text:
Contest Banner, Elements, Petitions, Requests, Etcetera
Posted by bonesiii , Apr 22 2008 · 530 views
Random Thunks.
Contest Banner
Here's a banner to spread the word about the Powerpoint Face Contest:
Yall must use it, capisce?
That's a Normalfied Calix, a Coolified Kaukau, Coolified Jutlin from my recent Phankuta art topic, Coolified "Igniru"request from GB#1 that was used in the second of the art guides as an example, the original Coolified Vahi, a coolified Hapori Tohu, and finally, a Ninja King face I made for Ninjo a long time ago that he used as his avatar for a while. :)
These are a few of my faves from my own work; hopefully they can help inspire yall for the contest. :)
You can see these and other Powerpoint art on my brickshelf, if you want even more inspiration. :)
A lotta talk lately about new Bionicle or fanfic Elements. Personally I think the more official elements, the better -- even many that Greg has turned down, I would include if it were up to me, but many would simply be considered evil elements just like Shadow. (Acid, for example.) And I really like the idea of "Abstract elements", like "Mind" for intelligence, or "Emotion", in which actual elemental energy would control these abstract aspects of the Matoran's world. I think these would really help make Bionicle's physics even more different from our world, which IMT is a good thing. :)
Maybe more importantly, it would challenge and inspire imagination even better than "obvious" elements. :) I think imagination is a very worthy goal, 'specially considering this is LEGO.
And I think a more complete selection of Legendary elements would make sense, even if they are merely "considered" elements and not actually used in the story. Time and Life don't sound much like a complete list. Force is probably the best example of one I'd support; it's basically kinetics.
The best argument against Aether/Continuum/Space, I think, is that kids wouldn't understand it, and I admit I'm Mr. Physics so this is like kindergarten to me much more so than most people, but I think "the fabric of dimensions" is simple enough to understand -- and just say it can make wormholes, modify physics somewhat in an area, and maybe a few other limited things that could be compared to fabric -- but if it ruptures space, the whole universe pops like a balloon. Besides, all I really wish for is that it be considered an element. (Also, calling it "Space" would be confusing, so another good argument against it is that the alternatives are just as confusing for names.)
Another idea I've had is "Mutated elements" -- where the element itself is mutated, not just the weilder. So the normal rules for elements wouldn't have to apply, per se, and they could be mixed with powers in some ways.
A short list of some random, mixed up examples of elements I have now listed in my Paracosmos Notebook database as real elements in my fanfics:
Lava -- A classified weilder of this rules a volcanic island; fits Ta-Koro style.
Crystal -- Fits Ko-Metru, lightstones, heatstones, etc.
Void -- Vacuum element; I think it fits best as its own element with its own EE, not as a "sub-element" of all others. Plus fits Levhak Kal better.
Blue Fire -- The important element of the RPG, as fans of it already know -- probably best not done in Bionicle though.
Shade -- Similar to Shadow, but not inherently evil. So stories about heroes who use the darkness are possible here. Another that's probably kept to fanfics.
Music -- Sounds weird, but it's tied in with a classified physics concept of the BP that will be revealed in the Le-Koro RPG level. Is an abstract.
Ghost -- Control semi-tangible ghostly materials that can defy gravity.
Ocean -- a mutated element from Water; weilders can breathe water and repair wooden boats.
Garden -- a mutated Le element, similar to Plants, but more for growing crops for food and controlling plant arrangement.
Forge -- a mutated element from Ta; includes ability to make metal and melt it.
Shredder -- a mutated Po element, can shred stone into fine sand with energy beams.
Clockwork -- a mutated Onu element; can reshape any solid into clockwork parts and understand such machines inherently.
____? --- I still need a suggestion for a Ko-equiv for these mutated elements. Any idears?
[EDIT: The above six are the Kriitunga elements. :) Also, the Ko-element is stasis.]
Memory -- an abstract element
Psionics -- an abstract element
Venom -- an evil element
Frost -- painfully cold evil element
Tar -- an evil element
Creation -- a Legendary; includes ability to know how to make things work, and to make them from elemental energy.
Chaos -- a Legendary; includes ability to make order chaotic, plus understanding of "chaos theory" -- controlling things that seem random but are really more like complex dominoes, like dropping a feather, or hitting a target from a distance just right, etc.
And there are quite a few more that are too classified to reveal. :P
As I had to say recently, many members seem to think it's wise to make petitions for any random feeling they have. If you wish Bionicle would go back to styles that sold poorly, you make a petition. If you wish LEGO could magically make prices go down with no reductions in sets, you make a petition. If you dislike Onua Mata, you make a petition. If you want free cookies for life, you make a petition.
Guys, that doesn't make any sense. ;)
First, you must logically determine what LEGO actually should do. Not just what you personally want -- that's personal taste. Bionicle has to appeal to the majority taste, which isn't necessarily the same as your own tastes. And your tastes aren't "better" than everybody else's either. Everybody's equal; to imply otherwise is a form of discrimination, as I talked about in a past entry here.
Also, we are a very tiny minority among the fanbase -- sales results are a much larger form of "petition", and LEGO does listen to sales results quite a bit. So LEGO is concerned with what the fans want, enough to do focus group research and sales analysis and various other things instead of just making random things and hoping they sell. We shouldn't puff ourselves up so we think we're the only fans, or worse, the only fans that matter. Everybody matters.
"Die-hard fans" -- I've heard the argument that devoted older fans are somehow more valuable. I would actually argue the opposite -- toys are for kids. Have you ever seen those cereal ads where they say "These are for kids, silly!"? Well, us adult fans must always remember that we are guests to this experience. Devotion is great, but acting spoiled is not. We should be grateful for the many nods LEGO has sent our way (especially including the storyline reason the Nuva were brought back -- remember that was never motivated for set reasons anyways; it was to have the Nuva in story spotlight).
So petitions like that only send the signal that we want to bite the hand that's feeding us, I'm afraid.
Now, sure, petitions for logical, good causes are okay. I've supported one -- the "bring back the collectibles" one. But that was because the starter thought things through and came up with an idea that was actually plausible. That's the key. :)
No matter what I do I just can't seem to get in the mood to fulfill some art requests from some of you. I apologize for the rediculous delays, and I'm afraid the delays are just going to continue for another few weeks at least. I will try to fulfill the requests I have at this point.
However, from now on, I will not be accepting any art requests at all. No av requests, no banner requests, nothing. I just need to get that load off my shoulders so I can focus on other things. Sorry. :(
One of my favorite things, as a writer, is just reading storyline debates many of you have. Because recently some of my best ideas for Bionicle Paracosmos mysteries have come from things you guys have said. Obviously, I can't get specific or it would ruin the surprises. But the ideas can come from the least expected places.
Similar to how I got great new element ideas from the "What Don't You Want" topic (:lol:), I got a great mystery idea from someone else who was arguing recently about how something was impossible. Basically, it made me think "what if it was possible? What could cause it?" and I made a comparison to something in the real world that fits the scenario, and modified it to make it possible in Bionicle. :D
So keep on debating guys. :P
This Week and Next Week
Probably gonna be busy this week, as I've got a big to-do list from the Dreaded Real Life. I'm hoping to set a new policy in stone related to storyline so we can announce it soon. Don't worry, nothing unusual. :)
Not sure what to expect for next week's schedule but something has come up that might cause me to be away for several days.
If I do have time, I'm trying to catch up on all the Gold Key to Nongu nominations that have made. The problem is, some of the nominations seem so good I haven't had time to read them in detail due to their length. :P
Workin on it...
