text:
Programming is usually team work and as such kind of hard to measure compared to salesman who just pulls for himself. Another thing is that coders aren't usually that good at expressing themself, so it may not be obvious who is being more productive than others.
And how do you measure that productivity? Is it the amount of code you write? What if its bad code.. Is it the quality of code? What if that shows up as less productive.. No one notices unless you make it visible and show your boss or developer that you're the man.
But being awesome coder and making upper level see it won't get you 10x salary. It might get you a better salary, but at that point you should probably aim for developer position or boss level, because that will happen eventually.
I know a person who used to run a application company. There was a coder who worked as such for some years, but he also took more important stuff to handle in the company. His boss always told how good coder he is and definitely noticed him over the others working there. Later he became the boss running that company, when the old one stepped down and only owned the company anymore.
But want to just work as an average coder? Expect average salary.
To clarify, I mean developer more as a designer like guy.
But, code is a product, and expected to be created. The value is obvious when it's completed, but still worthless to the bean counters until someone in sales sells it to a customer. The more customers they sell the code to, the more profitable it's become.
The thanks never comes down to the programmers. When the product is completed, it's likely they'll be let go, since no more work needs to be done. The sales staff could continue selling it for years, and making a profit.
I was told, I have to be able to sell the product. That's not where I want to be. I like creating things. I prefer to leave it up to sales to make it profitable. Unfortunately, the way most bosses run the show, development will always be a negative cashflow area, and sales will always be positive. In that, they consider development bad for the company, and forget that without our work, they'd never turn a profit.
That's probably where the term "code monkey" also comes from. It's sad but true. The only solution probably is to start your own company, or do things independently. However that usually requires you to create the idea too, not just following specs. But theres on good thing - on internet age it's easy to get marketers for you who promote the product for a share of income (CPA marketing).
The thanks never comes down to the programmers. When the product is completed, it's likely they'll be let go, since no more work needs to be done. The sales staff could continue selling it for years, and making a profit.
This is why I always leave lots of bugs in the code, and name the variables: a, aa, aAa, Aa, etc. They can never fire me.
This is why I always leave lots of bugs in the code, and name the variables: a, aa, aAa, Aa, etc. They can never fire me.
Hey, Intron, good to hear from you again. Seriously, we are really sorry we never sent you your last check after we fired you (your code had a bug in it which corrupted our terminated employee database beyond repair so we didn't have your address anymore).
In the modern world, those who create wealth are *never* paid anything close to the value of what they created. The lion's share goes to the rich fat-cats that sit at the top of the corporate ladder, contributing nothing that wouldn't have been present otherwise.
Exploitation - its how humans do things.
When the product is completed, it's likely they'll be let go, since no more work needs to be done. The sales staff could continue selling it for years, and making a profit.
Software that's finished in finite time? (Forever-finished, not just this-release-finished.)
What a concept! Exactly what segment of the industry are you working in over there? If my organization stopped development for a year or two just to sell the existing stuff, our competitors would soon crush us handily.
This release finish is usually enough for most companies. They can thin the herd of most of their developers, keep just a very few on, and when it's time to start on the next release, hire on fresh meat for a fraction of the cost of the last crew.
There used to be company loyalty. That's long since gone. Back in the day, if you had a job and were good at it, you would continue the job for the rest of your life, get yearly raises and promotions. Now, once they can terminate y
The thanks never comes down to the programmers. When the product is completed, it's likely they'll be let go, since no more work needs to be done. The sales staff could continue selling it for years, and making a profit.
Actually, this is the way that "creative" professions have generally worked. Consider the typical sculptor or painter. Even those that reached a level of fame have usually been paid only once for each creation. It is then owned by the client, who can resell it and not give the creator any part of the sale. There are a few countries that have dabbled with royalties for resale, but this is rare, and the royalties are typically small. The real profit from art goes to the sponsors and investors.
Authors and musicians have had some small success in getting royalties for their work. But this is most often "honored in the breach". It's well known that recording artists don't get any royalties at all, and may lose money, unless the recording sells around 1.5 to 2 million copies. Before that, all the income goes to the owner of the recording, which is the corporation that produced and marketed it. Even after a recording reaches the profitable stage, the artist typically gets only a few percent of each sale. The situation is similar with authors, who may be paid a small "advance" before production, but rarely makes a profit until several million copies have been sold. Most writers have worked for corporations such as newspapers or other periodicals, who pay a salary and claim all income from sales.
The movie industry has a few showcase stars who have made a small fortune in royalties. But most actors are "starving artists" who have to work at part-time jobs to get rent and food money. Movies are owned by the producers, not the actors. The few stars are held out as bait to attract the many workers who will never be stars and will never make a decent living from their creativity.
Software programmers like to think that they're something new that the world has never seen. But in reality they are merely creators in a new medium, and they are treated as the commercial world has always treated creative types. They're workers who can be paid a small salary to produce, and when they produce something that sells, the corporation can claim the profits. A few stars can be paid some royalties (still only a few percent of sales) and held up as public examples to attract the many workers that the industry needs.
Don't expect to see this change in your lifetime.
The thanks never comes down to the programmers. When the product is completed, it's likely they'll be let go, since no more work needs to be done. The sales staff could continue selling it for years, and making a profit.
Cry me a river. If a programmer wants lots of money, let him/her make and sell a product or service. It's a free country, and anyone who aspires can make the effort. Even people who aren't "smart" or "productive" can sell vast quantities of crapola for a fortune.
The way to measure who is co
And how do you measure that productivity?
Perhaps instead of trying to measure productivity directly, it could be done in other ways. For instance, there needs to be a project done - get two small teams together to tackle it: the first that gets a functional prototype done has their Tech. Dir. given the job, as well as being able to assemble his team from both. Notice which people always gets to be chosen on a team in both phases, promote those people, and let go of the people never chosen.
Sure, that may b
No worker in America has pay which is "proportional to productivity". That's not how our system works.
As long as you've got CEOs making 200-400 times the pay of the average worker in the same corporation, it is impossible to have any pay which is "proportional".
The specific kind of profits which most American companies strive for, the short-term profits that they return to their equity shareholders, make it necessary to pay all workers less than they are worth. And the trend is accelerating. If the same reduction in real income for workers that started during the Reagan administration continues, in 20 years the majority of American workers will be making about ten percent over minimum wage.
This very problem was written about [wikipedia.org] (at great length) by some guy named Karl Marx. Basically, his point was that the capital owners will always pay their employees less than they're worth to the capitalist, because that creates profits.
Basically, his point was that the capital owners will always pay their employees less than they're worth to the capitalist, because that creates profits.
Except that you could also say the capitalist always always pays people exactly what they are worth, and increases costs to consumers to create profits.
Both are non-sensical. That's why in reality, someone decides if payment being offered is worth them working for the company. Pretty much by definition, you are being paid what you are worth because only you can really decide that by accepting an offer. If you think you are not "being paid what you are worth" then you need to find someone who will pay you that, or at least leave and not suffer the insult of a continued paycheck.
Except that those with capital are the ones who decide how much you get paid. If you have no capital, you have no opportunity to increase your worth. It's all fine and dandy to say "If you really think you're worth more, go somewhere else." but if the jobs all pay the same amount, you can't go somewhere else. It's also very difficult to start your own business because the established businesses, with their economies of scale, can crush small ones and push them out of the market (see: Wal-mart).
The biggest problem with capitalism is that, for it to truly work, it requires that every party has equal information. This just isn't the case, information requires time to gather, and time costs money. Therefore, those with money get the information and use it to their advantage whenever they can. There's a reason that Harvard grads get the best paying jobs, and it's not because they are the "best and brightest," as they'd have you think they are.
Don't get me wrong, I'm a capitalist, but to assume that it is a perfect system is silly. To abuse a Winston Churchill quote about democracy, "Capitalism is the worst economic system there is, except all the others."
To abuse a Winston Churchill quote about democracy, "Capitalism is the worst economic system there is, except all the others."
Better you leave Churchill alone and pick up a copy of Naomi Klein's The Shock Doctrine.
Better to light a candle than curse the darkness, friend.
Pretty much by definition, you are being paid what you are worth because only you can really decide that by accepting an offer.
Can you say you are "deciding" when your family is hungry or your children are sick and a job is the only way to get health care benefits without going broke?
If managing were as easy as reading a guage that said "PRODUCTIVITY", you might as well get rid of the expensive managers and have a monkey read it.
Oh, so you've met my manager! (Hopefully he isn't reading this. If so, then, uh, lol j/k!)
Another thing is that coders aren't usually that good at expressing themself, so it may not be obvious who is being more productive than others.
Bullshit. Good programmers are great at expressing themselves, thats what programmers DO. That excuse is made by crappy 'programmers' who are really just introverts who aren't actually good at programming but rather are even worse at dealing with other living creatures.
A programmers job is to take an idea and express it in a way a computer can understand. All we DO is express ourselves, if you aren't good at expressing yourself, you aren't a good programmer.
A programmers job is to take an idea and express it in a way a computer can understand
Half right. A programmer's job is to take an idea and express it in a way that both computers and humans can understand. If only a computer can understand it, you might be a Perl programmer.
> Half right. A programmer's job is to take an idea and express it in a way that both computers and humans can understand. If only a computer can understand it, you might be a Haskell programmer.
There, fixed that for you.
That every sysadmin on the planet pretty can learn Perl means there must be humans in that group somewhere.
Now a language you have to be a mathematician to learn on the other hand...
A programmers job is to take an idea and express it in a way a computer can understand. All we DO is express ourselves, if you aren't good at expressing yourself, you aren't a good programmer.
If I understand you right, you consider expressing yourself in a computer-understandable fashion makes you good at expressing yourself. I would like to introduce you to the rest of the world, where being good at expressing yourself is measured by how well other people understand you. People, not computers.
I find this to be a common error among programmers.
See, for instance, section 2 (Productivity) of the Hacker FAQ [seebs.net].
