment of China's plans for nuclear development will require strong, sustained public support. To ensure such support, the government should allow greater public participation during siting and licensing processes. Government and industry should respond more actively and transparently to public concerns about nuclear safety or nuclear accidents. (Withholding information and covering up mistakes only undermine public trust in government.) The government should also seek to educate the public about nuclear energy and safety; educational initiatives will be more effective if they are carried out by the government instead of electrical utilities.
Hard work. Around the world, safety concerns surrounding nuclear power have intensified as a result of Fukushima. But because of some developing countries' huge electricity demand and severe environmental stresses, the world nuclear industry has managed to keep moving forward. Still, any developing country that is considering the development or expansion of a nuclear energy sector must be aware of the challenges involved. These include engineering complexity and financial demands. They also include public acceptance, an issue that should be studied carefully ahead of time. Nuclear energy also requires a comprehensive development plan, one that takes into account a country's electricity demand, energy mix, economic characteristics, technical capabilities, geography, and so forth. In the realm of safety, developing countries can borrow regulations, rules, and standards from vendor countries—but challenges will remain. Some standards won't be applicable, or will need to be applied differently in their new environments, and standards in any event must continuously evolve. Developing nations must understand that, if they are to establish a strong safety culture, a well-functioning quality assurance system, and an effective system for regulatory enforcement and supervision, a great deal of time and effort is required.
When the public doesn't trust you
One day in August 2013, hundreds of motorcycle-riding students converged on a government office in Indonesia's South Bangka District. They came with a demand—not that tuition increases be reversed, or that job opportunities for young people be prioritized, but that the district head denounce plans to construct the country's first nuclear power plant on Bangka Island. The district head demurred, but an antinuclear movement persists on Bangka Island and in much of the country. Indonesians simply don't trust their government to get nuclear power right.
Following the accident at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station, one might have expected nuclear power to lose much of its appeal. But in many developing countries, Indonesia among them, the desire for nuclear power has remained strong among officials, even if publics may harbor deep concerns about governmental ability to operate nuclear facilities.
To understand the dynamics of nuclear politics in Indonesia, it is useful to understand the nation's recent economic history—this is the backdrop against which the pronuclear and antinuclear camps make their cases. In the last years of the 20th century, Indonesia suffered through a bitter financial crisis. It experienced a few years of malaise thereafter. But over the past decade or so, Indonesia has achieved remarkable economic growth. Due partly to the government's efforts to battle deindustrialization, along with a program of liberalization that has included the opening of domestic markets to international products and investment, Indonesia has become one of the world's more important emerging economies. It is a member of the Group of Twenty (G-20). Its gross domestic product in 2012 was $878 billion—more than nine times its level in 1998, during the depths of the Asian Financial Crisis.
This massive economic expansion has had profound implications for energy demand—and energy has long been a fraught issue in Indonesia. Beginning in the 1970s, during the Suharto regime, Indonesia experienced an oil boom. Oil satisfied the country's energy demand and also became the government's primary means for funding development projects including a program of rapid industrialization. But the regime's reckless management of oil resources led to severe inefficiency in energy production and distribution. By the turn of the century, oil reserves were rapidly depleting, and in 2005 the country became a net importer of oil. Indonesia's electrification rate is around 70 percent, among the lowest rates in Southeast Asia. Major cities such as Jakarta, Bandung, and Surabaya suffer from frequent blackouts. Soaring economic growth is only widening the gap between supply and demand. So the search has intensified for alternative energy sources—nuclear power among them.
Indonesia's experience with nuclear technology dates back to the late 1950s, when the Institute of Atomic Power was established. In the 1960s, a more full-fledged entity—the National Nuclear Power Agency, known as BATAN—was created. A research reactor funded by the US "Atoms for Peace" program was installed. Later, two more research reactors were built. Indonesia developed its capacities in fields such as isotope production for medical and agricultural purposes. Today, Indonesia's decades of experience in operating research reactors would seem to indicate that the country has the capacity to operate power reactors as well.
Plans to develop a nuclear power sector have been discussed since the 1970s. But oil so dominated energy policy under Suharto that little progress was made for decades. In 2004, however, the government adopted a new energy policy according to which nuclear power would account for about 2 percent of electricity production by 2025. Four reactors would be built, producing 4,000 megawatts of electricity among them. Nuclear energy was portrayed as a clean, cost-effective energy source.
The first reactor was to have been completed by 2016 but it has been delayed repeatedly due to antinuclear protests—in particular, protests against nuclear power plants on the highly volcanic island of Java. Facing strong public opposition, the government in 2010 abandoned plans for reactors on Java. Plans now center on Bangka Island. The change has had implications for the project's scale—plans now call for two reactors instead of four, and lower electricity output.
The decision to scale down the nuclear project may seem an appropriate response to public opposition. But the question is why public attitudes toward nuclear power in Indonesia are so dominated by fear of nuclear hazards—a fear that has only intensified since Fukushima, which demonstrated that even a country with a strong safety culture can struggle in the face of a nuclear catastrophe.
In Indonesia, the root of public concern is the government's notoriously poor capacity to ensure public safety and security—as demonstrated, for example, in failed disaster mitigation and in frequent transportation accidents. Public resistance is not rooted in concerns about nuclear technocrats' competence—BATAN has had 50 years of experience operating research reactors. But BATAN isn't the issue. The issue is that the public distrusts the entire institution of government. Indonesians perceive their government as inefficient, poorly coordinated, and widely corrupt. When it comes to operating high-risk technology, these are grave problems. They can only be solved through a program of institutional reform, but an effective reform process can take years.
In an emerging democracy like Indonesia, a nuclear power sector cannot be developed without public deliberation and public acceptance. So until Indonesia's government can improve its efficiency, coordination, and quality of governance—traits that underlie the capacity to operate a nuclear power sector—establishing such a sector will remain a political challenge.
Round 2
Conspiracy-mindedness and nuclear machismo
My Round One essay has attracted a lot of apparently orchestrated criticism in the comments section. Sadly, the commenters don't usefully address the safety issues that surround the untested Chinese nuclear reactors that are to be installed close to Karachi, my home city. Rather, they exemplify the mindset of nuclear nationalists everywhere, especially nuclear officials in countries such as Pakistan and India.
For nuclear nationalists it is quite common to vilify, as agents of foreign powers and nongovernmental organizations, people who are concerned about the safety of nuclear power plants. Even Manmohan Singh, prime minister of India—whom I consider a decent man otherwise—recently raged against protesters at the Kudankulam nuclear power plant and attributed their opposition to the influence of American nongovernmental organizations. (Whom does Singh blame for antinuclear sentiment in the United States—the commies?) Meanwhile, a rightwing Hindu movement called the Sangh Parivar sees a Christian proselytizing hand behind the Kudankulam protests.
All this conspiracy-minded nonsense detracts from serious discussion of nuclear power in developing countries. Yes, more energy is desperately needed, but can the risk of nuclear disaster be made acceptably small? And just how does one define "acceptably?" No single answer exists, and I don't pretend to provide one. But surely people can learn to debate an important issue reasonably, without imputing foul motives to those with whom they disagree.
Concerns about nuclear power are prevalent in every country where the technology exists or is being developed. In a number of developing countries, these concerns are having an impact on policy. We learn from my roundtable colleague Yun Zhou that even energy-hungry China has become less gung ho about nuclear power since Fukushima. The Chinese government now expects that 58 gigawatts of nuclear capacity will be installed by 2020 instead of the 80 gigawatts contemplated earlier, and design requirements are being tightened. Even in a country where dissent is generally not tolerated, public fears about the negative environmental consequences of nuclear power have made some difference. We learn from Sulfikar Amir that nuclear ambitions have been downsized in Indonesia as well—two reactors are now slated to be built there instead of the four reactors planned a few years ago. This stems from public doubt about the government's capacity to ensure public safety and its poor mitigation record following natural disasters.
But Pakistan and India, two nations with abysmal records in disaster management, have simply shrugged off the Fukushima experience. The Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission has just announced that, with Chinese help and financing, it plans over an unspecified (but short) period of time to increase nuclear capacity, which currently amounts to about 700 megawatts, to an astounding 4 gigawatts. India plans by 2020 to increase nuclear capacity from about 6 gigawatts, its current level, to 20 gigawatts.
Why are India and Pakistan bucking the trend? The answer lies partly in economics—but even more in nuclear machismo. Both countries' atomic energy establishments are well-funded and also house large and growing nuclear weapons programs. Massive, rapid expansion of nuclear power is driven by a conviction that all things nuclear—whether bombs or power—are a sign of national virility, success, and progress. But this false belief means that the development of alternative energy sources takes a back seat.
India has only begun to scratch the surface of its abundant wind and solar potential—but the results so far are good. The Ministry of New and Renewable Energy reports that the country has an installed capacity of about 30 gigawatts of renewable grid power (including wind, solar, and a few other categories). Although renewable sources are being utilized at rates far below their potential, they already produce more energy in India than does nuclear power. Pakistan, unfortunately, has hardly begun to develop its wind and solar potential—as I noted in Round One, the total capacity of currently installed windmills is a mere 50 megawatts, which is a pittance compared to the potential 50 gigawatts of power that the country's wind corridors are thought to be capable of producing.
Rapid development of nuclear energy sucks away scarce capital and expertise that developing countries could put to more productive uses. Wind turbines and solar plants, for example—unlike imported turn-key nuclear power plants, which are enormously complex—could be manufactured locally, providing an important stimulus to a nation's economy. But when nuclear energy is conflated with national security strategy, it is very hard for alternative energy to receive the attention it deserves.
Building public acceptance
Sulfikar Amir's Round One essay presents a somewhat extreme example of a fairly typical scenario—one in which a democratic public vetoes a government's plans for nuclear energy.
In any democracy, including an emerging one such as Sulfikar's Indonesia, public acceptance is the first challenge that must be surmounted before nuclear projects can move forward; public opinion must be taken into account and opportunities must be provided for public participation in decision making. In countries with closed, centralized governments, publics are generally excluded from the decision making process. But in the long run, no country can avoid contending with public opinion on nuclear energy. Even within a closed political system, sustainable plans for development of nuclear energy require strong, durable public support.
In many countries with nuclear energy sectors, China and Pervez Hoodbhoy's Pakistan among them, governments have not properly informed their publics about the issues involved in nuclear energy development. Accordingly, public knowledge about nuclear safety in particular and nuclear energy in general is fairly low. In such situations the public will, for a time, simply accept nuclear technology as a given. But this cannot be expected to continue forever.
That is why the development of nuclear power should proceed in parallel with public communication. Governments should offer educational programs on a national level. They should allow public participation during siting and licensing processes. They should respond proactively to concerns about accidents and nuclear safety. Ultimately, any significant decrease in public acceptance of nuclear power could jeopardize goals for developing reactors and fuel cycle facilities.
No novelty. I appreciate Hoodbhoy's essay regarding plans for nuclear energy expansion in Pakistan—but I don't necessarily agree with his worries about the ACP-1000 reactors that Pakistan is slated to import from China. In fact, I find his concern on this point excessive. He refers to the ACP-1000 as "a new design that has never been installed before or even tested." But the ACP-1000 is derived from the French M310 design and borrows passive safety features from the US-designed AP-1000. I do not consider the ACP-1000 some novelty, featuring new design concepts that have never existed before or even been tested. Rather, it is an upgraded version of mature designs.