Next Survurlode Interview
I have three ideas for who to interview next, hopefully in May. But I can't decide which of the three it should be. :P I am leaning towards a Lawyerahk named Bob -- I usually interview somebody that was hinted at in a past interview, and Lawyerahks are the most obvious category of those. But there's someone else who should be very interesting and who was named in one of the older interviews that I haven't got around to yet (and would be well timed). There's a third new character who should be really fun, but he hasn't been hinted at or introduced at all. :shrugs:
Future Blog Contest
I got a great idea for another blog contest. But since I'm already running one right now, I'm keeping it classified for now. :P Suffice to say, whatever you are expecting, that's not it. :evilgrin:
- 0


text:
|"Viva Dojo Challenge! Youth is All About Passion!"
|File:Viva Dojo Challenge! Youth is All About Passion!.JPG
|(ビバ道場破り! 青春はバクハツだ, Biba Dōjōyaburi! Seishun wa Bakuhatsuda)
|Episode data
|"Ino Screams! Chubby Paradise!"
|Naruto #193
|"The Mysterious Curse of the Haunted Castle"
|July 12, 2006
|August 30, 2008
Viva Dojo Challenge! Youth is All About Passion! (ビバ道場破り! 青春はバクハツだ, Biba Dōjōyaburi! Seishun wa Bakuhatsuda) is episode 193 of the original Naruto anime.
Rock Lee is hungry for a sparring match, but has no one to spar with. He builds his own dōjō in the hopes of attracting challengers. Might Guy is so inspired by Lee's motivation that he puts on a disguise so that he can serve as the challenger that Lee seeks. But before he gets to challenge Lee, Guy is sidetracked by a mission. An intruder then shows up to spy on the village by impersonating Guy, but he unintentionally gets caught in Lee's overzealous training match. Naruto takes over for him, and fights evenly with Lee, and the intruder takes on Lee's form, but runs into the real Guy, who has come to take the challenge, and is easily defeated. Guy, hearing of the intruder's identity, drops him off in Tsunade's office, angering her.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
You have no items in your shopping cart.
Album Downloads
I Can Do It [Album Download]
All the songs from our I Can Do It DVD! Join the Biggles and the Kidsongs Kids as they explore all the things they know how to do.
The 50 Best Summer Songs [Album Download]
Join the Kidsongs Kids™ at the beach for fun in the sun. Sing, dance and enjoy these rock & roll classics and island tunes. They'll make you wanna grab your boogie board and go!
Old MacDonald Had a Farm 50 Songs [Album Download]
Now Old MacDonald has a great new sing-along collection of 50 classic Kidsongs that both children and parents will enjoy! This album download includes such classics as Mary Had a Little Lamb, Home on the Range,Turkey in the Straw, Five Little Ducks and many many more!
My Favorite Play Along Songs [Album Download]
Looking for songs that you can dance to? We've got the "Mexican Hat Dance", "Come On & Conga" and "Do the Silly Willy" on this album. Songs to play to? How about "Pat-A-Cake", "Here We Go 'Round the Mulberry Bush" and "Skip to My Lou"? My Favorite Play Along Songs is twenty-six songs about fun and games -- Enjoy!
A Day at Camp [Album Download]
Ready for some fun and games? Then these are the songs for you. This album has the classic counting song "99 Bottles of Pop" and everyone's first dance "The Hokey Pokey". The collection of eighteen camper's favorites will get your kids up and moving, and smiling too!
Very Silly Songs [Album Download]
A visit to Silly Dilly Ville will give you and your kids the giggles. Favorites like "The Name Game", "Purple People Eater" and "Down by the Bay" are sure to bring smiles your faces.
Let's Play Ball [Album Download]
Are your little ones active? Let's get them up and moving with this collection of sports themed songs that appeal to kids, like the Beach Boys Classics "I Get Around" & "Catch a Wave". Add in the positive messages in "It's Not if You Win or Lose" and the reminder that "Practice Makes Perfect" for a must have collection of kid's songs.


text:
Brand director Rachel Hamilton, who joined in January and was a board member, resigned last week, as did creative director Scott Parker and Kelly Hughes, who looks after PR for the club. Finance director Andrew Dixon, who resigned at the beginning of the year, left this month.
The resignations follow that of chief executive Mark Rodol, who left last month after 11 years with the company in various roles. It is understood the exodus has been sparked by a dispute over the brand's future direction between Rodol and founder James Palumbo.
At the end of last year Rodol devised a three-year plan for the business, which split it into three divisions: club, record company and product development. The entertainment brand produces CDs and audio equipment.
Palumbo, the company's major shareholder, has reverted to the role of chief executive until a replacement is found.


text:
- Home
- News
- Sports
- Opinion
- Obituaries
- Features
- Special Sections
- Classifieds
- Public Notices
Forgot Password? | Not a User? Sign up
As part of our 1 year anniversary celebration, join us on for live music on the patio (and inside).
Tim Curtis will be performing acoustic favorites on Saturday, 6/27 from 5:00-9:00 pm.
Dinner Specials will be prepared by Neal Gilder and David Cox:
• Grilled Rib Eye Steak with balsamic glaze
• New Zealand Cod with fried garlic chips and chiles
• Roast Pork Tenderloin stuffed with fresh herbs and leek
• Grilled Baby Lamb Chops with Pesto
Celebrate further when purchasing 2 dinner entrees, enjoy your choice of either
If you currently subscribe or have subscribed in the past to the Oldham Era, then simply find your account number on your mailing label and enter it below.
Click the question mark below to see where your account ID appears on your mailing label.
If you are new to the award winning Oldham Era and wish to get a subscription or simply gain access to our online content then please enter your ZIP code below and continue to setup your account.
|ZIP Code:


text: Our classic porcelain ramekins are wonderfully versatile: Use them to bake individual soufflés (the straight sides promote rising) or to create chilled mousses; they're also great for cooking and serving vegetables and other side dishes. Produced by Apilco, France's leading porcelain manufacturer, each restaurant-quality piece is chip resistant as well as oven, microwave and dishwasher safe. Small: 3" x 1 1/2" high, 3 oz. cap.; Large: 3 1/2" x 1 1/2" high, 5.4 oz. cap. Set of four.


text:
Catalog search
Catalog links
Graduate Bulletin 2013-2015 » Academic Programs and Courses » Health Sciences » Courses in Public Health » PHE 703: Social and Behavioral Dimensions of Health.
PHE 703: Social and Behavioral Dimensions of Health.
3 hours, 3 credits. Overview of social and behavioral aspects of health, the influence of social and behavioral factors in the distribution of health and illness among populations, and emphasis on how social science theory informs public health. Based on a social ecological perspective, this course offers an introduction to major theories of behavior change in health promotion, with a focus on applications to public health programs.
Last modified: 8/4/2015


text:
22 U.S. Code § 801 - Repealed.
prev | next
Section, act Aug. 13, 1946, ch. 957, title I, § 111,60 Stat. 999, set forth Congressional declaration of objectives for this chapter.
The following provisions of the Foreign Service Act of 1946 (approved Aug. 13, 1946, ch. 957, 60 Stat. 999), which had been set out as notes under this section, were repealed by Pub. L. 96–465, title II, § 2205(1),Oct. 17, 1980, 94 Stat. 2159:
Title I, § 101,60 Stat. 999, which provided that titles I through X of act Aug. 13, 1946, which enacted this chapter and amended section 681 of former Title 5, Executive Departments and Government Officers and Employees, be cited as the "Foreign Service Act of 1946".