I really have to get around to rewriting that some day. But it's been a loooong time, and it's translated into enough languages that I'd feel sorta bad modifying it.
The uber-coder's code works the first time - it sits there silently and invisibly working.
Meanwhile, everyone is looking at the hard work and long hours being put in by the guy who's code needs lots of help. He gets the notice, not the guy who did it right.
Another factor is that the manager likely recognizes the uber coders, and any piece that is particularly difficult or important gets assigned to the uber coder. So their productivity may appear to be no better than others because the lead has compensated by giving them the pieces that nobody else can be trusted to do.
One guy has great productivity creating a frequency distribution report. It works, looks good, and everyone is happy. It took him a week to do. The uber coder could have batted that out in an afternoon, but instead spent a week ensuring that histogrammer behind the report was multi-core aware and could scale to billions of data points without dragging the system to its knees. The fact that the report programmer would have floundered at that task for weeks is not going to be apparent to most people - even many other people on the team. So the uber-ness of the uber programmer is hidden by the work they are assigned.
Hence, the code of a good coder looks as if any beginner could have made it whereas the code of a bad coder appears as if the results of a sophisticated mind.
To put it in another way; any idiot can make something simple look difficult but it takes a genius to make it look easy.
As I pointed out previously, incompetent programmers require more servers. Their code spends more time not running, requires a larger support infrastructure to deal with the problems created and generally reduces profits all round.
These days it's difficult to point at a specific individual, but teams are easy. You can see which teams are a group of competent engineers and which are just a clusterfuck[1] of developers.
[1] the collective noun for developers.
Some of my most "productive" days have resulted in a net deletion of many hundreds of lines of code. Mostly this is cleaning horrendous cut & paste jobs, and refactoring APIs to dump buggy, unnecessary functionality. That one day of effort probably saves weeks of bug-hunting and spaghetti-unwinding further down the road. It would appear to be negatively productive by any naive metric.
I'd argue coder pay should be proportional to productivity. It's just that there's no shortcuts to measuring a coder's productivity.
I pulled a codebase down from 10,000 versions to 2.
That's right, the previous system had one different file for each of 10 pulse rates, 255 ID numbers, and a mortality switch.
I got it down to one version for each of the two chips.
I lost that job.
I have always liked this quote.
"Measuring programming progress by lines of code is like measuring aircraft building progress by weight" -- Bill Gates
The problem is design progress of almost anything is very difficult to measure, and when multiple people work on the same project it makes it almost impossible to sort out who did what. Sales does not have that problem because progress is not measured, however results can be measured before the paycheck is cut, and everyone is responsable for themself only. De
I have, on rare occasions, been Amazingly Productive. There are very narrowly-defined kinds of work where I am super fast. One of them is debugging. So, when we were doing our "no new features, clear out every P1 and P2 bug in this branch" run, I was awesome -- I regularly fixed many more bugs than anyone else. On the other hand... A lot of the time, I'm not much good. If I have a bad-ADHD week, I can have an entire day go by where I simply never quite get around to doing anything but mostly keeping up on my inbox.
So am I super productive, or not very productive, or what? I don't know. Realistically, the answer is probably "if you give me the sorts of work I'm good at, I'm great, otherwise I'm sorta mediocre." But I'm not sure how you'd measure that.
There's also a much more basic failure-to-apply-economics in the article. The value of something which does 10x as much is not necessarily exactly 10x. Is a monitor with 3x as many pixels worth exactly 3x as much? No. Is a video card which can render exactly 2x as many polygons worth exactly 2x as much? No. On the high end, you might see people paying 2x as much for 20% more polygons. On the low end, you might see people paying 20% more for 5x more polygons. Or there might be other factors; you might care about power consumption, or form factor, or...
I just bought a new Eee. It's SLOWER than the previous one I was using. I paid about the same amount for it, several months later. But it has a higher resolution display, and better battery life... So is it worth the same amount? I have no clue.
Long story short: The marginal value of the "more productive programmer" is not necessarily linear with productivity. Add in other complexities (plays-well-with-others, can do trade shows, reliable about giving feedback on progress) and general market forces, and I don't think it's just a question of measurement; I think it's largely that, in general, programmers are willing to work for comparable amounts of money, and the marginal benefits aren't as large as you might think they would be if you looked only at some measure of productivity. Even if it were a very good measure.
So am I super productive, or not very productive, or what? I don't know. Realistically, the answer is probably "if you give me the sorts of work I'm good at, I'm great, otherwise I'm sorta mediocre." But I'm not sure how you'd measure that.
As much as programmers often hate them, this is where good management comes in.
A manager who knows when to apply you to the project and where to put you on a team is going to get the most out of your abilities and you will both benefit.
Unfortunately, good managers are abo
in addition to the factors pointed out by others there is this:
Programmer "A" is an expert and they have a strong opinion that approach "Y" is the best approach- and it is a solid approach.
Programmer "B" is an expert and they have a strong opinion that approach "P" is the best approach- and it is a solid approach.
Programmer "C" is an expert and they have a strong opinion that approach "3" is the best approach- and it is a solid approach.
I've seen A,B, and C get into very loud, very heated arguments over this (I've been programmer A at times when I thought the "solid" approach was missing something that I saw intuitively which they wouldn't accept until I proved it to them laboriously).
Programming is not plumbing. The goal posts are subject to change.
What is efficiency?
Delivering a 100% perfect product 3 months late?
Delivering a 99% perfect product 1 week early?
Delivering a 100% perfect product 3 weeks early but then they change the scope and (as one manager said to me) say "this isn't scope creep". (I turned to my programmer and asked, "can you deliver this change by the previous deadline" and they said "no" and I asked "what date can you deliver it by, and she said 5 days later, and I turned back to the sheepishly smiling manager and said, "is that date acceptable?" -- I mention this because it's a great negotiating technique. And you avoid delivering the product later than the delivered deadline without being an ass and refusing changes).
I've known "great" programmers who were- as long as they were the only one in the company- because they used operating system cheats that worked-- as long as someone else didn't use them too.
A lot of great programmers fail to understand the business side of things.
And you can never control being put on a crappy project with a bad deadline and a bad manager.
However, fundamentally- the compensation isn't there because there are too many people willing to do the work. I do not recommend to people who ask me that they enter the IT field in general any more. It's pay is not sufficient to cover the low status, increasing lack of freedom, required holiday work, and offshoring risk.
What is efficiency?
Delivering a 100% perfect product 3 months late?
Delivering a 99% perfect product 1 week early?
I've always been a firm believer in the 80-20 rule. (Keep in mind its kind of like the rule of thumb, so it wavers a bit). You can achieve 80% of a programs functionality with 20% of the effort. That's 20% of bugs, which is alot, but in the business side, its only 20% of what it would take to be perfected. Most people agree thats a decent trade off. Thats where you should set the first goal post. Once you reach that goal post, something might have come up. Perhaps you'll want to work on new features that clients have requested. Bam, another 80-20 you can fire off. If there isn't anything else to add, work on reducing those bugs.
And if a bricklayer were 10x more productive than his peers this would be obvious too
And he'd end up getting shoved off the top of a building by the bricklayers that he made look bad.
Many years ago, I had the opportunity to assist on a s/w project to replace a (broken) legacy system. It had been identified by the FAA as not providing proper control over engineering data sufficient to maintain our production certification. And, over the years it had cost the company about $250 million to build and maintain. So we (myself and five other developers) build a new system over the course of about 6 months. It was blessed by the FAA and manufacturing loved it (it actually worked). After it was all done, my team got
...laid off.
Aside from actual coding shops, where the s/w IS your company's product, the whole free market capitalist model breaks down. The further you are away from the finished product, the more the corporation resembles a socialist economy, where headcount matters more than productivity. And much, if not most, software is produced in this setting. MS Word may sell millions of copies, but the are more lines of code (or kBytes of executable) developed internally. My boss only had 5 people under him. He was a first level manager. The legacy system employed over 100, making its manager a unit chief over several layers of PHBs. Guess who has the political power in that organization.
When i have a task. i find myself 'procastrinating' for days on end, unable to commit myself directly to writing the code. during the period, the task regularly comes to my mind in sudden, odd places, doing odd things, like in wc taking a dump, trying to go to sleep, going to the grocer's and so on. then, after a few days, i suddenly sit down and swiftly complete the task. it seems like im hatching things, dealing with the thing in subconscious before doing it.
the good side, it works. and good. the bad side, i feel like im procastrinating and being irresponsible during the hatching period and its annoying.
I am glad that there are other people who have the same symptoms as I, when it comes to programming. Last week Thursday I just wasted 6 hours doing nothing on my job. Friday it got better and Monday I was back up to speed. But I have the same behaviour on my own hobby projects, yes, it really feels as if you are hatching something.
I have seen this described a lot by many other programmers, and often experience it myself, so I'm inclined to assume that it is, in fact, the basic nature of our work.
The most productive programmers are orders of magnitude more productive than average programmers.
There, fixed that for you.
My dad was a programmer for the Star Tribune, back in the seventies and eighties.
Two things he said stick in my mind.
1. He had his own office, and sometimes he'd put up his feet and stare off into space. He told me that people passing by his office assumed that he was "doing nothing." But, he told me, he wasn't doing "nothing", he was very much doing something: thinking.
2. When he got, say, a directive from On High that he must "write a new program for the secretaries", the first thing he did was go and sit down with the secretaries, ask them about their work, and stick around for a while to actually watch them work. He called this the "going native" phase (he took his degree in anthropology). If he'd started coding on the basis of the directive from On High, the end result would be something the secretaries didn't need and wouldn't use.
> 1. He had his own office, and sometimes he'd put up his feet and stare off into space. He told me that people passing by his office assumed that he was "doing nothing." But, he told me, he wasn't doing "nothing", he was very much doing something: thinking.
I'll go even further. I have the privilege of working from home / running my own outfit.