In any event, Hoodbhoy presents a number of legitimate concerns about nuclear safety and security in an emerging nuclear nation such as Pakistan—and I would argue that my Round One discussion about building sound regulatory systems for nuclear safety is quite applicable to Pakistan. Then again, Hoodbhoy's discussion of nuclear safety in Pakistan is relevant to China too. Recent separatist-oriented terrorism in China has led to increased concern in some quarters about nuclear sabotage there—but governments in all emerging nuclear nations, including China, likely underestimate the risk of nuclear terrorism. The risk of sabotage increases as more power plants are built and more spent fuel is transported, so governments and nuclear industries must acknowledge the potential for nuclear terrorism and take judicious steps to prevent it.
Reducing risk through good governance
All technologies involve risk, but perhaps no technology is perceived as riskier than nuclear energy. Its risks, however, are not solely a function of technical issues—organizational and institutional capabilities play a crucial role as well. For example, though a developing country may utilize technologically advanced reactors, the country's nuclear risk will still be relatively high if institutional preparedness does not measure up. I have argued elsewhere that, in less advanced countries, nuclear energy's risks are more associated with the institutional sphere than with any particular reactor's design and safety systems.
In her first essay, my roundtable colleague Yun Zhou wrote that any nation developing a nuclear energy sector or expanding an existing one must establish three things: a sustainable development process, an appropriate safety framework, and a productive approach toward public opinion. Zhou did not use the term herself, but her prescriptions fall under the rubric of nuclear governance, which I would define as the way in which multiple stakeholders manage nuclear risk. Governments in the developing world must establish good systems for nuclear governance if they are to avoid controversy and maximize their chances to operate nuclear power safely. The foundations of nuclear governance include, from my point of view, at least three things: transparency, accountability, and trust.
Providing appropriate information to the public, as Zhou and Pervez Hoodbhoy have both discussed, is among the most critical issues surrounding the operation of nuclear power plants. Nuclear industries have a tendency to treat much critical information as secret—but the history of nuclear disasters has demonstrated that secrecy only increases the risk of a meltdown when a nuclear power plant experiences a crisis. Nuclear risks are too complex to be managed properly by plant operators alone. Potential hazards must be detected before they turn into crises. This means that nuclear risks must be communicated to the public and external stakeholders must have a chance to recognize risks at an early stage. For developing countries that lack traditions of transparency, establishing transparency in the nuclear realm may be challenging. It is also indispensable.
Accountability, an equally necessary component of nuclear governance, requires that regulators and plant operators, on a regular basis, report to and consult with the public regarding decisions made and actions taken. Accountability is a two-way street. Public assessment of officials' performance must become an essential element of nuclear safety practice and a regulatory framework must be established that facilitates this process. And any healthy system for nuclear accountability requires that civil society groups play an active role in monitoring official performance.
A third key element of nuclear governance is trust, the primary topic of my first roundtable essay. When the public lacks trust in nuclear authorities and plant operators, good nuclear governance is unlikely to be realized. When trust is present, the public and the nuclear industry can engage in balanced communication about nuclear risk (sine qua non for comprehensive risk assessment). Building such trust requires that the public be given ample opportunities to participate in decision making. When such opportunities are withheld, good nuclear governance is not possible—and a nuclear power sector is unlikely to be operated safely.
Round 3
How to get away with almost anything
I was intrigued to learn from Sulfikar Amir's Round One essay that when the Indonesian public, fearing a nuclear disaster of the Fukushima type, insisted that the country's nuclear electricity program be scaled back—the people's demands were largely met. It is difficult to imagine that public opinion could force either the Pakistani or Indian government to similarly change course. Why? Because both countries are wedded to nuclear weapons. Because in both countries, the fires of nuclear nationalism never cease to burn. In both countries, it was opaque civilian nuclear programs that provided a necessary vehicle for the achievement of national ambitions in nuclear weapons. Amid this environment, decisions on civilian nuclear matters are not made in a reasoned, transparent manner, and one cannot be hopeful that things will change soon.
A case in point is the recent decision by Pakistani authorities to install two Chinese-supplied reactors near Karachi, home to more than one of out of 10 Pakistanis. The authorities claimed that national security was at stake and therefore the public could not be engaged in the siting decision (though it must be admitted that only a small segment of the public expressed any concern). An environmental impact assessment was approved by unnamed but handpicked persons—rammed through in order to comply with legal formalities. The Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission official in charge of the new Karachi reactor project told the press, "We requested [the Sindh Environmental Protection Agency] not to hold a public hearing because of international politics." Presumably this meant that nuclear cooperation with the Chinese overpowered all other considerations. In a similar vein, academics from Pakistani universities have in the past been denied permission, for national security reasons, to check radioactivity levels in uranium mines that local communities suspected of posing health hazards.
In India, environmentalists have had some success in mobilizing antinuclear protesters, notably on issues of land acquisition, and the Fukushima disaster energized antinuclear groups like the Konkan Bachao Samiti and the Gandhian group known as the National Alliance of People's Movements. But though Indian activists may have mustered a few thousand protesters on occasion—most notably at the Kundankulam and Jaitapur nuclear reactor sites—they have gained no significant victories. Nothing remotely similar to movements such as European Nuclear Disarmament or the UK-based Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament has emerged in India. The Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses, a conservative Indian think tank, has published this dismissive language on its website: "An antinuclear movement in India would remain largely a marginal movement with sporadic spurts depending on the issue at hand, the site in question, and the political parties involved." Sadly, this seems correct.
This is music to the ears of the global nuclear establishment. In much of the West (and now Japan), the development of nuclear electricity has hit roadblocks because of deeply engaged and aware populations. But in many developing countries—especially those that now possess or aspire to obtain nuclear weapons—no such problem exists. In countries such as these, "building public acceptance" (as the title of Yun Zhou's second roundtable essay would have it) is easy. Publics indoctrinated in the virtues of nuclear weapons let their nations' atomic energy establishments get away with almost anything. Public subsidies are dispensed for nuclear power, but hidden for secrecy reasons, and are thus excluded from the real costs of electricity. Nuclear establishments need not reveal their plans for disaster management, prove these plans' adequacy, develop environmental impact mitigation schemes, or educate the population about radiation hazards. These establishments, operating almost unchallenged, feel little need to make the case for nuclear power over alternative energy technologies. Bureaucracies, shrouded in layer after layer of secrecy and relying on official secrecy acts, can continue to hide from the public gaze their appalling inefficiency and incompetence.
No matter how safe or unsafe nuclear energy in the West might be, it is constantly subjected to challenges from an aroused citizenry. But nuclear power in less open societies remains largely opaque, immune from public scrutiny. Under such conditions, one must expect lower safety standards. It might take more than a Fukushima disaster to change this state of affairs.
Reprocessing: Only where appropriate
The presidents of China and France recently brought renewed attention to the issue of nuclear waste management when they issued a joint statement discussing their nations' plans to establish a commercial reprocessing plant. But waste management has not come under discussion so far in this roundtable, which has focused mainly on public attitudes toward nuclear power. Waste management should not be ignored, however—it is a critical element of any nation's capacity to operate a nuclear sector, and indeed a 2003 MIT study identified waste management as one of four critical challenges (along with cost, safety, and proliferation) that must be overcome if a large expansion of nuclear energy is to occur.
When a nation first considers adopting nuclear power, its nuclear development plan is likely to be modest. Management of spent fuel and other nuclear waste might not seem a pressing concern at that point. But in reality, any nation that establishes a nuclear power sector—particularly a developing nation with limited resources—must devote careful thought to the policies that will govern long-term management of waste.
To date, no country in the world has implemented a permanent solution for managing nuclear waste in either of its two main forms: the spent fuel that emerges directly from reactor cores and the high-level radioactive waste that results when spent fuel is reprocessed. Establishing a permanent repository for either spent fuel or high-level waste requires vast geological resources and often encounters public resistance. Reprocessing spent fuel allows a portion of the fuel to be reused, which reduces the overall volume of waste—but it presents its own challenges.
Establishing a long-term policy of reprocessing spent fuel is natural enough for a large developing nation such as China—a country with tremendous projected energy demand, a huge commitment to nuclear energy, and a strong infrastructure in science and technology. But reprocessing is a complex and uneconomical process compared to interim storage of spent fuel. It requires huge financial inputs, a fairly strong science and technology infrastructure, a consistent national energy policy, and cooperation with other countries on advanced nuclear technology. So smaller developing countries might choose to forego reprocessing. For that matter, nations that don't intend to establish large-scale nuclear energy programs and that lack the geological resources to establish a permanent repository might choose to depend on interim, rather than permanent, storage of spent fuel.
Ultimate solutions to the problem of nuclear waste may one day be identified. Nations able to do so should carry out research and development that may hasten that day. For now, though, many emerging countries must be satisfied with dry storage of spent fuel, on-site or off-site, as an interim solution to the problem of nuclear waste.
The transnational dimensions of nuclear risk
When Indonesia announced plans several years ago to build nuclear power reactors on Java Island—only a few days after Java's Merapi volcano had erupted—the news shocked many Indonesians, especially those living on the island. But the announcement also sparked concern in neighboring countries, most notably Singapore, a densely populated city-state where 5.6 million people are packed into less than 700 square kilometers.
Singapore knows very well how it feels when neighbors export their pollution. Singaporeans already suffer through severe haze on an annual basis due to forest fires on Indonesia's Sumatra Island. So Singapore had good reason to worry about a disaster at a power plant on Java, and has even more reason to worry now that Indonesia's plans for nuclear power have shifted to Bangka Island, which lies even closer to the city-state.
Nuclear energy's risks are usually conceived of as national risks, but nuclear power possesses a transnational dimension as well. The Chernobyl disaster provides a dramatic example of nuclear hazards traveling from one country to another—and though Chernobyl was a worst-case scenario, it could easily be replicated in Southeast Asia. Nuclear risks—including the dangers surrounding nuclear waste, which Yun Zhou discussed in her third essay—simply cannot be confined within individual countries.
Across Southeast Asia, planning for nuclear energy has quickened over the last decade or so, and a number of countries in the region continue to see nuclear energy as viable despite the Fukushima disaster. At the moment, no nuclear power plants exist in Southeast Asia, except for the Philippines' abandoned Bataan facility—but, in addition to Indonesia, Thailand and especially Vietnam have proceeded fairly far with plans to construct nuclear power stations.
The construction of a nuclear plant anywhere in the region will strongly motivate other governments to build their own facilities. The logic is simple. If only one country in the region has a nuclear power plant, only that country will enjoy the benefits. But the geography of the region dictates that many nations will share the risks—Southeast Asia is a "community of risk," an area where physical proximity means that hazards can easily spread. This means that nuclear power "proliferation" is probable: Why would governments endure exposure to nuclear risk without taking advantage of nuclear energy's benefits?
What's needed is for neighboring states to develop a strong regulatory framework for managing risk at a regional level, a system that would take into account nuclear energy's transnational dimensions and whose main goal would be an equitable distribution of benefit and risk. A regional framework would include an agreement about building national systems for standard emergency response that neighboring countries could accept. It would establish a network of resources—manpower, technical knowledge, financial support—that could be circulated across the region. Last but not least, it would require implementing the ASEAN Power Grid project. This project would facilitate electricity sharing among member states, including the electricity generated by nuclear reactors.
Establishing such a framework will be no easy task in Southeast Asia. Nations in the region are quite diverse in terms of their national interests, institutional capacities, and desire for nuclear power. Their diversity will complicate negotiations toward a regional framework. Nonetheless, governing nuclear risk should not be left to individual states. Risk can best be managed if neighboring countries work together to further their common interests.