Title X, § 1061,60 Stat. 1032, which provided that chapter be construed liberally.
Title X, § 1062,60 Stat. 1033, which provided that if any provision of this chapter or the application of any such provision to any person or circumstance be held invalid, the validity of the remainder of the chapter or the application thereof not be affected.
Title X, § 1063,60 Stat. 1033, which provided that the title, part, and section headings of this chapter were inserted for convenience and, in the case of conflict between such headings and substance of the titles, parts, or sections, the heading be disregarded.
Title X, § 1064,60 Stat. 1033, which provided that nothing in this chapter be construed to affect provisions of act July 3, 1946, ch. 359, §§ 1–4,60 Stat. 426, formerly set out as a note under section 906 of this title, and that "classified grades" under that Act be construed to mean classes 1 to 5, inclusive.
Title X, § 1071,60 Stat. 1033, which authorized appropriations to carry out the purposes of this chapter.
Title XI, § 1122,60 Stat. 1035, which provided that funds appropriated to Department of State for fiscal year 1947, under the caption "Foreign Service", be available for purposes of this chapter and authorized additional appropriations as required to carry out this chapter.
Title XI, § 1132,60 Stat. 1040, which provided that any section not expressly repealed by this chapter but which is inconsistent with any provisions of this chapter shall be considered as having been amended or superseded by this chapter.
Title XI, § 1133,60 Stat. 1040, which provided that repeal of sections by this chapter should not in any way affect acts done or rights accruing or accrued, or any suits or proceedings had or commenced in any civil case, prior to such repeal, but that all rights and liabilities should continue as if such repeal had not been made.
Title XI, § 1134,60 Stat. 1040, which provided that repeal of any section by this chapter shall not be construed as a revival, up to effective date of this chapter, of any section which may have been previously repealed by implication.
Title XI, § 1135,60 Stat. 1040, which provided that notwithstanding provisions of this chapter, existing rules, regulations, and Executive orders remain in effect until revoked or modified, unless clearly inconsistent with the provisions of this chapter.
Title XI, § 1141,60 Stat. 1040, which provided that this chapter be effective three months following Aug. 13, 1946.
Effective Date of Repeal
Repeal effective Feb. 15, 1981, except as otherwise provided, see section 2403 ofPub. L. 96–465, set out as an Effective Date note under section 3901 of this title.
Short Title of 1965 Amendment
Pub. L. 89–308, § 1,Oct. 31, 1965, 79 Stat. 1129, which provided that Pub. L. 89–308be cited as the "Foreign Service Annuity Adjustment Act of 1965", was repealed by Pub. L. 96–465, title II, § 2205(16)Oct. 17, 1980, 94 Stat. 2160.
LII has no control over and does not endorse any external Internet site that contains links to or references LII.


text:
Grad Profiles highlight the personal and professional stories of Founder Institute Graduates from across the globe.
This profile on EventStir, a graduate of the Washington D.C. Founder Institute, was written by Emma Tzeng. Founded in 2012 by Sajad Ghanizada and Andrew Mason, EventStir minimizes risk during the event planning process through its crowdfunding platform.
Planning an event is no simple task. Taking into consideration the monetary, time, and labor costs, it's crucial for event planners and sponsors to effectively evaluate the benefits and risks associated with the successful execution of their event.
Washington D.C.-based startup EventStir understands the complexities that go into event planning. Thus, it wants to help event producers minimize risk by providing crowdfunding for events. In this way, event planners can gauge the general demand for a proposed event before finalizing the planning process.
"It's a win for attendees since they show up to events they actually care about and a win for event organizers because they can test out larger than life event ideas at no risk," remarks co-founder Andrew Mason in a press release.
Founded in 2012, EventStir launched publicly last December. Before the official launch, Mason and co-founder Sajad Ghanizada tested the product by using it to plan the startup's launch party, which was held on a yacht and estimated to cost $4,500 for the boat rental alone. Keeping in line with EventStir's promise to help fully fund the venue by a set deadline, Mason and Ghanizada asked supporters to pledge $65 for a spot on the yacht.
Running the real-life test launch helped the co-founders tweak the product to boost pledge numbers. When the final product was ready to be rolled out to the public in December 2012, it had already been used to help fund over 100 events during its meta-launch period.
Anyone can sign up for EventStir without charge. The startup charges a five percent service fee for each event crowdfunded on its platform. Businesses can also sign up for the enterprise access package, which allows them to crowdfund their own events for a small monthly fee.
As much as the Internet has allowed people to connect in ways like never before, it would be ignorant to underestimate the value of face-to-face interactions. EventStir makes those in-person experiences possible and more efficient by offering a solution for individuals and organizations looking to plan exciting, unique events while minimizing risk.
Learn more about EventStir:


text:
Call our certified SCUBA Instructors
Mon - Sat - 8AM - 6PM PST
Purchased for my wife, Scuba.com was great! They mached the price from another outfit with pleasure. The suit worked great, we were in temps down to 76F my wife was comfy the whole time and she loves the pink... Highly recommended!
Was this review helpful? Yes No
260 out of 543 people found this review helpful.
Bought a pair for my wife for a recent trip, tried them out and just ordered a pair for myself. Great value and good comfort and speed with little effort.
Was this review helpful? Yes No
159 out of 323 people found this review helpful.
Our first U/W digital camera. Lowest price around. This camera worked great! Next trip I will leave behind the second camera used for shoreside photos. I have read that this camera drains batteries.... I took 24AAs and used maybe six. Great pictures though I will be getting a strobe.
Was this review helpful? Yes No
190 out of 371 people found this review helpful.
We are new to diving and purchased two 100NX units for a recent trip to Negril. These computers were easy to use with a very short learning curve and were very accurate. We dove with several other people with upscale computers, when we compared them we had the same info. The log feature was a godsend when you need to catch-up on the logs... Great price and shipped quickly!
Was this review helpful? Yes No
212 out of 419 people found this review helpful.
This was my first purchase at Scuba.com. I was impressed with time in which my order arrived. I purchased two bags, they held large diving fins with no problem, the bag is well constructed and the zippers worked fine. This bag is great for people diving with their own gear at resorts when they only have F, S, & M. Its perfect for snorkelers as well. Great price too!
Was this review helpful? Yes No
237 out of 489 people found this review helpful.
Corporate Office: Scuba.com, 1752 Langley Avenue, Irvine CA 92614
949.221.9300 / Toll Free 1.800.347.2822


text:
Pipelines for Carbon Dioxide Control in the United States
Source: CO2 Capture Project
Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is of great interest because potentially large amounts of carbon dioxide (CO2) emitted from the industrial burning of fossil fuels in the United States could be suitable for sequestration. Carbon capture technologies can potentially remove 80%-95% of CO2 emitted from an electric power plant or other industrial source. Power plants are the most likely initial candidates for CCS because they are predominantly large, single-point sources, and they contribute approximately one-third of U.S. CO2 emissions from fossil fuels.
Note: This article contains information that was originally published in the Congressional Research Service reports Pipelines for Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Control: Network Needs and Cost Uncertainties (January 10, 2008) by Paul W. Parfomak and Peter Folger and Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Pipelines for CarbonSequestration: Emerging Policy Issues (July 31, 2009) by Paul W. Parfomak, Peter Folger, and Adam Vann. Topic editors and authors for the Encyclopedia of Earth may have edited its content or added new information. The use of information from the Congressional Research Service should not be construed as support for or endorsement by that organization for any new information added by EoE personnel, or for any editing of the original content.