I frequently simply go to sleep if I feel like it. For a while I felt guilty about this, but the reality is that I usually only doze for 10 minutes or so and when I wake up I have 5 solutions sitting in my head for what I need to do next. I'm not sure how or why it works, but I can struggle through a whole afternoon feeling sleepy and doing mediocre work or I can take a 10 minute nap and be a rock star for an hour
The Austrian School of Economics in determining the value of products actually discounts the idea that the value of the end product is somehow connected to the labor expended in producing the product. There are many examples of this in tangible products... for example in the art market, a painter, prior to earning fame may not be able to sell a painting at all or only for a few dollars; after the painter earns fame (and is probably dead) that same painting worth a few dollars many now be worth tens of thousands of dollars. The labor that went into the product didn't change... it's still the same product. But the value of that product to society increased through unmeasurable and intangible factors.
The same amount of code and development time may have gone into a $20 dollar shareware game and a $500 dollar business app. Assuming both sell equal copies, which has more value? Which was the more 'productive'? By looking at lines of code and development time alone their value should be equal, but that's not the case. True the idea behind each of those apps contributed to the overall value differently, but even then the ideas may have taken the same 'labor' to develop while producing uneven value.
I've managed development teams myself. Over time I've learned how long certain types of feature take to develop and how well they should work in that given period of time... sort of a baseline. If a develop provides the product in less than that time with the same quality that developer is clearly more productive than a developer that fails to meet that baseline. This could be formalized to a degree, but would still maintain subjective standards of quality and estimates of effort. I agree with the premise of the posting however... you cannot judge productivity on scientifically measured quantities like lines of code or number of bugs; coding is too creative an endeavor for that and it starts to look like judging value in the way the Austrians rejected long ago.
Just to throw some names out there:
Steve Wozniak - Apple I, II - (uber king because he did hardware and software)
Bill Gates / Paul Allen - original MS Basic
Charles Simonyi - Word, Excel, Multiplan
Ellison,Miner,Oats - Oracle
Mitch Kapor - Lotus 123
Ray Ozzie / David Woolley - Lotus Notes
John Carmack / Michael Abrash - Doom, Quake
Linus Torvalds - Linux
Mark Andreseen - Netscape
Most of those people on the above list were just programmers starting out without really all that much but a computer and an idea. Most of them went on to be billionaires. Below them are another tier of thousands of unnameable programmers that are millionaires, and below them are millions who form the back bone of their departments.
It's pretty much, you get paid great not to just code, but more importantly, to have great ideas and code them.
It doesn't matter if you don't get paid what you're worth, as long as you aren't going to be paid better anywhere else. Because what's your game options, quit and get a different job that sees even less of your value? Go independent and try to bill rates that high? Join a start-up and try to get that much of the total? Quit or take a long vacation and pray they'll miss you enough to take you back on a higher salary? Yeah right.
A lot of people might know internally what you did, but it's hard to convince outsiders that the projects you did really were that hard and you were that crucial to the solution and your solution was that great. Maybe even your boss knows you're brillant and he's rather fire the whole team and hand the money to you if that was what's needed to make you stay, but it will never come to that. Because who else would pay you that much money? Nobody. I guess maybe if you got some entrepreneurial skills and build the company around yourself it might happen, but that takes a very special kind of people which rarely overlaps with mastering coding.
I almost stopped reading when he said Joel Spolsky.
Joel is always looking down his nose at other coders who don't have degrees from MIT. Yet he thinks pointers are the ultimate test of a programmer. He has written one tool that is of note - Fogbugz. That is, if he even wrote the code.
He just reeks of "I know better". He wrote his own language to code-gen classic ASP applications, along with PHP. Right there is a red flag. Did they move to the new ASP.net platform? Nope. That wasn't good enough I guess. No they decided to stick with classic ASP and write a language that outputs both ASP and PHP. Epic arrogance combined with ignorance IMHO.
Then look at Fogbugz. It's just a typical bug tracking application. That's it. Did it need a new language? Hardly. So now these guys wasted all that time on something only they can use and it makes zero dollars. Way to go. Real top notch development there. Fact is his company is small potatoes.
Why do I rant on Joel? Because this guy is believing the shit he spouts and extrapolating from it. Frankly I'm sick of hearing from him about what makes a good programmer. If you aren't a good programmer yourself then STFU about what makes a good programmer. Writing a few insignificant applications doesn't make you a rock star.
The worst programmers I've met are the ones who are heads down and program. They are usually very arrogant and think they are gods. Case in point, there's a guy I currently work with who is a disaster. People are in awe of him because he will work until 4am and has improved the performance of our application 100-fold.
The problem is that during the design phase, he completely disregarded all of our design recommendations and did things his way. It turned into a complete disaster, with nothing working as it should, deadlocks and complete lack of scalability, etc. So yes, he worked until 4am to improve things and did improve the performance from the initial disastrous numbers, but it was all his own fault! As well, because he was so arrogant and stubborn, he ended up producing something that no one wants anymore because the interface is too abstract and hard to use. Now, our the product is being shut down before it has even launched, because we couldn't convince any consumers to "wait until the next release" to get it to do what they actually want. All the fellow programmers think he's an asshole, but all of the managers who don't understand what he does will undoubtedly promote him.
The best programmers are the ones who keep it simple, design things excellently and program it once, with maybe a couple of iterations of performance enhancement. I've met plenty of brilliant programmers in my time, and these are the key traits that they exhibit. The "brilliant", nerdy programmers that heads-down program are rarely any better than a smart, easy-going programmer that both works hard and spends more time listening to their customers and making common sense design decisions.
Each honest calling, each walk of life, has its own elite, its own aristocracy based on excellence of performance. -- James Bryant Conant


text:
A water utility serving two southern New Mexico communities is struggling to upgrade a system that has experienced outages that cause trouble for customers in recent weeks.
The Las Cruces Sun News reports that three of the system's 10 wells serving Sunland Park and Santa Teresa failed in the past month, including one that failed two times.
The failures of the 30- and 40-year-old wells resulted in low water pressure for residents and businesses.
Interim Dona Ana County Manager Sue Padilla says the Camino Real Regional Water Utility is working hard to prevent more problems.
Copyright 2013 The Associated Press.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
We tried last night (7/3/13) Some New Forlorn-Hope Whites:
1. Forlorn-Hope Norgard CheninBlanc NorgardRanch/TalmageBench/Mendocino (47 cs; 14.3%; aged
20 mo. in neutral oak) 2011: Light gold slightly cloudy color; slight cider/phenolic rather fragrant/
floral/melony/CB/spicy slight earthy/pungent/trumpet valve oil delicate/pretty very attractive nose;
quite tart bit metallic/steely tangy/grapefruity/chalky light floral/spicy/melony/CB flavor; med.long
delicate/racy bright/melony/floral/CB slight earthy/chalky/flinty tangy/grapefruity finish; a very pretty/
elegant/delicate rendition of CB; not the minerality of Loire nor the usual tutti-fruity of many Calif
CBs; those nose suggests a skin-contact white but the palate has no phenolic/tannic character. $30.00
2. ChaloneVnyd CheninBlanc EstateGrown/Chalone (#0415 of 2735 btls; 9 Fr.oak brls; 14.4%;
www.ChaloneVineyard.com) 2007: Light gold color; fragrant melony/chalky/CB some pungent/sauerkrauty
rather attractive nose; fairl:y tart pretty melony/CB/spicy/chalky light butterscotch/pungent flavor;
long bright/melony/CB some chalky/mineral light butterscotch elegant finish; quite an elegant/interesting
pretty Calif CB w/o the typical tutti-fruity character. $16.00 (CB)
3. PaulMas Estate Picpoul de Pinet Ad'OP: Coteaux du Languedoc (13%; www.PaulMas.com) Pezenas 2011: Light
gold color; light fragrant/lemony/mango some stony/chalky rather perfumed nose; soft fairly lush/r:ipe
mango/fruity/lemony bit chalky/stony bit weak/dilute flavor; med.short soft/lush/diffuse/weak light
lemony/mango/gruity slight chalky/stony finish; a bit like a honeyed Roussanne; some on the soft/diffuse
side on the palate but an attractive nose and a good price. $15.00 (AV)
4. Forlorn-Hope Picpoul HaugVnyd/Rutherford/NapaVlly (17 cs; 12.48%) 2012: Med.light yellow color; quite
spicy/fruity/bit grapefruity slight R-like/valve oil some peppery/GV-like quite fragrant nose; quite tart/
tangy/grapefruity bit metallic spicy/fruity/grapefruity some lemony/peppery/GV-like flavor; long tart/tangy
slight GV-like/peppery/pungent/spicy bit tangy/grapefruity/metallic finish; a rather interesting tangy kind
of white but nothing profound; prefer the TablasCreek rendition of Picpoul. $25.00
5. Forlorn-Hope LaGitana Torrontes SilvaspoonsVnyd/AltaMesa/Lodi/Calif (77 cs; 12.85%) Fairfield 2012: Pale
yellow color; some spicy/lemony/Torrontes/floral very slight musty/subdued/corked slight GWT-like/hair
oil nose; soft lush some floral/Torrontes/lemony some hair oil/GWT rather attractive spicy rich flavor;
very long soft light lemony/Torr/floral light GWT-hair oil finish; quite a lovely flavor but the nose
seems a bit subdued/supressed by the TCA. $22.00