text:
Defense Analyst: "We're in a technological race with ourselves"
Reading through a NY Times story about defense cuts led me to one of the most, oh I don't know, stupid statements it has been my misfortune to read in a while (one of the joys of being a blogger is I don't have to dress up my comments – stupid is stupid).
And apparently it passes for penetrating analysis. The thrust of the story, or at least the claim made in the story, is that the Pentagon has made no plans for the sequestration cuts mandated by the failure of the Supercommittee.
To be clear, DoD is working on the first $450 billion in cuts mandated by the Obama Administration. Those will already cut deeply into its capabilities over the next few decades.
This new round of cuts will go beyond "fat" and cut into muscle and bone. An idea of where cuts will have to be made is provided by some defense analysts:
They laid out the possibility of cutbacks to most weapons programs, a further reduction in the size of the Army, large layoffs among the Defense Department's 700,000 civilian employees and reduced military training time — such as on aircraft like the F-22 advanced jet fighter, which flies at Mach 2 and costs $18,000 an hour to operate, mostly because of the price of fuel.
Other possibilities include cutting the number of aircraft carriers to 10 from 11 — the United States still has more than any other country — as well as increased fees for the military's generous health care system, changes in military retirement, base closings around the country and delayed maintenance on ships and buildings.
And that brings us to a statement I find difficulty characterizing as anything but stupid. Perhaps to be less provocative, I ought to characterize it as woefully uninformed. I'll emphasize it for you:
Right now, the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, the most expensive weapons program in history, is the top target for cuts. (The Pentagon plans to spend nearly $400 billion buying 2,500 of the stealth jets through 2035.) Other potential targets include the Army's planned ground combat vehicle and a "next-generation" long-range bomber under development by the Air Force.
As a result, the military industry is already in full alarm. "The Pentagon has been cutting weapons programs by hundreds of billions of dollars for three years now," said Loren B. Thompson, a consultant to military contractors. "There's not much left to kill that won't affect the military's safety or success."
Other analysts argued that the United States had such overwhelming military superiority globally that it could easily withstand the cuts, even to the point of eliminating the Joint Strike Fighter. "We have airplanes coming out of our ears," said Gordon Adams, who oversaw military budgets in the Clinton White House. "We're in a technological race with ourselves." Nonetheless, he said, the automatic cuts make life difficult for Pentagon budget planners and are "a terrible way to manage defense."
No … we're not in a "technological race with ourselves". And yes, we have lots of airplanes. Worn out airplanes two or three decades old that have been to war for a decade.
Right now the Russians are developing a very good 5th generation fighter, the T-50 (also known as the PAK FA). The Chinese 5th generation aircraft is the J-20. We, on the other hand stopped a planned buy of F-22s at 180 out of 2,000. And now we're talking about cutting the F-35 (a buy of 2400 and supposedly the fighter to fill the gap left by the curtailment of the F-22 buy) as well? That's national defense suicide.
If we cut the JSF, in 10 years we'll have the same 4th generation aircraft we have now as our front line of defense against the newest generation of fighters that you can bet both Russia and China will export. Ours will be technologically inferior.
Yes, we enjoy a technological edge now. But that is because we've always made its maintenance a national security priority. What Gordon Adams is trying to do is wave away the need to maintain that edge with an absurdly simplistic and utterly incorrect "we're in a technological race with ourselves".
What we do now will effect our national security for decades to come. These fighters are planned to be the front line of defense for about 40 years. And while an F/A 18 is a hot jet in 2011, it will not be a hot jet in 2031 when refined and technologically superior T-50 and J-20 aircraft will command any airspace in which they fly.
For those who don't understand what that means, it means no close air support for troops on the ground. It means an enemy having air superiority over a battlefield (or at least air parity) and making our ground troops vulnerable to air attack for the first time since the Korean War.
It means we'll have lost the technological race that is required to maintain air dominance and will be hard pressed to catch up anytime soon.
The old term "penny wise and pound foolish" comes to mind. We're about to validate that saying. And the lack of leadership from this administration in outlining priorities concerning national defense and our future is terrifying. Instead of making national defense a priority, this administration would spend elsewhere.
The technological edge we've maintained over the decades is a perishable thing. There are other countries out there actively trying to steal it from us.
And we have so-called defense analysts like Gordon Adams making stupid – yes there's that word again – statements like "we're in a technological race with ourselves".
We make further cuts, such as those demanded by sequestration, at our peril. One of the primary functions of government, as outlined in our Constitution, is to provide for the national defense. It should be one of, if not the primary focus of any national government. To say we're playing with fire with deeper cuts than those already contemplated is an understatement. If you're comfortable with your grandson or granddaughter flying 40 year old jets in the near future against technologically superior enemies who we are getting ready to abandon the field too in 2011, then you'll be happy to support cutting defense to the bone now.
Twitter: @McQandO
F-35: Last Manned Fighter?
Adm. Mike Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, seems to think that may be the case.
So, what the aviation side of this is, I think, is very much focused on this change. And I think we're at the beginning of this change. I mean, there are those that see JSF as the last manned fighter — or fighter-bomber, or jet. And I'm one of — you know, I'm one that's inclined to believe that. I don't know if that's exactly right. But, this all speaks to the change that goes out, you know, many — obviously, decades, including how much unmanned we're going to have and how it's going to be resourced.
I'm not one inclined to believe that necessarily (at least not with the technology today). Although I did read that the Air Force will, this year for the first time, train more UAV pilots than fighter pilots, I think there will always be a role for fighter pilots in combat. Why? Because of the air superiority role. UAVs – drones if you prefer – can fulfill the close air support role, and even a tactical and strategic bombing role. But, at least with the technology we have today, I simply can't see an unmanned "fighter" having the advantage over a manned fighter in the air superiority role.
And without air superiority, you don't fly UAVs.
Here's someone who agrees with Mullen:
I guess I'm with Mullen; there are currently jobs that manned warplanes can do that drones can't perform (human pilots are more visually capable than even the best drones, for example), but a) drones are getting better, b) drones are so much cheaper, and c)taking the pilot out means that you can do a lot of funky, interesting things with an advanced airframe. This isn't to say that the F-35 (or even the F-22) have no role; they'll continue to be useful frames for the jobs they're intended to do for a substantial period of time. But I don't think there's a next "next generation" of fighter aircraft.
Addressing b) above, things like this don't help the manned fighter side. But then "cheap" doesn't always translate into "most effective" either.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
GoFit 10 lb Adjustable Ankle Weights
Product Information:
Boost your lower body training with GoFit® Adjustable Ankle Weights. Attach each 10 lb weight to your ankles to add resistance that helps tone and shape your lower body, including your inner and outer thighs.
- Add resistance to your lower body training
- Provides a great workout to the outer and inner thighs
- Includes two 5-lb weights
- 90-day manufacturer's warranty
- Model: GF-10W
- GoFit
Country of Origin: ChinaWeb ID: 11906262
Customer Reviews:
Rated 4.5 out of 5�by 10 reviewers.
Rated 5 out of 5�by TRAILBOSS WEIGHTS GOOD QUALITY.............EASY WEIGHT ADJUSTMENT............GREAT SET F WEIGHTS FOR MY REHAB July 9, 2016
Rated 4 out of 5�by WJW Ankle weights We appreciate the flexibility/adjustability of the ankle weights we've received, but it was very difficult to operate the zipper at first with all the weights shipped in the pockets. Other than that these are just what we had hoped they would be. The associate that helped me with the online ordering kiosk at the store was very helpful and extremely knowledgable and efficient. November 3, 2015
Rated 5 out of 5�by Jim Weights as described Weights were as described. Just what I needed. Delivered on time. September 9, 2015
Rated 4 out of 5�by Workout1 Strap broke I love this set, but after only three weeks of use one of the Velcro straps broke off. Luckily I know how to sew and was able to fix it, but still it was a bit disappointing. June 24, 2015
Rated 5 out of 5�by TheBear Great product for the price Easy to put on, easy to adjust the weight in one pound increments, comfortable to wear. Highly recommend. The description is a bit misleading, stating: "Attach each 10 lb weight to your ankles..." however, immediately below that in the listed features is: "two 5-lb weights" so it isn't too hard to figure out. June 9, 2015
Rated 5 out of 5�by doompdoomp Just what I needed Recovering from a knee injury. The adjustable weights are perfect. May 9, 2015
Rated 2 out of 5�by kneerehab Not an accurate description on the product This product is only sold online and not in stores. The description says "Attach each 10lb weight to your ankles to add resistance that helps tone and shape..." The box says 10 lb pair. I expected to have 10 lbs per ankle based on the online product description. To make things worse I weighed the overall product and it did not equal 5 lbs. It was 4.75 lb The product is comfortable and nice to use for rehabilitation. It just isn't what I thought I was buying. October 24, 2014
Rated 5 out of 5�by riley Great product These weights are awesome - I wanted something to wear while walking or doing cardio and due to a back injury was not allowed to wear a weighted vest. It is very easy to adjust the weight in each foot - just unzip the holder, pull the weight out, re-zip and you're good to go. They tend to slide down a bit even while wearing shoes, so you might have to play around with which weights you take out or rearrange the ones you have in there. Definitely recommend if you're looking for a little bit more out of your cardio and daily movement. January 17, 2014
Rated 5 out of 5�by Petras Great Product Was in need of ankle weights for physical therapy treatments at home. These were very similar to those used at the PT office - but had the added ability to delete weight (sissy-boy needed to make them lighter - for now). Quality seems good and velcro straps seem durable. Hope to get a lot of use out of them, since they work great. January 2, 2013
Rated 5 out of 5�by Shoes No complaint Exactly as advertised. Weights slide in and out of pouches easily. Velcro bands hold the wieights firmly in place. After discounts and free shipping, best value I could find. Order arrived quickly. December 31, 2012
1-10 of 10