There are many technological approaches to CCS. However, one common requirement for nearly all large-scale CCS schemes is a system for transporting CO2 from capture sites (e.g., power plants) to storage sites (e.g., underground reservoirs). Transporting captured CO2 in relatively limited quantities is possible by truck, rail, and ship, but moving the enormous quantities of CO2 implied by a widespread implementation of CCS technologies would likely require a dedicated interstate pipeline network.
As CO2 pipelines get longer, the state-by-state siting approval process may become complex and protracted, and may face public opposition. Because CO2 pipeline requirements in a CCS scheme are driven by the relative locations of CO2 sources and sequestration sites, identification and validation of such sites must explicitly account for CO2 pipeline costs if the economics of those sites are to be fully understood. Since transporting CO2 to distant locations can impose significant additional costs to a facility's carbon control infrastructure, facility owners may seek regulatory approval for as many sequestration sites as possible and near to as many facilities as possible. If CCS moves to widespread implementation, government agencies and private companies may face challenges in identifying, permitting, developing, and monitoring the large number of localized sequestration reservoirs that may be proposed. However, even as viable sequestration reservoirs are being identified, it is unclear which CO2 source facilities will have access to them, under what time frame, and under what conditions. Given the potential size of a national CO2 pipelines network, many billions of dollars of capital investment may be affected by policy decisions made today.
Carbon sequestration policies are inextricably tied to the function and availability of the necessary technologies. Consequently, discussion of CCS policy alternatives benefits from a basic understanding of the physical processes involved, and relevant experience with existing
infrastructure. This section provides a basic overview of carbon sequestration processes overall, as well as specific U.S. experience with CO2 pipelines[1].
Carbon Capture and Sequestration
Carbon capture and sequestration is essentially a three-part process involving a CO2 source facility, a long-term CO2 storage site, and an intermediate mode of CO2 transportation.
The first step in direct sequestration is to produce a concentrated stream of CO2 for transport and storage. Currently, three main approaches are available to capture CO2 from large-scale industrial facilities or power plants:
- pre-combustion, which separates CO2 from fuels by combining them with air and/or steam to produce hydrogen for combustion and CO2 for storage,
- post-combustion, which extracts CO2 from flue gases following combustion of fossil fuels or biomass, and
- oxyfuel combustion, which uses oxygen instead of air for combustion, producing flue gases that consist mostly of CO2 and water from which the CO2 is separated.
These approaches vary in terms of process technology and maturity, but all yield a stream of extracted CO2 which may then be compressed to increase its density and make it easier (and cheaper) to transport. Although technologies to separate and compress CO2 are commercially available, they have not been applied to large-scale CO2 capture from power plants for the purpose of long-term storage
Pipelines are the most common method for transporting large quantities of CO2 over long distances. CO2 pipelines are operated at ambient temperature and high pressure, with primary compressor stations located where the CO2 is injected and booster compressors located as needed further along the pipeline. In overall construction, CO2 pipelines are similar to natural gas pipelines, requiring the same attention to design, monitoring for leaks, and protection against overpressure, especially in populated areas. Many analysts consider CO2 pipeline technology to be mature, stemming from its use since the 1970s for Enhansed Oil Recovery (EOR) and in other industries.
Sequestration in Geological Formations
In most CCS approaches, CO2 would be transported by pipeline to a porous rock formation that holds (or previously held) fluids where the CO2 would be injected underground. By injecting CO2 at depths greater than 800 meters in a typical reservoir, pressure keeps the injected CO2 in a supercritical state and thus less likely to migrate out of the geological formation. Injecting CO2 into such formations uses existing technologies developed primarily for oil and natural gas production which potentially could be adapted for long-term storage and monitoring of CO2.
Other underground injection applications in practice today, such as natural gas storage, deep injection of liquid wastes, and subsurface disposal of oil-field brines, also provide potential technologies and experience for sequestering CO2. Three main types of geological formations are being considered for carbon sequestration:
- oil and gas reservoirs;
- deep saline reservoirs; and,
- unmineable coal seams.
The overall capacity for CO2 storage in such formations is potentially huge if all the sedimentary basins (large depressions in the Earth's surface filled with sediments and fluids) in the world are considered. The suitability of any particular site, however, depends on many factors, including proximity to CO2 sources and other reservoir-specific qualities like porosity, permeability, and potential for leakage. Marine transportation may also be feasible when CO2 needs to be transported over long distances or overseas; however, many manmade CO2 sources are located far from navigable waterways, so such a scheme would still likely require pipeline construction between CO2 sources and port terminals. Rail cars and trucks can also transport CO2, but these modes would be logistically impractical for large-scale CCS operations.
Existing U.S. CO2 Pipelines
The oldest long-distance CO2 pipeline in the United States is the 225 kilometer Canyon Reef Carriers Pipeline (in Texas), which began service in 1972 for EOR in regional oil fields. Other large CO2 pipelines constructed since then, mostly in the Western United States, have expanded the CO2 pipeline network for EOR. These pipelines carry CO2 from naturally occurring underground reservoirs, natural gas processing facilities, ammonia manufacturing plants, and a large coal gasification project to oil fields. Additional pipelines may carry CO2 from other manmade sources to supply a range of industrial applications. Altogether, approximately 5,800 kilometers (3,600 miles) of CO2 pipeline operate today in the United States.[2]
The locations of the major U.S. CO2 pipelines are shown below. By comparison, nearly 800,000 kilometers (500,000 miles) of natural gas and hazardous liquid transmission pipelines crisscross the United States.[3]
Major CO2 Pipelines in the United States. Sources: Denbury Resources Inc., "EOR: The Economic Alternative for CCS," Slide presentation (October 2007). U.S. Dept. of Transportation, National Pipeline Mapping System, Official use only. (July 2009).
CO2 Pipeline Requirements for Carbon Capture and Storage
The Department of Energy estimates that the United States has enough capacity to store CO2 for tens to hundreds of years. However, the large-scale CO2 experiments needed to acquire detailed data about potential sequestration reservoirs have only just begun.
Although any widespread CCS scheme in the United States would likely require dedicated CO2 pipelines, there is considerable uncertainty about the size and configuration of the pipeline network required. This uncertainty stems, in part, from uncertainty about the suitability of geological formations to sequester captured CO2 and the proximity of suitable formations to specific sources.
If CO2 can be sequestered near where it is produced then CO2 pipelines might evolve in a decentralized way, with individual facilities developing direct pipeline connections to nearby sequestration sites largely independent of other companies' pipelines. The resulting network might then consist of many relatively short and unconnected pipelines with a small number of longer pipelines for facilities with no sequestration sites nearby. Alternatively, if only very large, centralized sequestration sites are permitted, the result might be a network of interconnected long distance pipelines, perhaps including high-capacity trunk lines serving a multitude of feeder pipelines from individual facilities. A third scenario envisions CO2 sequestration, at least initially, at active oil fields where injection of CO2 may be profitably employed for enhanced oil recovery (EOR).
One analysis concludes that 77% of the total annual CO2 captured from the major North American sources may be stored in reservoirs directly underlying these sources, and that an additional 18% may be stored within 100 miles of additional sources.[4] If this were the case, the need for new CO2 pipelines would be limited to onsite transportation and a relatively small number of long-distance pipelines (only a subset of which might need to be interstate pipelines).