6. Forlorn-Hope Kirschenman PinotGris KirschenmannVnyd/Lodi (47 cs; 11.97%; TeganPassalacqua vnyd)
2012: Some orange/burniished bronze color; very strong very perfumed/PG/alpine flowers/spicy/exotic
some phenolic/cidery/earthy nose; beautiful exotic/alpine strawberries/floral/PG/spicy/cinammon slight
tannic/phenolic/cidery rather soft very unusual flavor; very long very spicy/alpine strawberries/PG/floral
soft/lush/rich somewhat tannic/phenolic/cider finish; a very unusual rendition of PG. $30.00
7. Forlorn-Hope QueSaudade Calif Verdelho (217 cs; 13.9%) MatthewRorick/Fairfield 2011: Med.light gold bit
cloudy color; lovely floral/aromatic/Verdelho/carnations/spicy/creamy slight mineral/stony very perfumed
nose; rather tart very spicy/floral/Verdelho/carnations buttery/creamy bit mineral/stony/saline beautiful
huge fruit flavor; very long intense spicy/floral/carnations/Verdelho creamy slight stony/mineral finish;
huge/powerful fruit but w/ an underlying structure/acidity to it; this is probably the best Amador White
I've ever had other than a few Viogniers. $28.00
8. Forlorn-Hope Batiscafo Verdelho DeWittVnyd/AmadorCnty (27 cs; 14.7%; finest brl of QueSaudade;
aged xtra yr w/o topping or added SO2) 2011: Med.gold slightly cloudy color; much more subdued some
pencilly/pungent less floral/Verdelho rather complex rather exotic nose; softer some floral/carnations
rather lush exotic/spicy bit pencilly/pungent some creamy exotic flavor; very long lightly tart slight
pencilly/pungent/smokey bit saline light floral/carnations/creamy slight stony/saline complex finish w/
a trace of oxidation in the backtaste; lacks the huge fruit of the regular and more subdued/complex;
pretty exotic wine a bit on the pricey side. $50.00
9. Forlorn-Hope Sihaya RibollaGialla VareVnyd/NapaVlly (12.10%; 27 cs; 2 weeks frmtd on skins;
www.ForlornHopeWines.com) 2011: Light gold color; some phenolic/apple cider slight peppery/pungent/RG
slight volatile/aromatic very perfumed beautiful exotic nose; tart quite phenolic/cidery rather tannic
slight bitter slight oxidized/honeyed rather peppery/floral/RG exotic flavor; long slight peppery/RG/floral
rather phenolic/cider some tannic bit bitter rather exotic finish; probably needs some age; a rather exotic
white; love the nose but rather phenolic on the palate; seems mid-way between a Movia (skin-contact Lite)
and a Gravner (w/o the oxidation); actually pretty close to OliverMcCrum's Skerk wines. $29.00
10. Ryme RibollaGialla VareVnyd/NapaVlly (13.9%; 44 cs) 2010: Med.dark bit bronze color that suggests some
skin contact; strong phenolic/cidery/apple cider rather honeyed/peppery very exotic nose; very tart quite
phenolic/apple cider some honeyed/peppery/mead-like quite rich rather tannic/bitter slight oxidized flavor;
very long strong phenolic/apple cider/mead-like bit honeyed/peppery rich finish w/ slight oxidation; quite
unusual/exotic RG that reminds me a lot of the Vodopivec Vitovska than anything; interesting to see how
it will evolve; I'm clueless. $40.00
11. Forlorn-Hope Kumo To Ame Rose Wine DeWittVnyd/AmadorCnty (117 cs; 11.33%; TourigaNacional/TintaRoriz/
TintaCao/TintaAmarella; early picked) 2012: Med.gold bit bronze quite light color; rather stony/dusty/
earthy some spicy/cinammon bit strawberry almost Provence/Rousillon-like quite fragrant nose; quite tart
rather austere bit pungent/spicy/cinammon light strawberry/cranberry/floral some dusty/earthy/stony
flavor; long tangy/metallic very spicy/cinammon/strawberry/watermelon some stony/earthy/dusty bit tannic
rather austere finish; not a lot of perfumed fruit to it and a stony/austere character like some
Rousillon whites; not a rose to sip but needs some garliky oysters to go with it; quite unusual/austere
for a Calif rose. $25.00
12. Forlorn-Hope TrouGrit TrousseauGris KingAndrewsVnyd/SuisunVlly/SolanoCnty (34 cs; 10.57%;
3 yr old vines) 2012: Med.gold rather burnshed/bronze color; strong phenolic/apple cider/mead some
earthy/dusty quite exotic complex nose; soft somewhat tangy/metallic/grapefruity rather tannic/phenolic/
cidery slight bitter rather earthy/dusty slight strawberry/floral rather complex flavor; long quite
phenolic/tannic/cidery/mead-like bit bitter slight strawberry/floral/earthy/stony finish; quite exotic
nose but a bit tough on the palate; interesting to see where this will go. $25.00
And the usual blather from TheBloodyPulpit:
1. Chalone: Thiis is a wine I've been drinking w/ great relish over the last yr, since DarrellCorti
brought it in. It is from the last crop of the original CB vines planted at Chalone in the 1920's. I'd
never picked up the pungent/sauerkrauty character in the nose before, but it still has that elegant/
pretty CB fruit on the palate.
2. Kirschenman: This is the first wine I've had from KirscenmanVnyd, a old vine vnyd TeganPassalacqua bought
about a yr ago. It has some beautiful old-vine Zin on it that some has gone to Mike and Morgan, I believe.
Didn't know they had PG on it nor the age of the vines.
This was a very exotic rendition of PG, because of the (presumed) skin contact. Very strong aromatics,
but also that phenolic character. I think I would have liked a bit more acid & brightness on the palate;
it seems a bit like a cold-climate grape grown in a hot climate. It reminded me a lot of the BigTableFarm
OR (skin-contact) PG I had a yr ago at ZaZu, but much more impressive aromatics.
3. Verdelho: This was a very interesting comparison. The Bariscafo was Matt's best barrel of QueSaudade
that was held out an xtra year in (presumably old/neutral) barrel and not topped up in that time. It
reminded me a bit of the Jura sous voile whites, but not the level of oxidation and the fino sherry
character thos wines sometimes show. Pretty exotic stuff.
4. Forrest: I'm a huge ForrestGump fan. He had some pretty profound things to say. Take a look:
I used the "stupid is as stupid does" on a recent Heimhoff blog post..but it was over everyone's head.
Matt's wines brings to mind ForrestGump as well: "Life is like a box of chocolates. You never know what
you're gonna get". That's sorta the way w/ Matt's whites. He likes to play around w/ skin-contact whites.
Sometimes they show a strong phenolic character, sometimes they only hint of that phenolic character.
And sometimes they're huge fruit whites (like the QueSaudade) made to play well in Monktown....if ever they
make it back there. The reds are usually more conventional...sometimes more mainstream, sometimes pretty
exotic; but always an adventure to try.
5. I've sung the praises of MattRorick's Forlorn-Hope wines before. This was the largest tasting of his whites
I've yet had. The ranged from beautiful perfumed/aromatic like the Torrentes/Verdelho...proving that Matt
can out-slut anyone when it comes to making white wines. To the highly phenolic whites that leave you
scratching your head in puzzlement on what he's trying to do here. I, in general, liked these wines quite
a lot. Some of my people were not able to warm up to some of them. They're not for everyone. Damned box
of chocolates.


text:
Reporting - Cisco Contact Center Gateway Deployments: Requery on parent reflects as an abandoned call on parent and child
From DocWiki
Requery on parent reflects as an abandoned call on parent and child
|Problem Summary
|While doing enterprise queuing at the parent with Unified CVP, the call is sent to a Unified SCCE child and the agent does not answer. The Requery feature on the Parent pulls the call back. On the childm this is reflected as an abandon call with a call disposition of 3 Abandon Ring. On the parent, the call is reflected as call disposition 4, Abandon Delay. This reflects an abandoned call on both the TCD record as well as Call Type Half Hour data on both parent and child.
|Error Message
|None, but see symptom for what appears in the reports.
|Possible Cause
|Due to the nature of requery, there is no way to avoid this situation.
|Recommended Action
|Create custom reporting to calculate the true number of abandons. Total number of abandons = (RCD.RouterErrorCode = 448) + (TCD.CallDisposition = 3)
|Release 7.5(1) and 8.0
|Associated CDETS #


text:
- Heavyweight
Harrison eyes revenge fight with Price
Audley Harrison returns to the ring this weekend, but he is looking beyond Prizefighter to a revenge mission on David Price.
Harrison is one of the enigmas of British boxing, as he never really progressed from winning gold at the Olympics in 2000. He has suffered a number of overwhelming defeats, the most recent of which was a first-round knockout by Price in October of last year.
He has resisted calls to retire and will be on the Prizefighter card at York Hall on Saturday, which he hopes will be a springboard to a fresh chapter in his career.
"I'm back and I would love to fight David Price," Harrison said. "He took me out and I would like the opportunity to avenge that.
"After the David Price fight people thought I would never get back from it and that they had seen the last of me. It made me look bad. But I have come up from underneath all of that rubble and it didn't take me long to say, 'Hell, it's not over yet!'.
"I was too hyped up for the Price fight and it allowed him to walk me onto his big right hand and finish me. I learn from my mistakes and that's the bottom line. I made a mistake against Price and he made me pay for it.
"I felt good and mentally I was back together. But it just wasn't to be. Now you just don't know what happens and, if it is possible, I would love the chance of fighting David again."
Harrison believes that despite all the setbacks, he can still get his career back on an upward curve.
"I still haven't fulfilled my dreams," he said. "My goals have not been achieved and it would be crazy for me to come back and just win the Prizefighter, so my goals are still there.
"The burning desire is still there and with optimism and the string of performances you are going to see, I can do it. I am about to reintroduce myself into the heavyweight division. I have lived the dream but I haven't achieved what I wanted."


text:
Manto to work one-on-one with Viciedo, Flowers
Hitting coach traveling to Florida next week for in-person tutorial session
By Scott Merkin /01/07/13 2:28 PM ET
CHICAGO -- Class will be in session for Dayan Viciedo and Tyler Flowers early next week, when White Sox hitting coach Jeff Manto makes a trip down the East Coast to Florida.
It could be an on-field classroom of three, with Manto also expected to work with shortstop and fellow Florida resident Alexei Ramirez. But implementing a slight change in Viciedo's hitting approach by adding a small leg kick and making sure Flowers is at a good physical and mental place stand as the focus of Manto's excursion.