text:
The ink on the 2014 NFL draft is still drying, but that won't keep us from looking ahead to the 2015 draft with a fresh mock.
An early first-round mock draft has to be taken with some context, so here are a few ground rules.
1. Jameis Winston says he's not entering the draft this year, so I'm not putting him in any mock drafts at this time.
2. The draft order is based on the 2014 draft order (updated for trades). This is the only fair way I know to list draft order so early in the process. Once updated Super Bowl odds come out, I'll begin using those for my draft order.
3. This is based on current team needs immediately after the 2014 draft, taking into account upcoming free agents and areas of need that weren't addressed in this offseason.
A lot will change between now and then, but the 2015 class is anchored by rock-solid quarterback Marcus Mariota, a freak pass-rusher in Randy Gregory and another (!) stud offensive tackle from Texas A&M in Cedric Ogbuehi.
Let this be your hype tape for the summer season, as these players are driving draft coverage right now.


text:
Spinach and Blue Cheese Salad RecipeRead Reviews Be the first to add a review
5 2 5
A simple dressing made of currant jelly and balsamic vinegar coats this colorful salad, sprinkled with crunchy pine nuts. If you like blue cheese, you'll love this refreshing toss. —Grace Sandvigen, Rochester, New York
Recommended: 30 Fall Harvest Salads
- 1/2 cup red currant jelly
- 3 tablespoons balsamic vinegar
- 6 cups fresh baby spinach
- 2 pints fresh strawberries, quartered
- 1 cup mandarin oranges, drained
- 1/2 medium red onion, thinly sliced
- 1/2 cup crumbled blue cheese
- 1/2 cup pine nuts, toasted
- For dressing, heat jelly in a small saucepan over low heat, stirring until smooth. Remove from the heat; stir in vinegar.
- In a large bowl, combine the spinach, strawberries, oranges, onion and blue cheese. Drizzle with dressing and toss to coat. Sprinkle with pine nuts. Yield: 12 servings.
Originally published as Blue Cheese Spinach Salad in Taste of Home February/March 2006, p37
Reviews for Spinach and Blue Cheese Salad
Please Log In or Join to add a rating and review.
Click stars to rate
Any changes to your rating or review will appear where you originally posted your review
Reviewed Feb. 7, 2011
"I've made this salad many times and everyone always loves it."
Reviewed Jun. 17, 2010
"Whenever I bring this salad people want the recipe. It is the only salad my family wants me to bring for family get together.I use feta cheese instead of blue cheese, and sunflower seeds instead of pine nuts."