Other analysts have suggested that captured CO2 may need to be sequestered, at least initially, in more centralized reservoirs to reduce potential risks associated with CO2 leaks.[5] They suggest that, given current uncertainty about the suitability of various on-site geological formations for long-term CO2 storage, certain specific types of formations (e.g., deep saline aquifers) may be preferred as CO2 repositories because they have adequate capacity and are most likely to retain sequestered CO2 indefinitely.
Others suggest that scale economies in seqestration site acquisition, validation, development, or monitoring may drive the choice of large, centralized sequestration sites. There are also significant scale economies for large, integrated CO2 pipeline networks that link many sources together rather than single, dedicated pipelines between individual sources and storage reservoirs.[6] As geologic formations are characterized in more detail and suitable repositories identified, CO2 sources can be mapped against storage sites with increasing certainty.
The current uncertainty over proximity of sources to storage sites, however, implies a wide range of possible pipeline configurations and a wide range of possible costs. Whether CCS policies ultimately lead to centralized or decentralized storage configurations remains to be seen; however, pipeline requirements and storage configurations are closely related. A 2007 study at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) concluded that "the majority of coal-fired power plants are situated in regions where there are high expectations of having CO2 sequestration sites nearby."[7] In these cases, the MIT study estimated the cost of CO2 transport and injection to be less than 20% of total CCS costs. However, the study also stated that the costs of CO2 pipelines are highly non-linear with respect to the quantity transported, and highly variable due to "physical ... and political considerations."[8] Another 2007 study, at Duke University, concluded that "geologic sequestration is not economically or technically feasible within North Carolina," but "may be viable if the captured CO2 is piped out of North Carolina and stored elsewhere."23 More recent studies continue to suggest a range of possible scenarios for CO2 pipeline development.[9]
Case Study: Hypothetical CO2 Pipelines in the U.S. Midwest
Infrastructure requirements and policy implications related to CO2 pipelines become clearer when considering what actual pipeline projects might look like. This section outlines contrasting scenarios for hypothetical CO2 pipeline development in the region covered by the Midwest Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership (MRCSP). The MRCSP is one of seven regional partnerships of state agencies, universities, private companies, and non-governmental organizations established by the Department of Energy to assess CCS approaches. The MRCSP serves as a good illustration of CO2 pipeline issues because it has a varied mix of CO2 sources and potential geologic sequestration sites, and because geologists have completed a number of focused studies relevant to CCS in this region.
Sequestration in the Rose Run Formation
The MRCSP has identified key CO2 sources and geologic formations potentially suitable for carbon sequestration within its seven-state region encompassing northeast Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia. Figure 1 shows the locations of 11 of the largest CO2 sources located in the MRSCP region — all coal-fired electric power plants emitting over 9 million metric tons of CO2 annually.There are numerous other CO2 sources in this region, including many other power plants and large industrial facilities, but the 11 power plants in this analysis include the very largest in terms of annual CO2 emissions.
Image:Figure 1 - CRS Pipline.JPG
Figure 1 also shows the locations of the Rose Run sandstone, a deep saline formation identified by the MRCSP as a potential carbon sequestration site.[9] As the figure shows, the plants all lie above or near to this formation, so suitable CO2 injection sites presumably could be located very near to each of these plants. If the Rose Run formation proves to be viable for large-scale CO2 sequestration, then some plants may be able to inject CO2 directly below their facilities, and CCS pipeline requirements for some of the other 11 power plants could be small. If this were the case, then the CCS CO2 pipeline network for the 11 plants might appear as shown in Figure 2.
Image:Figure 2 - CRS Pipeline.JPG
The hypothetical pipeline layout in Figure 2 assumes that a 25-mile diameter, non-overlapping reserve area is needed for each plant's sequestration site and that any location within the Rose Run formation is viable for sequestration. Figure 2 also assumes that each power plant is either located at or is connected to the center of its respective sequestration field by a large trunk pipeline built along existing rights of way and capable of carrying its peak CO2 output. Smaller pipelines branching from the centrally-located plant or from the trunk line distribute the CO2 to multiple injection wells in the sequestration site. These smaller pipelines are not considered in detail in this report.
Figure 2 shows that the longest trunk pipeline for CO2 transportation is 32 miles long, and the average pipeline is approximately 11 miles long. According to models developed at Carnegie Mellon University (CMU), the capital costs to construct an 11-mile pipeline in the Midwestern United States with a capacity of 10 million tons of CO2 annually would be approximately $6 million. The levelized cost would be approximately $0.10 per ton of transported CO2, including costs for operation (e.g., compression) and maintenance.[10]
Potential Barriers to Rose Run Sequestration. Although the Rose Run formation is identified by the MRCSP as a major potential sequestration site, it has characteristics which may ultimately limit its viability for large-scale CO2 sequestration. The most important of these is overall sequestration capacity. Because the Rose Run formation has low to moderate permeability and thickness, geologic models show that it is unlikely all of the CO2 emitted in the Rose Run region can be efficiently sequestered in the Rose Run formation.[11] The Rose Run formation is also relatively fractured.[12] Geologists have concluded that injecting pressurized CO2 into the Rose Run formation potentially could induce minor earthquakes along certain preexisting (but undetected) faults in otherwise seismically stable areas.[13] Faults and fractures can, in some cases, provide additional sequestration capacity and be beneficial for sequestration. But faults or fractures can also be permeable conduits for leakage and "can be a significant pathway for the loss of sequestered CO2."[14] While studies are not yet available to establish the validity of any of these concerns, future research may conclude that significant parts of the Rose Run formation would be unsuitable for large scale, permanent CO2 sequestration.[15]
Alternatives to CO2 Sequestration in Rose Run
The CO2 sequestration capacity of the Rose Run formation may turn out to be too limited because of its of overall size or integrity. If the policy goal is to sequester CO2 from all major sources in the region, then at least some of the largest power plants in the MRCSP will need to sequester their carbon emissions elsewhere. The alternative sites for potential CO2 sequestration nearest to Rose Run are unmineable coal beds, oil and natural gas fields, and another large saline formation — the Mount Simon sandstone.
Unmineable Coal Beds. The MRCSP region contains unmineable coal beds underlying the same general geographic footprint as the Rose Run formation, but located at different depths underground. Studies suggest that such coal beds may be suitable for sequestration. In some cases injected CO2 could replace methane trapped in the coal seam, increasing natural gas available for extraction wells in a process similar to EOR known as enhanced coal-bed methane recovery. However, the potential capacity for storing CO2 in regional coal beds is only about 5% compared to the Rose Run sandstone, and the practicability of storing CO2 in coal seams is virtually untested.[16] In addition, removing groundwater from coal seams prior to CO2 injection may create environmental problems related to water disposal, and some studies indicate that coal swelling associated with CO2 injection may curtail the permeability of the coal seam, limiting its overall capacity to store CO2.[17]
Oil and Natural Gas Fields. The MRCSP region includes a number of oil and natural gas fields which may offer opportunities for CO2 sequestration. The region also includes a number of natural gas storage reservoirs, both natural and human-made, which suggest that CO2 could be similarly stored. However, according to the MRCSP, the ten largest oil and gas fields in the region have an average CO2 sequestration potential of only 251 million tons.[18] By comparison, the 30-year CO2 output of the 11 plants in this analysis would range from 270 to 491 million tons at current emission levels. The oil and gas fields in the MRCSP region, therefore, even if they could achieve their stated sequestration potential, may not individually have sufficient capacity to sequester CO2 from one of the 11 power plants in this analysis operating with current emissions over a 30-year period. Multiple fields possibly could be used by individual power plants to achieve adequate long-term sequestration, but this would require multiple pipeline networks and, consequently, could increase CO2 transportation costs and complexity.