"What I want to do is meet them face to face and explain what we are going to try to work on in Spring Training," Manto told MLB.com during a Sunday night phone interview, mentioning that Flowers will be traveling from Georgia for the two-day session. "We'll do it face to face, not over the phone, and have live pitching with it.
"That way Viciedo, for example, can get a feel for it, see what he's doing and ask questions. He can work on that during the time until Spring Training instead of getting him out of sorts by starting it at Spring Training."
Adding this new Viciedo leg kick came about through discussions involving Manto, assistant hitting coach Harold Baines and manager Robin Ventura. It's something Viciedo employed early on in his White Sox Minor League days, but not consistently from at-bat to at-bat.
Manto doesn't consider himself a big leg kick guy. But in Viciedo's instance, Manto felt it was clearly needed for the 23-year-old talent, who fanned 120 times last season.
"With this leg kick, the timing, his body will be behind the ball more often and give him a better chance for better contact," Manto said. "He's such a tremendous hitter, but sometimes he gets so excited getting after the ball.
"Dayan hit [25] homers and drove in 78 and we are still going to mess with him. That's how good he is, how good we think he is and can be. I'll be able to show him exactly what we think is best for him."
If the leg kick doesn't work for Viciedo once the White Sox get going during Spring Training, then Manto and company will go back to working with Viciedo on what he's been doing and where he feels comfortable. They strongly believe this change will be for the better.
As for Flowers' Florida work, Manto wants to make sure the catcher's "bottom half is intact" and that he's in a good overall position to hit in preparing for the transition to a starting job.
"We won't know what we have until the end of Spring Training, after he gets consistent at-bats like a No. 1," Manto said of Flowers. "We'll be dealing with a lot of things for the first time with him, and the last thing he needs to be worried about is mechanics."
White Sox lineups have not been officially set, not with five weeks to go before the start of Spring Training. But a pretty good guess can be made.
Alejandro De Aza and free-agent signee Jeff Keppinger, who Manto says "can do anything you want in the batter's box," figure to be the top two hitters. Veterans Adam Dunn, Paul Konerko and Alex Rios make up a potent middle of the order, but it's the final four hitters that have White Sox fans concerned.
There's not a question of ability where Ramirez, Viciedo, Flowers and Gordon Beckham are concerned. It's more about bunching together four free swingers with all four having an on-base percentage of .300 or below during the 2012 campaign.
Flowers is thought to have on-base potential with regular at-bats. Ramirez is coming off an admitted down year, despite driving in 73, and Beckham exited the 2012 campaign with a newfound confidence that wasn't there at the start. The change in Viciedo's approach could help, although even experience might not alter his aggressive style.
The answer on this matter from Manto probably isn't the one White Sox supporters want to hear, but it's the same sort of response the even-keel hitting coach provides when asked about having just two left-handed hitters in the starting lineup. He's happy with what he has.
"You probably don't want that [low on-base bunched together], and on paper, you think [it might be a problem]," Manto said. "Then again, with these guys, I don't think you'll get that again.
"These guys got better and have proven themselves as the season went on. They learned from their at-bats. It takes a while to be a great player. These are good players but certainly on their way. Unfortunately the big leagues are tough. So, you get through some of the roadblocks and hiccups they have, and everyone gets better."


text:
In addition to the money received through the high-speed rail program, Caltrain also will receive more than $100 million in connectivity funding through Proposition 1A. Additional funds for the project will come from a combination of local, regional and federal sources.
A modern Caltrain system is expected to provide more service, carry more riders, get more cars off the roads, reduce the operating subsidy and reduce pollution.
"There is a generational responsibility to leave behind a world that is better than the one we found. This speaks to that responsibility," said Caltrain Executive Director Mike Scanlon.
The "blended system" will allow Caltrain and high-speed rail to operate primarily on Caltrain's existing tracks, minimizing the impacts on the communities through which it passes.
With the additional funding for the $1.5 billion project, electric train service could be operating on the Caltrain corridor as soon as 2019.


text:
LANSING, Mich. - Job seekers and employers can connect with each other in a live virtual environment through a MiVirtualCareerFair career networking event hosted by the State of Michigan on Wednesday, September 25 from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m.
"There are more than 60,000 jobs currently available in various industries on the Pure Michigan Talent Connect website, which connects Michigan employers to qualified talent as well as provides resources for job seekers," said Joe Quick, Manager of Talent Programs, Michigan Economic Development Corporation. "With more than 1,900 job seekers participating in last month's MIVirtualCareerFair, these events are proving to be a valuable, convenient way for employers and job seekers to connect without leaving their home or office."
MiVirtualCareerFair allows employers to connect with top talent and gives job seekers the opportunity to apply for dozens of available positions without the inconvenience and expense of traditional job fairs. Since the first MiVirtualCareerFair event in February 2012, more than 90 employers and more than 10,000 job seekers have been connected.
Within MiVirtualCareerFair, employers host exhibitor booths that include links to job postings, company profiles, employee benefits, and employer contact information, and allow job seekers to communicate one-on-one with company representatives. Post-event, employers receive in-depth analytics including candidate resumes, applications, chat transcripts, and booth visit data. All job openings posted during the fair will be accessible to participants for 30 days after the live event.
The September 25 MiVirtualCareerFair event will provide an opportunity to:
· Connect and interact with recruiters and business owners from wherever you are, avoiding the time and expense of traditional career fairs.
· Review available positions and submit resumes for multiple job listings.
· Meet and interact with other job seekers in the Networking Lounge.
· View informational videos in the Auditorium.
· Use Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn to search for connections and update your status from within the event.
Participation is free for job seekers, who can register, view informational videos on the virtual environment, and know how to navigate within the environment.


text:
OUYA, the Android gaming box that took Kickstarter by storm, will be available to purchase on June 4th for $99.99. Early systems are being shipped today for qualifying pre-purchasers. However, if you missed the crowdfunding storm, you'll be able to buy a system from Amazon, Best Buy, GameStop, Target, and on ouya.tv. Additional controllers for the system can be purchased for $49.99 each.
Ouya CEO Julie Uhrman says that there are already 104 published games on the platform, although very few recognizable names. Perhaps the biggest: Final Fantasy 3. There are also a few entertainment apps, including XBMC, Flixster, and TwitchTV. "And developers are releasing new games for OUYA everyday. Eight thousand developers have created developer accounts with us so far," Uhrman said on the official blog.
With its budget price and focus on smaller games, Uhrman believes she can carve out a unique market for her Android console. "Core gamers on average own more than one console. We don't really think it's an either/or situation. We're offering something different," she told GI.biz.


text:
Liverpool are closing in on the £6million January signing of Blackpool winger Thomas Ince, according to the Daily Mirror.
The England U21 international has been earning rave reviews at Bloomfield Road this season, following his £250,000 move from Liverpool less than 18 months ago.
Now Brendan Rodgers wants to bring Ince back to Anfield, after watching him impress in the Championship.
The 20-year-old left under previous management after being deemed not good enough for Liverpool's first-team, however the new coach - who has a reputation for nurturing and bringing through young players - wants to reunite him with the Merseyside outfit.
Ince is the son of former Liverpool midfielder Paul, and despite being valued at £6million, he will only cost the club around £4million because the Reds still hold a 35 per cent sell-on clause.
Negotiations between the two clubs are believed to be at an advanced stage, with Rodgers already making clear he will not stand in the way of any of Liverpool's fringe players if they want to leave the club in the New Year.
Do YOU want to write for GiveMeSport? Get started today by signing-up and submitting an article HERE: https://www.givemesport.com/writeforgms


text:
20041 Surnames | 130698 Records | 2693 Reunions
Dead Fred asks:Are you a Desperate Genealogist?
Click the e-book above for details!
Dead Fred's Genealogy Photo Archive, a free, fun photo genealogy research web site devoted to helping you visualize your heritage!
Photo Thumbnail
Click image for
larger view.
Order The Desperate Genealogist's Idea Book: Creative Ways to Outsmart Your Elusive Ancestors (eBook).You can also order The Desperate Genealogist's Idea Book in hardcopy format by clicking here.
Photo #70012
Last Name: Pauley
First Name : Abbie
Middle Name: Jane
Subject's City: Delbarton
Subject's State: WV
Subject's County: MINGO
Subject's Country: USA
Date: 1941-1960
Photographer's City:
Photographer's State:
Nee: White
Type** : B&W
Comments: Abbie Jane Pauley (Nee: White) | Delbarton WV USA | 1941-1960 | Comments: My mom holding my sister Karen, 5 years younger than me. Sherry, who is two years younger than me, is to the left. The picture is on Hazel Chafin White's(grandma) porch) near Delbarton,WV about 1961.
Digital Image Only?
Everyone Listed In This Photo:
To view all records posted by this submitter, click here:
Search Photos | Post Photos | Surnames | Mysteries | Annuals
Meet Fred | Testimonials | Media | Archivists | FAQs
Contact Us | Groups | Links | Your Own Search Box | Marketplace
Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
Free genealogy searches for those looking into their family history.
© 2001-2018 DeadFred.com Genealogy Photo Archive
P.O. Box 6937 | Springdale, AR | 72766-6937 | (479) 750-0082
Search Photos
Post Photos
Meet Fred
Media Center
Contact Us
Facebook Group
Your Own Search Box


text:
With Tuesday's election results, President Obama and Congress should take steps to end "the warfare state" instituted by the George W. Bush White House.
No one can deny that threats to U.S. security exist around the world. But the Defense Department needs continued reform to meet those varied threats and to cut the most costly elements in the core Pentagon budget that were developed for past wars.
Starting in 2003, the United States for the first time fought wars, in Iraq and Afghanistan, without a tax to pay for them. Ironically, the core Defense budget during the Bush administration was supposed to include funds for such events.