text:
Strathholme when it was 15man
Strathholme when it was 15man
Let's look at the test results. You are a horrible person. It says right here, you're a horrible person. We weren't even testing that. Don't let the horrible person thing get you down though. Science justified your parents choice to abandon you.
Eugenik - Tchondrius
Level 80 Naxxramas on my Hunter. Fun times. I used to pug every week 25 man and got all of my cryptstalker and the bad ass gun from KT before I started raiding with an actual guild.
ubrs haha back at 60. was awesome
- - - Updated - - -
how the hell do you see anything?
Wrath baby here so Naxx pugs for me as well. Got into a raiding guild and started tanking for Ulduar. Game hasn't felt as epic since those first few weeks of Ulduar.
On a hunter, raiding Razor Hill in Durotar on patch 1.4.0 day when they released pvp ranking system.
If you go by today's definitions; UBRS back at lvl 60 when it was 15-man. However, no one back then actually viewed 15-man as a 'raid', so yeah, I guess Molten Core a few months after launch would have to be my final answer. ^^
Karazhan, healing Moroes. Garrote thing was a pain omg.
My first dungeon was Gnomeregan and for some reason because I was still a noob, for months I thought that the entrance to Gnomeregan was the Tram in SW :/ >_<
My transmog & misc. blog!
THIS ! Awesome how 40 ppl. were wrecked by these to Molten GiantsMolten Core - we wiped at the first 2 mobs
I start with ICC
MC, or Scholo, if you count that.
have quite a few fond memories during vanilla... though not necessarily fond memories OF vanilla.
ZG when i was only level 58 on my resto druid. I begged my guild and they brought me in.
UBRS 15, at level 52? Don't remember. But far below level 60.
The first "real" raid was MC 1 Day after hitting level 60, with quite poor gear. It was terrible, but after long fights and wipes we managed to kill even Lucifron!
Bastion of twilight was first time I raided. Beginning of cata obv, when it was only BoT and Bwd out


text:
-T / T / +T | Comment(s)
Friday, April 26, 2013
LOT Returning 787s to Service in June
Polish national carrier LOT is resuming flights for its two grounded Boeing 787s in June, following FAA approval of Boeing's redesigned lithium-ion battery system.
(LOT Polish Airlines 787. Photo, courtesy of Boeing.)
The worldwide fleet of 787s has been grounded since Jan. 16, following incidents involving overheating of the aircraft's battery system on separate flights operated by Japanese carriers Japanese Airlines (JAL) and All Nippon Airways (ANA).
Boeing proposed a redesigned battery system with a steel enclosure to prevent any level of overheating from affecting passengers or aircraft systems, which was approved by FAA last week. Earlier this week, teams of engineers from Boeing have begun helping customers install the new system on their grounded 787s.
LOT plans to begin flying its 787s from Chicago to Warsaw in June, and New York-Warsaw beginning in July. The airline is scheduled to receive its third 787 in July.


text:
USA TouchPoints: An Agency's Perspective
February 15, 2012
David Shiffman, senior vice president, research director, MediaVest, provided an overview of USA TouchPoints as an innovative new planning and consumer insights tool for cross-platform campaigns.
Members Only Content
This content is available to ANA Members only. Please login below or create an account.
You may already be a member. Find out if your company is already an ANA member.


text:
Push Presents?
This is the conversation that went down in my house today…
Husband: *reaching into the refrigerator * We should get one of those soda wraparound thingies for the fridge. They probably sell them at Bed Bath and Beyond in the As Seen on TV section.
Me: Well, if we're talking about As Seen on TV products, I want a Swivel Store first.
Husband: *In loud Oprah-like voice* PUSH PRESENT!!
For those of you who aren't familiar with the term "push present" it refers to a gift a mother might receive from her partner upon giving birth to their child. According to Wikipedia, the term first appeared in print in 1992. Since that time it has become somewhat of a cultural phenomenon. Some moms have come to expect they will receive a gift upon delivering a baby. It's a quid pro quo: baubles in exchange for 9 months of carrying baby. Of course, a push present could be any number of things but generally the favored item tends to be jewelry. I'm not certain about this but I'd be willing to bet that my grandmothers didn't get diamond earrings when they gave birth to their babies. I'm curious when this whole idea really evolved. Did jewelers everywhere unite in the early 90′s? Did they conduct clandestine meetings behind the jewelry counters and develop marketing campaigns targeting new moms? Is it akin to the Sweetest Day holiday (a contrived holiday that I'd never heard of before living in Buffalo and am convinced exists solely to boost greeting card sales)? Also, does the ante go up with the more babies you have? For example, I am expecting our third child. Does that mean my push present should proportionately reflect three deliveries? And what about multiples? Or extra big babies? Or late babies? So many questions!
I've never received a push present. In fairness, my husband was only recently made aware of the phenomenon. I didn't get any precious metal but I did receive support, guidance, love and help changing diapers. Hmm, diamonds or diaper changes? I think I'd still take diaper changes believe it or not. I'm not one to turn away a gift (husband, read that line again) but I also think it's silly to expect presents in exchange for a baby. I think the gesture is sweet as long as it doesn't get carried away (like so many gestures seem to do these days).
What about you? Did you give or receive a push present? Were you disappointed if you didn't get any bling upon the arrival of your child? Should my husband be picking up a Swivel Store right this very moment?!
Stop over at Moms Like Me and weigh in on the discussion!


text:
Takeover Group Makes Final Dell Offer as Icahn Looms
NEW YORK ( TheStreet) -- Dell's
Michael Dell and Silver Lake are now offering shareholders an extra 10-cents to their initial $13.65 a share takeover offer and will also pay out a 13-cent special dividend if shareholders accept their bid.
The new offer comes with big changes to Dell's near six-month takeover. A shareholder vote scheduled for later Friday will be adjourned until Sept.12 and the record date on the vote will be changed to August 13.
More importantly, a special committee tasked with maintaining fairness in the process of the struggling PC-maker's takeover has caved to the buyout consortium's demands.
In late July, Silver Lake and Michael Dell asked that, along with a bid increase, Dell's special committee agreed to revise its merger agreement so absentee votes at the shareholder meeting aren't counted against the takeover consortium.
The special committee had refused such demands earlier in the week, however, Silver Lake's 13-cent special dividend may have changed its mind. Dell will also pay out its 8-cent quarterly dividend and the company has agreed to significantly reduce a breakup fee on the takeover.
"The Committee is pleased to have negotiated this transaction, which provides as much as $470 million of increased value, including the next quarterly dividend that will now be paid regardless of when the transaction closes," Alex Mandl, Chairman of the special committee said in a statement.
While subtle, a changed record date and merger agreement could allow the buyout consortium to finally win over undecided voters in the buyout process. Absentee voters, who counted against their offer, now won't count at all.
The move indicates the takeover consortium may finally win control of Dell, amid fierce opposition from billionaire activist investor Carl Icahn, who is offering shareholders a $14 a share self-tender for about 72% of Dell's shares.
In July, Icahn said he would add a warrant to his tender offer for the majority shares. The warrant, which Icahn says is worth up to $4 a share to current investors, will give Dell shareholders the right to buy one Dell share within the next seven years for every four shares they tender to his offer.
Icahn said earlier in August he would sue Dell if it changes the record date on its buyout vote. Given a smaller breakup fee and the need to now convince more shareholders to vote against Dell's takeover, the activist may have to consider new changes to his competing takeover efforts.