Oil and gas production fields also present CO2 sequestration challenges due to numerous boreholes from historical well-drilling activity. Geologists are concerned that old oil and gas wells may be inadequately sealed and that their locations may be uncertain.[19] Increased leakage risks from old wells, as well as associated mitigation and monitoring costs, may reduce the economic CCS sequestration potential in oil or gas fields. Although revenues from CO2 sales for EOR projects could offset CO2 transportation and sequestration costs for some source facilities, long-term CO2 emissions in the MRCSP region would far exceed CO2 requirements for EOR. It is possible, therefore, that because of their limited sequestration capacity and wellbore leakage concerns, oil and natural gas fields in the MRCSP region may not be viable sequestration sites for the largest CO2 sources either.
Mt. Simon Formation. If neither the Rose Run formation nor regional coal, oil, or gas fields can provide adequate CO2 sequestration for the major power plants in the MRCSP region, the next best potential CO2 sequestration site is the Mt. Simon formation. This formation is a deep saline aquifer like the Rose Run formation, but it is over four times larger in terms of sequestration capacity and is less fractured.[20]
Image:Figure 3 - CRS Pipeline.JPG
Figure 3 shows hypothetical CO2 pipelines which might be required if any of the major power plants in this analysis were required to transport CO2 to the Mount Simon formation. As in the Rose Run case, Figure 3 assumes pipelines use existing rights of way and that a 25-mile diameter, non-overlapping reserve area is needed for each plant's sequestration site. However, consistent with the Rose Run limitations, the Mt. Simon scenario assumes that the thinnest parts of the formation (the easternmost contours on the contour map) are unsuitable sequestration sites. As the figure shows, the pipelines required in such a scenario could be substantial, ranging in length from 130 to 294 miles, and averaging 234 miles. According to estimates from CMU, the approximate capital costs for these pipelines would range from $70 million to $180 million, and would average $150 million. The average levelized cost would be approximately $2.00 per ton of transported CO2.[21]
Although Figure 3 shows a pipeline route for all the 11 power plants in question, how many of these pipelines might be needed depends upon which plants may be able to sequester their CO2 emissions closer to home. Furthermore, there are potential scale economies for large, integrated CO2 pipeline networks that link many sources together rather than single, dedicated pipelines between individual sources and sequestration reservoirs.[22] The individual pipelines required in Figure 3 may be so large on their own that combining multiple CO2 flows from multiple plants through shared trunk lines may be limited.[23]
While the Mt. Simon scenario in Figure 3 is far less favorable in terms of cost and siting requirements than the Rose Run scenario in Figure 2, it is not necessarily the "worst" case in terms of overall pipeline requirements. Future work on sequestration capacity may conclude that the Mt. Simon sequestration sites should be located in thicker parts of the formation (in central Indiana and Michigan) to absorb the tremendous volumes of CO2 generated by these power plants. Such a westward shift would require even longer pipelines than those illustrated here.
Economic Regulation
Economic regulation of interstate pipelines by the federal government is generally intended to ensure pipelines fulfill common carrier obligations by charging reasonable rates; providing rates and services to all upon reasonable request; not unfairly discriminating among shippers; establishing reasonable classifications, rules, and practices; and interchanging traffic with other pipelines or transportation modes. If interstate CO2 pipelines for carbon sequestration are ultimately to be developed, it will raise important regulatory questions in this context because federal jurisdiction over hypothetical interstate CO2 pipeline siting and rate decisions is not clear. Based on their current regulatory roles, two of the more likely candidates for jurisdiction over interstate pipelines transporting CO2 for purposes of CCS are the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and the Surface Transportation Board (STB). However, both agencies have at some point expressed a position that interstate CO2 pipelines are not within their purview.
If CCS technology develops to the point where interstate CO2 pipelines become more common, and if FERC and the STB continue to disclaim jurisdiction over CO2 pipelines, then the absence of federal regulation described above may pose policy challenges. In particular, with many more pipeline users and interconnections than exist today, complex common carrier issues might arise. One potential concern, for example, is whether rates should be set separately for existing pipelines carrying CO2 as a valuable commercial commodity (e.g., for EOR), versus new pipelines carrying CO2 as industrial pollution for disposal. Furthermore, if rates are not reviewed prior to pipeline construction, it might be difficult for regulators to ensure the reasonableness of CO2 pipeline rates until after the pipelines were already in service. If CO2 pipeline connections become mandatory under future regulations, such arrangements might expose pipeline users to abuses of potential market power in CO2 pipeline services, at least until rate cases could be heard. Presiding over a large number of CO2 rate cases of varying complexity in a relatively short time frame might also be administratively overwhelming for state agencies, which may have limited resources available for pipeline regulatory activities.
Pipeline Costs
The cost of CO2 transportation is a function of pipeline length (among other factors), which in turn is determined by the location of sequestration sites relative to CO2 sources. The Midwest scenarios illustrate how different assumptions about sequestration site viability in the MRCSP region can lead to a 20-fold difference in CO2 pipeline lengths and, therefore, similarly large differences in capital costs. (In this regard, CO2 pipeline costs may present the cost component in integrated CCS schemes with the greatest potential variability.) At the international and national policy levels, some studies have recognized this potential variability. For example, an MIT analysis states that the costs of CO2 pipelines are highly variable due to "physical ... and political considerations."[24] The IPCC report likewise estimates total costs of CO2 mitigation of $31- $71 per ton of CO2 avoided for a new pulverized coal power plant, assuming CO2 pipeline transportation costs, including operations and maintenance costs, of $0 to $5 per ton.[25] Recent increases in the global price of steel used to make line pipe could push CO2 pipeline costs above this range.[26] At $5 per ton of transported CO2, pipeline costs account for a modest share of aggregate carbon control costs — between 7% and 16% based on the IPCC estimates. Nonetheless, if CCS technology were deployed on a national scale, overall CO2 pipeline costs could be in the billions of dollars. Minimizing these costs while achieving environmental objectives may therefore be an important public policy objective.
From the perspective of individual power plants, or other CO2 sources, highly variable costs for CO2 pipelines may have more immediate ramifications. If CO2 pipeline costs for specific regions reach hundreds, or even tens, of millions of dollars per plant, then power companies may have difficulty securing the capital financing or regulatory approval needed to construct or retrofit fossil fuel-powered plants in these regions. For example, in August 2007, the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission rejected a developer's proposal to construct a new coal-fired power plant in the state, in large part because the associated costs of a 450-mile CO2 pipeline to an EOR site in Alberta, over $635 million, were not viewed to be in the public interest.[27] To the extent that other, lower-cost power plant options are available, the failure of a costly project like the Minnesota plant may not be a problem. However, if other generation sources are constrained (e.g., nuclear, renewable), then the inability to construct a new fossil-fueled power plant may negatively impact the regional balance of electricity supply and demand. Higher electricity prices or reliability concerns might ensue.