The September 2001 quadrennial review, which laid the policy foundation for the Bush fiscal 2003 Pentagon budget, called for forces that could "swiftly defeat aggression in overlapping major conflicts while preserving for the president the option to call for a decisive victory in one of those conflicts — including the possibility of regime change or occupation." That sounds a lot like foreseeing the invasion of Iraq that came 18 months later. The plan said the military also could, within the proposed budget, "Conduct a limited number of smaller-scale contingency operations."
Still, supplemental budgets were sought for the two wars, putting the costs, now near $1.5 trillion, on a credit card.
Meanwhile, Defense's core budget has risen about 4 percent a year, adjusted for inflation, except for the past two years. As Todd Harrison of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments (CSBA) points out, President Obama's plan to reduce 100,000 Army troops and Marines over the next five years will still leave ground forces larger than those existing at the time of the 9/11 attacks.
Then there are the funds wasted on failed efforts to modernize weapons systems. According to a 2011 CSBA study, "Over the past decade, at least a dozen major programs were terminated without any operational systems being fielded. The sunk cost of the terminated programs . . . for example, totals some $46 billion." The Pentagon also is paying hundreds of millions to upgrade some systems, such as the F-22 stealth fighter plane.
Overruns are a problem at all levels. A recent Government Accountability Office report, for example, found that the Pentagon's six computer systems that produce auditable financial statements for all the military services "experienced cost increases of $8 billion and schedule delays ranging from 1.5 to 12.5 years."
No other government entity would have been permitted to continue getting almost unlimited funding in the face of its past lack of fiscal controls.
Wasteful war-zone spending also has been well documented, but the money continues to flow.
Over the past decade, the United States has spent about $11.7 billion on facilities for the Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF). But, as an audit released last month by the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) found: "The Afghan government will likely be incapable of fully sustaining ANSF facilities after the transition in 2014 and the expected decrease in U.S. and coalition support."
On Tuesday I wrote about corruption in Afghanistan with Americans participating. Today's lesson is that the United States and its allies still build facilities that Afghans can't sustain.
At an Afghan National Police compound, SIGAR saw corrosion on a pipe in a water treatment system caused by pumping liquid chlorine into the water. "If not replaced with pipe of a chlorine-compatible material, the pipe may fail, resulting in the release of hazardous liquid chlorine into the room," the SIGAR report said. A contract for $24 million was needed to repair that and other construction flaws, the report said.
Construction goes on. One of the biggest projects is for a new Afghan National Security University underway outside Kabul. It will be a four-year institution, based on West Point, that will graduate officers for the Afghan Army and air force.
The first contract, for $25.6 million, for the facility was awarded in July. It includes construction of an "administration building, barracks, a classroom, support buildings, weapons storage and cleaning, obstacle courses, and all utilities and site grading to serve a population of approximately three thousand personnel," according to a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers notice.
Last month, a second phase was advertised by the Corps for building additional "barracks, dining facility, library, gymnasium, laundry building, other support buildings, athletic field and parade ground." The cost could run as high as $100 million for this phase, which could take 15 months to build . I wonder if the Afghan army also has its own U.S. -financed military bands.
Holman W. Jenkins Jr., a Wall Street Journal columnist, wrote Wednesday that Obama voters "are ready neither to reform the welfare state nor pay for it." It called to mind those Virginia voters who live around and work at the military facilities in Norfolk and Hampton Roads. For months they'd been hit with ads warning about the 200,000 defense jobs that would be lost should Obama and former Gov. Tim Kaine win their elections.
These areas went overwhelmingly for Obama and Kaine, indicating residents are both ready to reform the warfare state and willing to pay for the security provided by what the president described Tuesday night as "the strongest military on earth and the best troops this world has ever known."
For previous Fine Print columns, go to washingtonpost.com/fedpage.


text:
LONG BEACH - Kate del Castillo fans had one objective Saturday: Find the Mexican actress at the Toyota Pro/Celebrity and make her grin and bear it.
And the star of "La Reina del Sur" happily did, posing for pictures with members of her fan club and a massive Teddy bear wearing a T-shirt with a picture of her they brought.
Decked in caps, bracelets and sparkly nails that spelled out her name, members of the actress's fan club
traveled from as far as Chicago to see her.
"I was really emotional right now when I saw her," said Los Angeles resident Maria Vallejo, who teared up after meeting the actress. "I've been a fan since I was 4 years old. ... I love how she acts, and ever since the (TV series) `Muchachitas' ... it was like, I want to be like her. She's like my role model."
For fans like Vallejo, the 38th annual Toyota Grand Prix of Long Beach is all about the celebrities.
The Grand Prix, which draws more than 170,000 people over three days, features six races, including the 36th annual Toyota Pro/Celebrity race.
The charity race - which has featured celebrities such as George Lucas, Cameron Diaz, Paul Newman and Keanu Reeves - benefits Miller Children's Hospital in Long Beach and Children's Hospital of Orange County.
This year's race featured del Castillo, Adrien Brody, Eddie Cibrian, Kim Coates, William Fichtner, Hill Harper, Cain Velasquez and Brody Jenner.
With race cars roaring in the background, fans pressed themselves against the fence that surrounded the celebrity compound, hoping to catch a glimpse of their favorite stars.
"That was awesome," she said.
Academy Award winner Brody waved at Hollywood resident Nina Vercher, who held up a sign in the crowds that read, "Happy birthday, Adrien!" (The actor, who won an Oscar for his role in "The Pianist," turned 39 Saturday.)
"It was great," she said. "He's also a great actor. His look just catches me."
Her friend, Toluca Lake resident Marisa Traub, said she came for support. Traub had been coming to the Grand Prix four years in a row, the first time to see Reeves when he participated in the charity race.
"That was my favorite - that's why I started this whole thing," she said, laughing. "It's just a lot of fun. It's a chance to get to see celebrities. It's something different."
Del Castillo's fans were front and center, holding up a banner of the actress in racing gear and the words "There's only one queen. And that's me."
"You have no idea how important that is for me and how much it means, really, because they are adorable," del Castillo said about the fan club and her fans. "I love them. It means so much."
Although del Castillo did not win the charity race - that honor went to comedian Adam Carolla - it did not matter to Vallejo.
"I think she did great in the race - doesn't matter who wins," she said. "She'll always be the best one."


text:
If the Japanese can't do this shit safely, then who can?
Anyone else apparently, that plant was due for replacement/shutdown many years ago.
Anyone else? Including those who ran the reactor in Chernobyl?
Chernobyl was new but read this:
http://web.ics.purdue.edu/~pbawa/421/ETHICAL%20ISSUES%20CHERNOBYL.htm [purdue.edu]
And before you vilify the Soviet system for fraud, incompetence, corruption etc,; read up on the Diablo canyon reactor. It had serious quality issues as well. Such as the shock absorbers on the foundation which were intended to protect it from, IIRC, 7.3 magnitude earthquakes being installed in reverse. Quality issues abound in all construction even reactors. I don't even trust the Germans to do it right.
Diablo canyon and Chernobyl also points out that if a good reactor design can be made, building it to spec is still a problem.
Trivia tidbit: I do believe that the author of the Chernobyl memo is Uri Andropov who chose Gorbachev as his successor to the post of General Secretary of the CP of the Soviet Union. Gorbachev who instituted Glasnost and Perestroika, which eventually led to the peaceful downfall of the Soviet Union.
The Soviets sucked. But lets review the three power reactor accidents that have presented any potential or actual risk to the public and lets see how those accidents shook out:
1) Chernobyl: A soviet designed reactor with no containment that had a steam explosion because the operators were not trained for the experiment they were running, and they lost control of the reactor by disabling all the safety systems and doing things all the other reactors in the USSR said no to. No shock there that it had a steam explosion. (Operator error, design flaw)
2) Three Mile Island: A faulty pressure relief valve on the PWRs pressurizer and a bad design for the indicator, plus poor location of the indicators on the back of a panel, no release but core damage. (Operator error, design flaw)
3) Fukushima: a Tsunami induced beyond design basis accident, where the Units survived the earthquake and apparently the safety systems were working until the Tsunami took out the Diesel generators knocking all but the RCIC safety system out. (Beyond DBA)
1) Chernobyl: Core Damage and exposure plus release plus fire. Worst case accident. Expected because the soviets just didnt give a fuck, they built a faulty reactor, had no containment and they blew it up with faulty procedures and an arrogant approach to Nuclear engineering. Big shocker to no one that they had a loss of containment accident and killed a lot of people trying to bring it under control. Classic Soviet Engineering Fuckup.
Actual Measurable Effects: Unit destroyed, lots of deaths of personnel involved in controlling the accident. Area contaminated, but effects have been much less over time than expected, tours are available of the area now. Worst case loss of control accident.
Cause: Experiment coupled with Operator Error/Arrogance. Soviet reactor design was unstable at low power, Night shift was untrained for the experiment that they were told to run. Plant tried to run experiment during the day, but was told to stop due to Brown Outs and passed this on to the junior night shift. Shift lost control of reactor, steam explosion took the lid off the uncontained reactor. Because Soviet reactors were designed to be refueled while running it had no containment and the rest is history. No one builds reactors like this except the Soviets, so this kind of accident can not occur with non-soviet designed reactors.
2) TMI: Core damage, no known release. It scared a lot of people at the time because it wasn't clear, at the time, what was wrong or what the effects were. Communication was poor and people understandably were panicked. No known release was measured, and a number of studies have looked into this. Increased rates of cancer were not detected, but its possible it did occur. Unfortunately, at the time the accident occurred the movie China Syndrome came out and this may have also had some impact on public perception of this accident.
Actual measurable effects: Core Damaged, Unit unusable, No deaths, no known direct health effects although there is some debate from residents on this point. Scientific studies so far have concluded that if there was any release (and there is no evidence of , it did not have any impact on public health and safety. The material than ended up the aux building did not contain solids at room temp, so any release was likely xenon (and maybe some argon or krypton), and possibly some radioactive iodine. Data at the time of the accident indicates that the release was less than 2 mrem, or 1/40th the natural dose for residents of a high altitude city. In short, not above background levels and no evidence of I-131 or C-137 in mammalian milk in the surrounding areas. So, the actual effects were scary sounding, but not anything that would have adverse impacts on health.