text:
Beautiful Minds: Spreading her wings
Friday, March 30, 2012
Growing up poor in a lower-class family in Venezuela, Monica Garcia-Perez had no inkling that she someday would hold degrees from three different universities on three separate continents. All she knew is that she didn't want to clean house for anybody.
"I was the first in my family from my generation to go to university and the only one to go to graduate school," said Garcia- Perez who attended public grade school because it was free. She remembers telling her grandmother how she hated cleaning the house and her grandmother told her that if she was going to be able to afford to hire someone to clean for her, she'd have to get a good education.
Garcia-Perez parlayed that education into a ticket that would take her places she never dreamed. By achieving excellent grades and working hard, she earned scholarships and fellowships and never once had to incur debt.
Today Garcia-Perez is a tenure-track assistant professor in the Department of Economics at St. Cloud State University and is conducting research on a topic not only near to her heart, but of great significance.
Towards the end of the year, García-Pérez is expected to publish research regarding child health outcomes of immigrant children and children of immigrants. Garcia-Perez and her husband, Darin Cort, were expecting their first child, Annabel, as this edition of Outlook went to press.
The importance of her research is tied to a major national demographic shift. First- and second-generation children of immigrants are the fastest-growing segment of the population. Understanding health-care access and health outcomes will have political, social and public-policy implications. Economists and other academics have explored immigrant health issues in the past, but few have examined these issues through succeeding generations, said García-Pérez.
Among the questions she is studying: Why do non-citizen Hispanics and Asians self-report higher levels of health among their children despite lower access to traditional health care? She also looks at the use of social networks, entrepreneurship, and immigration effects on local economies.
Garcia-Perez was 21 when she graduated with a degree in economics from the Universidad Central de Venezuela in 1999. Thanks to a mother who pushed her to achieve good grades, a father whose hard work allowed her to afford her books and daily expenses and professors who became her mentors, she realized she could further her education anywhere in the world. It wasn't long before she was off to get her master's degree in economics from the University College London. From there, she came to the United States to obtain her Ph.D. degree in Economics from the University of Maryland – College Park, a top 20 economic school.
The process of applying for schools as an international student was overwhelming, but Garcia-Perez was fortunate to land a graduate assistantship with the U.S. Census Bureau that not only provided her with needed finances, but also helped hone her desire to research issues important to immigrants.
"The Center for Economic Studies was the perfect platform for me," she explained. While many in her department were concerned about purely the "numbers," Garcia-Perez was intrigued by the stories behind them.
Garcia-Perez hopes to have a draft of her research completed by this summer and published toward the end of the year. She also is expected to present her findings at a meeting of the American Health Economists at the University of Minnesota in June.
She said her parents and family back home are incredibly happy about her achievements. Her success has even motivated her mother to earn an advanced degree in economics as well as her sister.
And Garcia-Perez hopes to mentor others, as she has been mentored. She has brought a group of Latino Girl Scouts to St. Cloud State to show them that achieving a degree in higher education is possible no matter your situation or means.
For all of her success there is one dream Garcia-Perez hasn't achieved: she still does her own house cleaning.


text:
Old Series Ordnance Survey Author: John Rocque First Published: 1746 ISBN: 0 903541 16 5 Chart of the routes taken by Bonnie Prince Charlie in Great Britain and the marches of his army and of the English. The sieges are distinguished as are the battles that were fought in this enterprise more information... Author: John Rocque First Published: 1748 ISBN: 0 903541 21 1 This is the sixth volume in the series of eight and covers the Welsh counties (except for small parts of Flintshire, Radnorshire and Eastern Monmouthshire, and including parts of Cheshire, Herefordshi more information... Reproduction of maps of the counties have been published as part of an expanding series. The Yorkshire Rose This is the seventh volume in the series of eight and covers the North Central England (Cheshire, Derbyshire, most of Flint, Leicestershire, Northamptonshire, Shropshire and Staffordshire, southern La more information... Each pack has been faithfully reproduced on thick card and contains an introduction; both are contained in a card packet similar to those found in modern playing cards. Author: Pieter Van Den Keere First Published: 1605 ISBN: 0 903541 00 9 The 1850s had seen a growth in the demand for universal knowledge and with it the establishment of a free public library system. Publishers were not slow to grasp the implications of the Public L more information... Not all of us have plan chests in our houses! The maps concerned have been faithfully reproduced in the original scale (with the exception of one large scale map that has been slightly reduced) on high quality paper and case bound in A4 format together with a dust jacket.This publication contains a collection of the most important maps published during the period. 26 sheets plus an introduction by the late R A Skelton, sometime Superintendent of the Map Room of the B more information...This is an extract from A Map of the County of Sussex from an Actual Survey made in the years 1823 and 1824 by C & I Greenwood. This map is part of the collection 250 Years of Mapmaking in the Count more information... Atlas of the British Isles Author: Filippo Morghen First Published: 1768 ISBN: 0 903541 43 2 British Colonies in North America Index of the Plan of the Cities of London and Westminster and Borough of Southwark
Playing Cards | Ordnance Survey | Antique Maps | A to Z | John Rocque | American Colonies | maps home


text:
Shop officially licensed Boston Celtics watches. These attractive timepieces will make sure you are never late for game time. With mens, womens, and kids styles, these collectible watches are perfect for all Celtic fans.
New Items Coming Soon!
Can't find what you are looking for? Make a product Suggestion »
Save 10% when you sign up for our store newsletter! Privacy Policy
No Thanks
*Subscribers will be eligible to receive future promotional emails.
Privacy Policy


text: Staff on December 26, 2012 0 Comments Who doesn't love their slow cooker? If you don't have one, I would highly suggest you get one ASAP. You can just throw all of your ingredients in, turn it on, and when you get home from work or just a day out having fun with friends or family, dinner is ready! And as an added bonus, your home smells amazing. The Nesco 6 qt Porcelain Roaster with Non-Stick Cookwell and Glass Lid is perfect for any size meal. You can slow cook, cook, roast, bake and steam in this guy. Nesco Porcelain Roaster The Hamilton Beach Portable Slow Cooker is perfect for the holidays or anytime you are making something to take to a party or potluck. Portable Slow Cooker I'd like to share with you some of my favorite slow cooker recipes. Chicken Tortilla Soup 1 lb boneless, skinless chicken breasts 1 can (15 oz) diced tomatoes 1 can (10 oz) enchilada sauce 1 medium onion, chopped 1 can (4 oz) diced green chiles 1 can (14.5 oz) chicken broth 1 can (15 oz) whole kernel corn 1 clove garlic, minced 1 Tb dried cilantro 2 cups water 1 Tsp cumin ½ Tsp chili powder 1 Tsp salt ¼ Tsp pepper 1 bay leaf Dump all ingredients into the crock pot and cook on high 4-5 hours. Remove bay leaf and discard. Lift out the chicken pieces and shred. Put shredded chicken back into soup. Serve with tortilla chips and grated cheese, or your own favorite toppings! One Pot Bean Dinner 1 lb ground beef 12 oz package of bacon, fried and chopped 1 chopped onion 2 cans pork & beans 1 can kidney beans 1 cup ketchup 1/4 cup brown sugar 3 Tb white vinegar 1 Tsp salt Dash of pepper Brown beef in skillet and drain fat. Put in crockpot. Stir in remaining ingredients. Stir together well. Cover and cook on low in crockpot for 4 hours, or high for a shorter time. Hawaiian Crock Pot Chicken 4-6 boneless, skinless chicken breasts 1 (16.5 oz) can crushed pineapple 1 (16.5 oz) bottle archer farms Hawaiian style barbeque sauce (found at Target) Place breasts in crock pot, pour pineapple on top of chicken and then pour sauce over all. Cook on low for 6 hours. Mexican Crock Pot Tacos 2 frozen chicken breasts 2 cans black beans, rinsed 2 bottles salsa Throw above ingredients in a crock pot and cook on low for 8 hours. Shred chicken and stir together. Serve in hard or soft shells with taco toppings (lettuce, sour cream, etc). Chicken with Black Beans and Cream Cheese 4-5 boneless chicken breasts 1 (15.5 oz) can black beans 1 (15 oz) can corn 1 (15 oz) jar salsa, any kind 1 (8 oz) package cream cheese Well, writing this made me hungry. Good thing it's almost lunchtime. I hope you'll give these recipes a try. And if you do, please let me know what you think! I'd also love it if you'd share your favorite crock pot recipes. Just leave a comment below!