Some analysts believe that CO2 pipeline costs will be moderated in the future because generating companies will construct new power plants geographically near sequestration sites. Recent network cost models suggest otherwise. On a mile-for-mile basis, these models show that electricity transmission costs (including capital, operations, maintenance, and electric line losses) generally outweigh CO2 pipeline costs in new construction. Accordingly, the least costly site for a new power plant tends to be nearer the electricity consumers (cities) rather than nearer the sequestration sites if the two are geographically separated.[28] Analysts have therefore concluded that "a power system with significant amounts of CCS requires a very large CO2 pipeline infrastructure."[29]
In states where traditional rate regulation exists, construction and operation of CO2 pipelines for CCS could raise questions about cost recovery for electric utilities under state utility regulation. If, for example, a CO2 pipeline is constructed for the exclusive use of a single power plant for onsite (or nearby) CO2 sequestration, and is owned by the power plant owners, it logically could be considered an extension of the plant itself. In such cases, the CO2 pipelines could be eligible for regulated returns on the invested capital and their costs could be recovered by utilities in electricity rates. Alternatively such a CO2 pipeline could be owned by third parties and considered a non-plant asset providing a transportation service for a fee. In the latter case, the costs could still be recovered by the utility in its rates as an operating cost.
Two complications arise with respect to pipeline cost recovery. First, because utility regulation varies from state to state (e.g., some states allow for competition in electricity generation, others do not), differences among states in the economic regulation of CO2 pipelines could create economic inefficiencies and affect the attractiveness of CO2 pipelines for capital investment. Second, if CO2 transportation infrastructure is intended to evolve from shorter, stand-alone, intrastate pipelines into a network of interconnected interstate pipelines, pipeline operators wishing to link CO2 pipelines across state lines may face a regulatory environment of daunting complexity. Without a coherent system of economic regulation for CO2 pipelines, whether as a commodity, pollutant, or some other classification, developers of interstate CO2 pipelines may need to negotiate or litigate repeatedly issues such as siting, pipeline access, terms of service, and rate "pancaking" (the accumulation of transportation charges assessed by contiguous pipeline operators along a particular transportation route). It is just these kinds of issues which have complicated and impeded the integration of individual utility electric transmission systems into larger regional transmission networks.
Oil industry representatives frequently point to EOR as offering a market-based model for profitable CO2 transportation via pipeline. It should be noted, however, that much of the existing CO2 pipeline network in the United States for EOR has been established with the benefit of federal tax incentives. Although current federal tax law provides no special or targeted tax benefits specifically to CO2 pipelines, investments in CO2 pipelines do benefit from tax provisions targeted for EOR. They also benefit from accelerated depreciation rules, which apply generally to any capital investment including petroleum and natural gas (non-CO2) pipelines. For example, the Internal Revenue Code provides for a 15% income tax credit for the costs of recovering domestic oil by one of nine qualified EOR methods, including CO2 injection (I.R.C. §43). Also, extraction of naturally occurring CO2 may qualify for percentage depletion allowance under I.R.C. § 613(b)(7). Prior federal law, both tax and nontax, also provided various types of incentives for EOR which stimulated investment in CO2 pipelines. In particular, oil produced from EOR projects was exempt from oil price controls in the 1970s. Development of CO2 pipeline infrastructure in the 1980s benefitted from tax advantages to EOR oil under the crude oil windfall profits tax law, which was in effect from March 1980 to August 1988.
Although there were never incentives explicitly for CO2 pipelines under federal tax and price control regulation in the 1970s and 1980s, it is clear that CO2 pipeline infrastructure development benefitted from these regulations. In a CCS environment where some captured CO2 is a valuable commodity, but the remainder is not, establishing similar regulatory incentives for CO2 pipelines becomes complex. One initial proposal, for example, would allow seven-year accelerated depreciation for qualifying CO2 pipelines. As debate continues about the economics of CO2 capture and sequestration generally, and how the federal government can encourage CCS infrastructure investment, Congress may seek to understand the implications of CCS incentives specifically on CO2 pipeline development.
Pipeline Siting Challenges
Any company seeking to construct a CO2 pipeline must secure siting approval from the relevant regulatory authorities and must subsequently secure rights of way from landowners. There is no federal authority over CO2 pipeline siting, so it is regulated to varying degrees by the states (as is the case for oil pipelines). The state-by-state siting approval process for CO2 pipelines may be complex and protracted, and may face public opposition, especially in populated or environmentally sensitive areas.[30] Securing rights of way along existing easements for other infrastructure (e.g., gas pipelines), as the scenarios in this report assume, may be one way to facilitate the siting of new CO2 pipelines. However, questions arise as to the right of easement holders to install CO2 pipelines, compensation for use of such easements, and whether existing easements can be sold or leased to CO2 pipeline companies.[31] Although these siting issues may arise for any CO2 pipeline, they become more challenging as pipeline systems become larger and more interconnected, and cross state lines. If a widespread, interstate CO2 pipeline network is required to support CCS, the ability to site these pipelines may become an issue requiring new federal initiatives.[32]
Due to potential CO2 transportation costs, individual generating plants have a strong interest in the selection of specific sequestration sites under future CCS policies. Since transporting CO2 to distant locations can impose significant additional costs to a facility's carbon control infrastructure, facility owners may seek regulatory approval for as many sequestration sites as possible and near to as many facilities as possible. Furthermore, capacity limitations at favorably located sequestration sites (like the Rose Run formation) may lead to competition among large CO2 source facilities seeking to secure the best local sequestration sites before others do. How the development of sequestration sites will be prioritized and how competition for such sites may evolve have yet to be explored, but they may create new and significant economic differences among facilities.
Because CO2 pipeline requirements in a CCS scheme are driven by the relative locations of CO2 sources and sequestration sites, identification and validation of such sites must explicitly account for CO2 pipeline costs if the economics of those sites are to be fully understood. Proposals such as S. 2323, which would require an integrated evaluation of CO2 capture, sequestration, and transportation (Sec. 3(b)(5)), appear to promote such an approach, although the details of future sequestration site selection have yet to be established. If CCS moves from pilot projects to widespread implementation, government agencies and private companies may face challenges in identifying, permitting, developing, and monitoring the large number of localized sequestration reservoirs that may be proposed.
Advantaged and Disadvantaged Regions
Geologists have long recognized that some regions in the United States have high potential for carbon sequestration and others do not. For example, a 2007 study at Duke University concluded that "geologic sequestration is not economically or technically feasible within North Carolina," but "may be viable if the captured CO2 is piped out of North Carolina and stored elsewhere."[33] Likewise, states in the Northeast, Minnesota, Wisconsin, and possibly parts of other states appear to lack geological formations with potential for large-scale sequestration of the volumes of CO2 they produce. If national CCS policies are implemented, power plants and other CO2-producing facilities in these states may face more extensive, and more costly, pipeline requirements than other states if they are to sequester their CO2. States such as North Carolina, with limited sequestration potential and a relatively high proportion of coal or natural gas in their electric generation fuel mix, may face particular challenges in this regard. The Duke study, for example, estimated it would cost $5 billion to construct an interstate pipeline network for transporting CO2 from North Carolina's electric utilities to sequestration sites in other states.[34]
One particular concern among some stakeholders is that high CO2 transportation costs could increase electricity prices in "sequestration-poor" regions relative to regions able to sequester CO2 more locally. For states like Massachusetts, for example, which has some of the highest electricity prices in the country and may have little sequestration potential, CO2 transportation costs could raise electricity prices even higher above the national average. Moving beyond this illustrative example to evaluate comprehensively the distribution of CO2 transportation costs across the United States is beyond the scope of this report. Nonetheless, these kinds of regional price impacts, and their implications for regional economies, may become an issue for Congress.