Cause: The Babcock and Wilcox valve indicated it was closed if the solenoid was de-energized, not when it was actually closed. It stuck open, and the indicators said it was closed. There were sensors on th
That said, in the grand scheme of things, it has not presented a harm to the general public that is greater than other risks: look at the poor folks in the spillways of the Mississippi. Or the coal ash spill from the coal-fired plant in Kingston, TN.
Three incidents like you describe above, over thirty-two years, is a pretty darned good safety record, with the 440+ commercial power reactors around the world. Why does nuclear have a bad rap? One possibility is it stems from fear [anengineerindc.com] since it all started with a few mushroom clouds, but whatever the reason, it seems awfully visceral.
>I quibble with the "no evidence of any significant release of radiation" quote for Fukushima
I did say significant (not no release, I'm a Nuclear Engineer too!).
So yes, there certainly should have been noble gas releases, and probably C-131 radioisotopes. Possibly others with cladding damage, but its hard to know all the facts at Fukushima right now (we sent people, and the Japanese have not been really that cooperative), including release so I agree that a release of some radiation occurred. We ca
This article by some nuclear engineers at NC State [blogspot.com] is an excellent, fact-based breakdown of what the effects are of the Fukushima accident, with known numbers to date.
Bottom line: Three cancers.
Three cases of cancer that would not otherwise have occurred, and this is using the (very conservative) linear-no-threshold assumption.
Others in this thread have been bleating about how bad nuclear power accidents have been. The following quote from the UN's final report on the Chernobyl accident (a summary can be found here [21stcentur...cetech.com] ) doesn't support their claims:
"Apart from the increase in thyroid cancer after childhood exposure, no increases in overall cancer incidence or mortality have been observed that could be attributed to ionizing radiation. The risk of leukemia, one of the main concerns (leukemia is the first cancer to appear after radiation exposure, because of its short latency time of 2 to 10 years), does not appear to be elevated, even among the recovery operation workers. Neither is there any proof of other non-malignant disorders that are related to ionizing radiation. However, there were widespread psychological reactions to the accident, which were due to fear of the radiation, not to actual radiation doses."
People's fear is very real and important. But it's not substantiated by facts.
>I quibble with the "no evidence of any significant release of radiation" quote for Fukushima
I did say significant (not no release, I'm a Nuclear Engineer too!).
So yes, there certainly should have been noble gas releases, and probably C-131 radioisotopes. Possibly others with cladding damage, but its hard to know all the facts at Fukushima right now (we sent people, and the Japanese have not been really that cooperative), including release so I agree that a release of some radiation occurred. We can messure that, but the amounts so far appear to present no threat to public health and safety, hence the use of the words "significant release of radiation". Thats why I mentioned the WHO quote, they seem like the best non-nuclear source, so it seems reasonable they probably aren't trying to spin it and there conclusion was no threat to health at this point.
As an aside, going back on GE BWR training I would have expected some release of nobles and C-131. Until we have cold shutdown and we can all study the events its all just inference at this point, so this could all change.
>Three incidents like you describe above, over thirty-two years, is a pretty darned good safety record, with the
> 440+ commercial power reactors around the world. Why does nuclear have a bad rap?
> One possibility is it stems from fear [anengineerindc.com] since it all started with a few mushroom clouds,
>but whatever the reason, it seems awfully visceral.
Yeah I agree. I think you have it right, mushroom clouds and nuclear weapons. That and general ignorance of how power reactors work coupled with a general misunderstanding of the health effects of ionizing radiation, and that we are all exposed to it all day long. As Arthur C. Clarke said "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
I wonder if we still called them something else, like "atomic steam generator plants" instead of "Nuclear Power Reactors" if people would be less irrationally afraid of them.
Eh, and if people were perfectly rational we would hit the snooze button in the face of the absurdly small danger that terrorism represents and spend our money on something useful that will save lives, like choking prevention courses, or trying to teach people how not eat yourself to death. To bad people are stupid.
Nuclear suffers the double edged blade of stupid fears and rational fears. You are not being stupid if you decide you don't feel like living next to Fukushima right now. The area is irradiated
Your facts are out of date, measurements have been done and data has been released. Not of the reactor, which is irrelevant to those not involved in the cleanup unless bad things happens again, but of the area around the power plant. Decent quantities of radiation (cesium-137) have been detected in some areas. Enough to essentially leave the areas uninhabitable without significant cleanup costs. I think I've read estimates of up to 200 square km being unsafely radioactive but don't quote me on that. Not ins
A fantastic summary, but I quibble with the "no evidence of any significant release of radiation" quote for Fukushima. Two months ago, I would have said it was impossible for a reactor in Japan to contaminate the drinking water in Tokyo, but that's exactly what happened. To the detriment of the industry (and I'm a nuclear engineer), there was a significant release of radiation.
Right. The number of casualties is small, but the area evacuated is large, and may be evacuated for decades.
For actuarial purposes, insurance for nuclear plants now has to be repriced. Total power reactor years worldwide is now about 14,000, with two major evacuation incidents. So an assumption of one evacuation of a 30km circle around the plant and acquisition of that real estate per 7000 reactor-years is appropriate for insurance purposes.
The insurance cost will vary with location. That's a big probl
So seriously, lets stop the fear mongering, four accidents of significance and only one - due to a terribly stupid design - resulted in actual threats to the public. Nuclear power is safe, and if people would just take the time to actually understand it they would know it.
It is statements such as this that contribute to the public suspicion of the nuclear industry IMO. Nuclear power is not "safe", it has risks like any other industrial scale power generation. The public knows there are risks, it knows that the nuclear industry has a history of trying to hide the risks, and it knows that human factors are often more significant than reactor design when safety is concerned.
At some point the industry needs to hold their hands up and say "yes we have been doing it wrong", and
3) Fukushima: a Tsunami induced beyond design basis accident
People keep repeating that phrase "beyond design basis" as if it's some kind of positive thing.
All it means is that the designers got their design basis dead wrong as it didn't reflect the actual real-world conditions.
Since the designers in this case weren't some fly-by-night Soviet outfit but General Electric, who built a whole load of reactors based on the same flawed design basis, and neither the company nor the nuclear industry as a whole nor any of the international nuclear regulatory agencies called t
And I'm glad Chalk River is still on line. My wife needed the isotopes they make to help treat her cancer.
Their "spill" was 47 liters of heavy water. No damage, nobody harmed. If they stopped making radioisotopes, they'd kill tens of thousands of patients due to lack of treatment options. And it's not like they can stockpile those compounds. The half life of the useful ones are all pretty short.
There's this fragile thing called perspective. I don't know why so many people lose it when they hear the word "nuclear".
Anyone else apparently, that plant was due for replacement/shutdown many years ago.
Every time there's a nuke plant disaster, some people argue that the particular situation is a special case that can be safely ignored. Undoubtedly, the same arguments will pop up the next time there's a major accident, sabotage or attack (which will undoubtedly be yet another special case).
Exactly. I'm not "scared" of nuclear power, I'm an engineer and I understand the concepts of risk and failure mode effects analysis. The problem is primarily management failures in most of these high-profile accidents, as summarized by the poster above. There is no way to eliminate those on long enough time scales because human beings make mistakes. The problem with nuclear power is that the catastrophe scenario is very, very bad, and the timescale to react is very short. The latest update from Fukushima is
Except they didn't shut it down or replace it. Just like everyone else. Including the US, where practically any time our 104 plants is due for replacement/shutdown, instead it just magically gets relicensed.
So no, nobody else can either.
Obviously it is impossible, which is why we have yearly meltdowns and hundreds of huge exclusion zones around the wo...
Wait a second. We don't. It seems that, unlke oil or coal, the total number of major disasters is way lower on the nuke side.
It's too bad we can't actually build the newer, safer designs. People might protest. It reminds me of the protests when the Cassini probe was launched, all because it had a plutonium RTG on it.
How many oil plant and coal plant explosions did we have in recent years?
According to you they seem to be far more dangerous than nuclear plants
This are not power plants.
How do you dare to compare a nuclear power plants safety with 3rd worlds mining accidents?
Are you completely nuts?
P.S. how many ppl died in oil spills? And again: what has that to do with a power plant and its safety?
Intriguing. Coal kills.
Oh well. Not too different from self-driving cars. The first self-driving car that even injures someone will be a media circus. Yet I guess we're ok with human drivers: http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/Main/index.aspx [dot.gov].
How many oil plant and coal plant explosions did we have in recent years?
You don't need explosions for those to harm people. Air pollution, mining incidents, global warming... if all the consequences of coal were piled into a single, per-decade event it would be an appalling accident, far worse than Fukushima.
We can't build the newer, safer designes for two reasons. The first is that the nuclear industry, by which I mean both the operators and the regulators, have utterly failed to be honest and diligent. By this I mean that they generally do their best to try to paint a happy face on any problem that may come up, rather than saying "here's what's bad about this, and here's what we're doing about it." Consequently, each time something genuinely bad happens, public trust is further undermined. And they do their best to find the cheapest possible solution to any problem, rather than actually trying to solve it, because if they had to actually solve it, it might be cheaper to simply shut down the plant.
The root of this problem is that nuclear, like solar, is not actually economically competitive with carbon sources. We'd like to stop using carbon sources of energy, but it's difficult because it's cheaper (partially because we never count the cost of the externalities). The difference between nuclear and solar is that in the case of nuclear, there's a temptation to cheap out on safety so as to make it more economically feasible, or to simply not account for externalities, like the cost of exclusion zones when a serious accident like the ones at Chernobyl and Fukushima happens.
So the point is not that nuclear is inherently unsafe, or inherently a bad idea, but rather that the economics of nuclear power tend to increase risk, not decrease it, and that what is being risked is an outcome like the ones in Fukushima and Chernobyl.