text:
Branstrom – Rudden
ESCANABA – Julie Anne Branstrom became the bride of Chad William Rudden during an early afternoon wedding ceremony that took place at Central United Methodist Church in Escanaba. Rev. Scott Harmon officiated the nuptials.
Following the ceremony, a reception in honor of the newlyweds was held at the Danforth Place.
Meryl Kohlman, a friend of the bride, served as matron of honor. Bridesmaids were: Cheyenna McCrite, Anna Sargent, and Sam Brunette, all friends of the bride; Melissa Kositzky, sister of the groom; and Keia Brunette, sister-in-law of the bride.
Andy Branstrom, brother of the bride, stood as best man. Groomsmen were: Tim Waeghe and Eric Reim, both cousins of the groom; Steve Kositzky, brother-in-law of the groom; Kurtis Schroeder, a friend of the couple; and Jason Branstrom, brother of the bride.
Seating the guests were Carolyn Pelto and Becca Gustafson, both friends of the bride. Ring bearers were Blake Branstrom, nephew of the bride, and Easton Kositzky, nephew of the groom. Flower girl was Michaela Kohlman, daughter of the maid of honor, Meryl Kohlman.
The daughter of Bryon and Lori Branstrom of Gladstone, Julie is a 2004 graduate of Gladstone High School and a 2008 graduate of Bay de Noc Community College with an associate's degree. She is employed at Newpage.
Chad is the son of William and Peggy Rudden of Escanaba. He is a 1998 graduate of Escanaba High School and a 2001 graduate of Bay College with an associate's degree in computer systems technology. He is an inventory supervisor at Walmart.
The couple will spend their honeymoon in Negril, Jamaica, in February. The couple have made their home in Soo Hill.


text:
Cancel Brown's Visit to Tampa Bay
According to ESPN's Adam Schefter, former Florida Gator and Chicago Brown defensive end Alex Brown has signed with the New Orleans Saints. Brown was released by the Bears on Thursday and started his tour of other teams. He was scheduled to visit Tampa Bay next but he must have liked the thought of hanging in the French Quarter with the Super Bowl Champions more than hanging in Channelside or Ybor City.


text:
Enlaces Relacionados
Annual Report 2015(Esta página no se ha traducido al Español)
Annual Report 2014
Click here for dynamic view | Lo resolution (5.3 MB)
Annual Report 2013
Click here for dynamic view | Download the pdf (3.2 MB)
Annual Report 2012
Click here for dynamic view | Download the pdf (5.6 MB)
Annual Report 2011
Click here for dynamic view | Download the pdf (12 MB)
Debt Boils Over
One of the hidden drivers behind Europe's financial turmoil is the dramatic increase in resource prices over the last 10 years. Historically, cheap resources have helped fuel economic growth, but the situation has now changed. Increasing costs impose a burden on economic performance that, in some cases, is reflected in rising debt levels. This, at a time when the ability of many countries to service this debt is being called into question.
Energy Trumps Safety
Petroleum is becoming more difficult and costly to extract. But since our economies remain dependent on fossil fuels, we are taking greater risks to acquire it. Increasing demand, coupled with declining supplies, is leading to volatility and higher prices, characteristic of what some economists refer to as "peak oil." Even the conservative International Energy Agency has acknowledged that oil production may peak in a decade's time.
The Majority is Left Out
As prices rise, many countries must spend larger portions of their budgets on essential resources from abroad, often forgoing expenditures on health, education, infrastructure or other productive capacity building. People find it more difficult to make ends meet. The socio-economic impact of ecological overshoot, including climate change, disproportionately affects the most vulnerable.
Biodiversity is for Sale
The threats facing plant and animal life on the planet are greater than at any time in recorded history. Human pressure in the form of over-harvesting and habitat loss is driving down wildlife populations worldwide. In our economies, wild species have little value. As long as trees, for example, are worth more cut than they are standing, the pressures to liquidate natural resources will be overwhelming.
Food Turns into a Luxury
Soil erosion, rising fertilizer prices, and severe weather brought on by climate change have all contributed to the volatility of crop yields and food prices. This is particularly harsh in countries where most people depend on basic foods, such as unrefined grains and rice, which are more directly linked to global commodity prices than are the refined foods found in supermarkets.
People Rise Up
In 2010 and 2011, people across the Arab world rose up against oppression and deprivation. But after the celebration of hard-earned victories, many countries will continue to face systemic challenges due to food insecurity, demographic trends, and water scarcity. Securing the future will depend on changes in the coming years to national policy that include resource limits as a central component.


text:
/* Please think about more computing power too. */
Although Advanced Micro Devices earlier this year officially confirmed plans to completely get rid of microprocessor branding, the company has quietly decided to introduce chips made using 32nm process technology in FM1 packaging under Athlon II and Sempron trademarks, according to a source with knowledge of AMD's plans.
With the introduction of A-series accelerated processing units (APUs) AMD also rolled-out new FM3 platform for mainstream offerings. But while AMD's code-named Llano APUs do offer up to four x86 cores and a desktop-class graphics adapter, not everyone needs integrated graphics solutions and many prefer discrete chips. In order to address those customers, AMD plans to offer "graphics free" Llano chips, a source indicated.
The new central processing units will be made using 32nm process technology and will have similar characteristics similar to Llano APUs (advanced power consumption management, performance tweaks, etc.), but will naturally lack graphics adapter. The novelties will only be compatible with FM1 mainboards.
AMD intends to offer the "graphics free" Llano processors under Athlon II and Sempron brands. The first model – Athlon II X4 631 (2.60GHz, 100W, 4MB L2 cache) – is already listed on the company's web-site. Thanks to 1MB of level-two cache, the new Athlon II should provide higher performance than previous-generation offerings with 512KB cache per core in certain cases.
Since the new Athlon II and Sempron are made using 32nm process technology and are generally inexpensive (the Athlon II X4 631 costs $79 in 1000-unit quantities), they may become popular among overclockers.
Tags: AMD, Sempron, Athlon, Llano, 32nm


text:
iHerb Customer Reviews
Savings of: $9.63 (44% off)
The best
Posted by Reviewer1024194 on Apr 15, 2011
God bless the reviewer who mentioned the Linus Pauling Heart Protocol. I had never heard of it. But I looked it up and ordered what I needed. Three days in the sinus condition that had plagued me for 20 years, often getting me up in the middle of the night for an hour til they cleared enough that I could go back to sleep, disappeared. Three weeks in I cut my heart meds in half. I feel good. I can breathe. I can walk. I want to. I want to dance, really. Yesterday I walked 9 blocks, and wasn't puffing until the last one. Three weeks ago I couldn't walk across the yard. God bless the reviewer, Linus Pauling, and Iherb. Looks like I'm going to live.
pauling heart and abe metabolism
Posted by Reviewer2580618 on Mar 12, 2008
I use this to make custom drinks for myself. One is the Pauling heart protocol. The other drinks are based on Abe's proline cycle research - to help me on endurance based exercise or to help me preferentially use fat as fuel earlier in workouts or in general. I love this product, it takes time to mix in water - stir or shake it in and just let it sit for a few minutes and it will dissolve.
L-Lysine powder
Posted by Reviewer1954694 on Feb 21, 2009
Excellent, excellent product. I have had attacks of shingles 2-3 times per year and I take 1500 mg of lysine and the pain goes away, and the rash disappears in 3-4 days. Now I take 1000 mg daily and no more shingles. I have never taken prescription drugs for shingles and lysine works 100%. I only wish more people knew about this product to help and prevent shingles. I also give the powder to my older horses for their immune system, and take capsules (2X 500mg) myself.
Lysine Powder
Posted by Reviewer2432091 on Jan 07, 2008
As an alternative to taking a Lysine pill, the powder absorbs quicker into the system and is easy to take with liquid. Lysine is one of the few products that helps build the immune system to combat viruses (vs bacteria)
Life Savior - for my cats!
Posted by Reviewer2195414 on Nov 25, 2009
My veterinarian reccommended this particual product for my kittens, who were born with the herpes virus. Her practice uses it on all their sick kittens. It keeps the virus under control, is completely tasteless (great for the cats) and keeps my babies healthy. The price is fantstic - a great product!
L-Lysine powder
Posted by Reviewer2090882 on Mar 14, 2008
Excellent product! We use it to minimize Herpes viral outbreaks in cats. Most cats do not mind the addition of this powder to their canned foods. Thanks!
Economy and convenience
Posted by robingiles on Jun 22, 2007
Far cheaper than any other form of lysine. Dissolves very easily in water and has a mild, not unpleasant, taste. No difficulty in swallowing. Very convenient (when you're at home).
Excellent value, top quality.
Posted by Reviewer1148576 on Jan 18, 2008
Top quality pure lysine. Taken at the early signs of a cold sore, lysine can stop it developing. This is the best lysine I have found and the price cannot be beaten.
I've been recommending this product & site to ALL my cat friends!!
Posted by Reviewer2919501 on Mar 25, 2008
A vet recommended I put all my indoor cats on L-Lysine to help boost their immune systems, since I often foster others... that may come in our house with the sniffles or other things. Try grinding up the pill form, then found this powder in GREAT Quanity AND at a FAB price! I've been recommending this product and website now to ALL my cat friends! A BIG HIT here Debbie Crazy cat mom of Bonnie, Olive, Lucky Streak and Sandia Foster mom of Crockett and Rocca Adoptive mom of Purrsonality, Pillow, Porchia, Rennie Dreamcycle and many more :-Meow
Works miracles for our cats!
Posted by Reviewer2740834 on Oct 16, 2008
We have a small special needs cat sanctuary, and give this to all of our cats in their meals, twice a day. We have seen a tremendous improvement in their health issues related to Feline Herpes over the past few months, for which we are truly grateful. This product has significantly lowered the inflamation in their mouths, and has all but eliminated chronic sinus congestion for several of them. Thank you so much for making this available, and at such a reasonable price! God bless. . .


text:
City burn victim taken to hospital
OBSERVER Staff Report
This afternoon, firefighters, police and Alstar ambulance reported to a house on Lake Shore Drive West in Dunkirk. According to a firefighter on the scene, there was an incident of burned food and a burn victim.
The female was transported by Alstar Ambulance from the scene. No report on her condition is available at this time.


text:
Boericke & Tafel, Alpha CF, 40 Tablets
- You earn loyalty credit for every order you place at iHerb!
- Loyalty credit is equal to 5% of the value of your order, excluding shipping charges.
- Your loyalty credit will be applied towards your next order as soon as your current order has shipped.
- Your loyalty credits are valid for up to 60 days from the date of your last purchase.
This product is already in your Wish List.
View Wish List
This product is now in your Wish List.
View Wish List
Expiration Date:?Oct 2020Expiration Date
The length of time for the expiration date or "best used before" date depends on the type of product, as well as the brand.
Perishable items (such as flax oils or certain probiotics) generally have shorter expiration dates. Although our warehouse is fully air-conditioned, these more fragile items are put in cold storage (freezer or refrigeration unit) for maximum freshness.
Our receiving department does its best to verify and then enter the correct expiration dates for all incoming products. However, discrepancies do occur from time to time. This being said, the exceptionally high turnover at iHerb ensures that our inventory is among the freshest in the industry.
Shipping Weight:?0.03 kgShipping WeightThe Shipping Weight includes the product, protective packaging material and the actual shipping box. In addition, the Shipping Weight may be adjusted for the Dimensional Weight (e.g. length, width & height) of a package. It is important to note that certain types of products (e.g. glass containers, liquids, fragile, refrigerated or ice packed) will often require protective packaging material. As such, these products will reflect a higher Shipping Weight compared to the unprotected product.
- Product Code: BAT-00490
- UPC Code: 308078004907
- Package Quantity: 40 Tablets
- Dimensions: 2 x 9.9 x 4.6 cm , 0.02 kg
- Fast, Natural Relief
- Relieves Symptoms of Colds & Flu
- Clinically Tested
- Take at the First Sign of Cold or Flu!
- Natural Homeopathic
- Safe and Effective
- Safe, Natural Relief from Symptoms of Colds & Flu
Complete Relief Formula:
- Fever
- Chills
- Body Aches & Pains
- Runny Nose
- Stuffy Nose
- Headache
Uses: Temporary relieves fever, chills, sneezing, stuffed-up nose, runny nose, coughing, sore throat, headache, minor aches and pains that may accompany colds or flu.
Suggested Use
Place tablets under tongue and let dissolve slowly. Best if taken at least 15 minutes before or half an hour after eating, brushing teeth, or drinking anything other than water. Adults & Children 12 years of age & older: At first sign of cold or flu, take 1 tablet every hour and 2 to 3 tablets before going to sleep. As symptoms subside, take 1 tablet every 2 or 3 hours. Children 2 to 12: Half of the adult dose. Children under 2: Consult a doctor.
Consult a doctor if symptoms worsen, do not improve within 7 days, or new symptoms appear. If fever lasts more than 3 days, or if sore throat is severe, persists for more than 2 days, or is accompanied or followed by fever, difficulty breathing, headache, rash, swelling, nausea, or vomiting, consult a doctor. If cough persists for more than 7 days, tends to recur, or is accompanied by a rash or persistent headache, consult a doctor. A persistent cough may be a sign of a serious condition. Do not take this product for persistent or chronic cough such as occurs with smoking, asthma, chronic bronchitis, or emphysema or if cough is accompanied by excessive phlegm (mucus) unless directed by a doctor. As with any drug, if you are pregnant or nursing a baby, seek the advice of a health professional before using this product. Keep out of the reach of children.
For your protection, each tablet is encased in a sealed blister unit with specially imprinted foil backing. Do not use if blister unit or foil backing is torn or missing.
Store at room temperature out of direct sunlight.
Active Ingredients (HPUS): Aconitum napellus 4X 2.5 parts, bryonia alba 4X 2.5 parts, eucalyptus globulus 2X 1 part, eupatorium perfoliatum 2X 2.5 parts, gelsemium sempervirens 4X 2.5 parts, ipecacuanha 3X 2.5 parts, phosphorus 6X 2.5 parts. Lactose based tablets.


text:
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Yup, I'm familiar with it, John
Oh, yeah.It's funny, Chaz, I'm not seeing a lot of topping migration. Did you try a little edge stretching?
Sounds good, Chaz. How long was this bake? 5.5 minutes?
I have in the back of my mind moving the steel to the top shelf and utilizing the broiler efficiently. Stay tuned....
More practice on steel. This one is with some hot sopressata. Damn good!
Crumbs looking very nice! Im going to work my way to that kind of crumb What kind of dough used for this ? Is that heaven i see thru the crumb..


text:
2013 Bible Bee season announced
QUINNESEC – Officials of the CBC Bible Bee have announced the beginning of the 2013 Bible Bee season.
Contestant registration runs through May 31, and official contest materials will be released on June 1. Every contestant will receive a Bible, scripture memory cards, inductive Bible study curriculum, a T-shirt and more as part of registration. The CBC Bible Bee will be holding monthly fun family activities in preparation for the local contest which will be held on Aug. 24 at the Community Bible Chapel in Norway.
"This exciting competition brings your whole family together to learn more about God's Word – you'll be surprised at how much you can learn and memorize in just one summer. Not only that, there are fun activities and great prizes for all ages," according to organizers.
The Shelby Kennedy Foundation, a non-profit organization dedicated to encouraging the spiritual growth of the entire family through Bible study, scripture memorization and prayer, launched the National Bible Bee in 2009. The competition challenges youth from ages 7 to 18 years in Bible knowledge and memorization first at local contests held around the country at the end of August, and then at a national competition held in November for the top scoring 360 contestants from across the nation.
The winners of the National Bible Bee Competition are awarded $260,000 in cash prizes, as well as other awards. In addition to the exciting competition, national contestants and their families enjoy a variety of family activity rooms, musical performers, guest speakers, a vendor hall and a formal banquet.
To leam more about the local and national Bible Bee and to register go to www.BibleBee.org


text:
I believe that video games have the power to teach us many things.
Math (See Lure of the Labyrinth, and DimensionM)
Biology (MedMyst, CSI: The Experience, Cellcraft and Immune Attack)
Ancient History (Discover Babylon)
And the many games that teach social awareness and facts about current events at Games for Change.
But can a game teach interpersonal skills? Can a game teach problem solving skills? What do you think? Leave a comment and give me an example of a time when something you learned from a video game came into play in real life? Perhaps in World of Warcraft or some other multiplayer game you convinced another player to join you, and you have tried the same tactic in real life? Perhaps in Whyville you have learned something about getting people to agree with you? Must a game be multiplayer in order to foster interpersonal skills? What about Mass Effect? Have anyone learned any negotiation skills that have worked on humans in the real world?
I'm keeping my eye out for my own experiences. I know I have started to be more experimental and to take more chances in the video games I play. But I'm wondering what effect that will have on my real life. Maybe I'll post more often on my blog. That would be a nice effect.


text:
We've literally seen decreases of 99 percent of raccoons and possums."they were even established. And then we've sampled them for many years since they've been established by simply driving the road and counting how many mammals we see, both dead and alive. And between the 1990s and the 2000s, we've literally seen decreases of 99 percent of raccoons and possums. We have not found a rabbit in the southern part of the Everglades since the year 2000 during our road transects. Bobcats are down 87 percent. Deer are down 94 percent.
You can go out and you can find pythons, but you can't go out and find all the pythons — in any area."of mammals in South Florida to look at how they respond to pythons. But it's probably a safe assumption that things like raccoons and possums probably don't associate snakes with being something that really is a major threat to them. Because there really hasn't been a snake big enough to eat a raccoon living in Florida for about 18 million years.
MORE FROM YALE e360
Alien Species Reconsidered:
Finding a Value in Non-Natives