Nuclear energy is quite cheap once the plant is up and running they can be run indefinitely with proper maintenance. Cost wouldn't be an issue if we required the coal and oil industries to pay a fee for the pollution they produce as a byproduct of production.
Nuclear energy is quite cheap once the plant is up and running they can be run indefinitely with proper maintenance.
Fukushima Dai-ichi's energy was cheap until 3/11/2011 and it was properly maintained as much as any of them. Also, the Titanic was a great ship that provided excellent transportation until halfway across the Atlantic.
"Also, the Titanic was a great ship that provided excellent transportation until halfway across the Atlantic."
But, we didn't stop sailing because of the Titanic.
The same is true for wind, water and solar plants, or more even for sea wave power plants.
It seems that, unlke oil or coal, the total number of major disasters is way lower on the nuke side.
Of course, the "way lower" number of nuclear plants may have something to do with that. But on you also have to consider the lack of evacuations around a coal plant in the event of disasters - and I don't know of a single coal plant that has a sarcophagus over it, or a vast area around it where people are forbidden to live.
I don't know of a single coal plant that has a sarcophagus over it
Good catch. Mostly that's because its toxic materials are either blown into the atmosphere or end up in large reservoirs on site, which have a habit of breaking.
a vast area around it where people are forbidden to live.
I suppose that's mostly because we're ignorant of the hazards of coal plant output. I hear the health effects are quite drastic, let alone living downstream in the event of a fly ash spill.
I suppose that's mostly because we're ignorant of the hazards of coal plant output. I hear the health effects are quite drastic, let alone living downstream in the event of a fly ash spill.
You should not believe everything you hear. There is no fly ash anymore in a modern plant since 15 - 20 years (in EU especially, not sure about USA, the last discussion with a
I don't really know what you mean with a s
You should not believe everything you hear. There is no fly ash anymore in a modern plant since 15 - 20 years (in EU especially, not sure about USA, the last discussion with a
I personally know a guy who was paid to climb stacks here in the states and you can find out-of-spec plants as fast as you can pay people to climb them.
Anyway, regarding fly ash: it is separated in a way that most of it can be used as building material, e.g. for roads or as hard plaster in buildings. Only a very small amount gets deposited.
We did actually have a case with some sheet rock from china sweating radioactives and toxics, as you may recall; it was made from fly ash. A great deal of fly ash seems to be made into concrete, which seems like a decent way to entomb radioactives if it's sufficiently uniform, except that the suckers who are working with the stuff are going to breathe a certain amount of it past the sides of their respirators, assuming they're even in the first world where they get to use them. Here in the USA you can track increased radioactives downwind of pretty much any coal plant. I would guess that it's worse in China. The jet stream brings a crapload of Chinese pollution here. There are now days where there's more Chinese pollution in Los Angeles than there is of the local kind.
I was in highschool at the time and some girl was trying to get people to sign a petition to prevent the Cassini probe from launching in one of my classes. I told her I wouldn't sign it and when she asked why I basically explained how it was statistically impossible for it to hit the earth during the slingshot maneuver and even if it did, and the containment of the plutonium failed in a worst case scenario, the increased nuclear exposure would be so small as the be statistically insignificant, and since we
Hey, this is Slashdot, nukes can do no wrong! Clearly this must be propaganda from the bleeding heart eviro-nuts who don't hold the same opinions as me!
Nobody here says that, at least not that I've seen. But a bunch of us do point out that under normal circumstances and ones in which nuclear reactors are supposed to be engineered to handle, things like this don't happen. If you've been paying attention, this wouldn't have been much of an issue had the reactor been properly designed, it's beyond my comprehension as to why they did not have a proper contingency plan for tsunami, given the plant's location and the general likelihood of such a disaster. Had th
under normal circumstances and ones in which nuclear reactors are supposed to be engineered to handle, things like this don't happen
Well, thank goodness! For a while there, I thought we had a major disaster on our hands.
Fact is: they had planned for a Tsunami.
Only not for such a big one.
And: they did not even do it properly, instead of putting the emergency power into a truly save spot they had them standing outside on the field. The cheapest solution.
Imho it can't be so hard to make an air tight building with lets say a 30 yards high chimney and air take ins and put the emergency power diesel generators into it. However, if they do that, they surely mess it up as well and it will break exactly in the moment where it is ne
I can only assume you're reading a different Slashdot, because there have been a large number of anti-nuke comments on every Fukushima story.
Much of this is TEPCO's fault, and specifically the fault of their CEO, Masataka Shimizu. A few weeks after the hydrogen explosions, it came out that the CEO had ruled that only he could authorize any release of radioactive material, including venting hydrogen to the atmosphere to avoid an explosion.
When that decision needed to be made, the CEO was not present when wanted. [reuters.com] When the earthquake occurred, he happened to be in another part of Japan and had trouble getting to TEPCO HQ. But there was no backup plan if the CEO was unavailable. Nobody took over and made the decision. (In the US, policy is that the on-site plant manager can make that decision.)
The CEO wasn't seen in public for weeks after the disaster. He was rumored to have fled the country, that he'd committed suicide, or that he was in a hospital. The Prime Minister of Japan personally went over to TEPCO headquarters to demand answers and action. Even that didn't help, and his office had to directly take over management of the disaster.
Masataka Shimizu is still CEO of TEPCO.
Japan used to have a tradition of seppuku in such situations.
I wonder if the next logical step will follow the Chernobyl pattern.
After the Chernobyl disaster, a common effort by all soviet republic to give relief to victims of the disaster resulted in building a new city from scratch. Slavutych [wikipedia.org] is the city of people from the Chernobyl zone. Employees of the power plant, veterans of liquidation of the disaster, foresters, guards and scientists maintaining the zone of exclusion live in a city 50km from Pripyat, and these currently employed in the zone are going the 60km to work by a train every morning. The town, population 25,000 is divided into 8 districts, each with unique style and character given by a chosen soviet republic that lead building it. The design was specifically intended to give people new hope, a consolation and compensation for what they lost. The plan mostly worked: the standard of living is one of best in Ukraine, and there is outstanding number of children in the town, making its average age the lowest in the country.
Now I wonder how would the counterpart in Japan look like, if Japan chooses a similar solution. A modern town built in a year or less from scratch, designed with keeping spirits up in mind, done by the Japaneese may be very interesting...
Now I wonder how would the counterpart in Japan look like, if Japan chooses a similar solution.
The problem is, they're not exactly swimming in land in Japan. (They're swimming in radioactivity.) They'd have to build it on the side of a mountain [nydailynews.com] or something. Seriously though, the best option is to expatriate as rapidly as possible. Spend some of their money while it's worth something to secure some land for their citizens in some other nation and send them packing. Whole towns are now flooded at high tide since the 'quake [sfgate.com]. Japan is facing a chronic land shortage.
All this comes off as insensitive I'm sure, and I'm sorry, but it doesn't make sense to build anything in Japan any more. I'd be talking real seriously with Brazil. They already have lots of Japanese and surely they could benefit from lots more. The Japanese are very serious about protecting the environment in their own country [greenpeace.org.uk], so it might actually improve their environmental conditions to import them all.
It seems that the quake itself damaged the #1 reactor, well before the tsunami took out the power system:
http://mdn.mainichi.jp/mdnnews/news/20110515p2g00m0dm007000c.html [mainichi.jp]
Life in the state of nature is solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short. - Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan


text:
GLEN ELLYN – A new residential and parking development may be coming to downtown Glen Ellyn at the site of longtime grocer McChesney and Miller.
Although plans are still being discussed and nothing has been approved, the development could include a 502-space parking garage, a 185-unit apartment building and about 3,750 square feet of retail space that would replace the grocery store and part of a nearby commuter parking lot, said Jim Hughes, Jr., CEO of Wheaton-based Next Generation Development.
The developer is under contract to purchase the property from McChesney and Miller owner Bill Behrmann, but the closing of the sale depends on whether the project plans receive approval from the village of Glen Ellyn, Hughes said.
Next Generation Development was initially attracted to downtown Glen Ellyn after hearing about the village's efforts to bring development to the area, he said.
A Downtown Strategic Plan was approved in 2009, which features goals that correspond to the proposed development, including increasing downtown residential units and public parking structures, according to plan documents.
The developer hopes to receive financial assistance from Glen Ellyn to build the three-story parking garage, which would then be owned by the village, Hughes said. Next Generation would lease garage spaces for residents of the apartment complex.
So far, the village appears to like the development concept, he said.
"It's just a matter of them getting their arms around the financial component," Hughes said.
Village Manager Mark Franz said the details of the parking garage have not been finalized, but different scenarios have been discussed.
"We're going to continue to keep an open dialogue," he said.
The garage would be built with two stories below ground and one above ground. The five-story apartment building would sit on top of the garage. The project would close Crescent Boulevard between Glenwood and Prospect avenues.
Next Generation has been in talks with village staff for about a year and recently began casual conversations with individual trustees, Hughes said.
"It's been a staff-driven review up until this point," Franz said.
Besides addressing aspects of the village's Downtown Strategic Plan, benefits could include drawing residents to live in the area and support downtown businesses, Franz said.
The site of the potential development also is part of a tax increment financing (TIF) district, where property taxes to local government entities are frozen. Any increase in taxes that occurs as a result of a rise in property values goes into a TIF fund that is reinvested in the area.
The proposed development could result in an increase in property values, Franz said.
There are a number of approval processes that still need to take place before any construction could begin, however.
If Next Generation's conceptual plans are approved, Hughes hopes to develop more detailed plans and complete necessary studies this year, with a construction start date in early 2015.
Cost estimates for the proposed project are not yet available, he said.
McChesney and Miller has operated in downtown Glen Ellyn since 1862, making it the oldest retail store in DuPage County, according to its website. The current building is not the store's original location in Glen Ellyn.
Behrmann declined to comment. However, Hughes said he has been in talks with the store about potentially using the retail space the new development would offer.