Commodity vs. Pollutant Classification
Under a comprehensive CCS policy, captured CO2 arguably could be classified as either a commodity or as a pollutant. CO2 used in EOR is considered to be a commodity, and is regulated as such by the states. Because captured CO2 may be sold as a valuable commodity for EOR, and may have further economic potential for enhanced recovery of coal bed methane (ECBM), some argue that all CO2 under a CCS scheme should be classified as a commodity.[35] However, it is unlikely that the quantities of CO2 captured under a widely implemented CCS policy could all be absorbed in EOR or ECBM applications. In the long run, significant quantities of captured CO2 will have to be disposed as industrial pollution, with negative economic value.[36] Furthermore, on April 2, 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Clean Air Act gives the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) the authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, including CO2, from new motor vehicles.[37] The court also held that EPA cannot interpose policy considerations to refuse to exercise this authority. While the specifics of EPA regulation under this ruling might be subject to agency discretion, it has implications for the regulation of CO2 emissions from stationary sources, such as power plants.
Separately, EPA has also concluded that geologic sequestration of captured CO2 through well injection meets the definition of "underground injection" in § 1421(d)(1) of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA).[38] EPA anticipates protecting underground sources of drinking water, through its authority under the SDWA, from "potential endangerment" as a result of underground injection of CO2 in anticipated CCS pilot projects. EPA's assertion of authority under SDWA for underground injection of CO2 during CCS pilot studies may contribute to uncertainty over future classification of CO2 as a commodity or a pollutant.
Conflicting classification of captured CO2 as either a commodity or pollutant has important implications for CO2 pipeline development. For example, classifying all CO2 as a pollutant not only would contradict current state and BLM treatment of CO2 for EOR, but might also undermine an interstate commerce rationale for FERC regulation of CO2 pipelines. On the other hand, classifying all CO2 as a commodity would create other policy contradictions, for example, in regions like New England where EOR may be impracticable. Under either scenario, legislative and regulatory ambiguities would arise—especially for an integrated, interstate CO2 pipeline network carrying a mixture of "commodity" CO2 and "pollutant" CO2. Resolving these ambiguities to establish a consistent and workable CCS policy could likely be an issue for Congress.
CO2 Pipeline Safety
CO2 occurs naturally in the atmosphere, and is produced by the human body during ordinary respiration, so it is commonly perceived by the general public to be a relatively harmless gas. However, at concentrations above 10% by volume, CO2 may cause adverse health effects and at concentrations above 25% poses a significant asphyxiation hazard. Because CO2 is colorless, odorless, and heavier than air, an uncontrolled release may accumulate and remain undetected near the ground in low-lying outdoor areas, and in confined spaces such as caverns, tunnels, and basements.[39] Exposure to CO2 gas, as for other asphyxiates, may cause rapid "circulatory insufficiency," coma, and death.[40] Such an event occurred in 1986 in Cameroon, when a cloud of naturally-occurring CO2 spontaneously released from Lake Nyos killed 1,800 people in nearby villages.[41]
The Secretary of Transportation has primary authority to regulate interstate CO2 pipeline safety under the Hazardous Liquid Pipeline Act of 1979 as amended (49 U.S.C. § 601). Under the act, the Department of Transportation (DOT) regulates the design, construction, operation and maintenance, and spill response planning for CO2 pipelines (49 C.F.R. § 190, 195-199). The DOT administers pipeline regulations through the Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS) within the Pipelines and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA).[42] Although CO2 is listed as a Class 2.2 (non-flammable gas) hazardous material under DOT regulations (49 C.F.R. § 172.101), the agency applies nearly the same safety requirements to CO2 pipelines as it does to pipelines carrying hazardous liquids such as crude oil, gasoline, and anhydrous ammonia (49 C.F.R. § 195).
To date, CO2 pipelines in the United States have experienced few serious accidents. According to OPS statistics, there were 31 leaks from CO2 pipelines reported from 2002 through 2008—none resulting in injuries to people. By contrast, there were 2,059 accidents causing 106 fatalities and 382 injuries related to natural gas and hazardous liquids (excluding CO2) pipelines during the same period.[43] It is difficult to draw firm conclusions from these accident data, because CO2 pipelines account for less than 1% of total natural gas and hazardous liquids pipelines, and CO2 pipelines currently run primarily through remote areas. Based on the limited sample of CO2 incidents, analysts conclude that, mile-for-mile, CO2 pipelines appear to be safer than the other types of pipeline regulated by OPS.[44] Additional measures, such as adding gas odorants to CO2 to aid in leak detection, may further mitigate CO2 pipeline hazards. Nonetheless, as the number of CO2 pipelines expands, analysts suggest that "statistically, the number of incidents involving CO2 should be similar to those for natural gas transmission."[45] If the nation's CO2 pipeline network expands significantly to support CCS, and if this expansion includes more pipelines near populated areas, more CO2 pipeline accidents are likely in the future.[46]
Criminal and Civil Liability
There are no special provisions in U.S. law protecting the pipeline industry from criminal or civil liability. In fact, criminal liability has been at issue in a handful of recent pipeline incidents. For example, in 2007, BP reportedly agreed to pay Alaska $20 million in fines and restitution to resolve criminal liability for a 2006 pipeline spill at its Prudhoe Bay oilfield.[47] In 2003, the Justice Department announced over $100 million in civil and criminal penalties against Olympic Pipeline and Shell Pipeline resolving claims from a fatal gasoline pipeline fire in Bellingham, WA, in 1999.[48] In March 2003, emphasizing the environmental aspects of homeland security, Attorney General John Ashcroft reportedly announced a crackdown on companies failing to protect against possible terrorist attacks on storage tanks, transportation networks, industrial plants, and pipelines.[49]
Even if no federal or state regulations are violated, CO2 pipeline operators could still face civil liability for personal injury or wrongful death in the event of an accident. In the Bellingham accident, the pipeline owner and associated defendants reportedly agreed to pay a $75 million settlement to the families of two children killed in the accident.[50] In 2002, El Paso Corporation settled wrongful death and personal injury lawsuits stemming from a natural gas pipeline explosion near Carlsbad, NM, which killed 12 campers.[51] Although the terms of those settlements were not disclosed, two additional lawsuits sought a total of $171 million in damages.[52] The MIT study concluded that operational liability for CO2 pipelines, as part of an integrated CCS infrastructure, "can be managed within the framework that has been successfully used for decades by the oil and gas industries."[53] Nonetheless, as CCS policy evolves, Congress may seek to ensure that liability provisions for CO2 pipelines are adequate and consistent with liability provisions in place for other CO2 infrastructure.
Other Issues
In addition to the issues discussed above, additional policy issues related to CO2 pipelines may arise as CCS policy evolves. These may include addressing technical transportation problems related to the presence of other pollutants, such as sulfuric and carbonic acid, in CO2 pipelines. Some have also suggested the use or conversion of existing non-CO2 pipelines, such as natural gas pipelines, to transport CO2.[54] Coordination of U.S. CO2 pipeline policies with Canada, with whom the United States shares its existing pipeline infrastructure, may also become a consideration. Finally, the potential impacts of CO2 pipeline development overseas on the global availability of construction skills and materials may arise as a key factor in CCS economics and implementation.
Policy debate about the mitigation of climate change through some scheme of carbon capture and sequestration is expanding quickly. To date, debate among legislators has been focused mostly on CO2 sources and storage sites, but CO2 pipelines are a vital connection between the two. Although CO2 transportation by pipeline is in some respects a mature technology, there are many important unanswered questions about the socially optimal configuration, regulation, and costs of a CO2 pipeline network for CCS. Furthermore, because CO2 pipelines for enhanced oil recovery (EOR) are already in use today, policy decisions affecting CO2 pipelines take on an urgency that is, perhaps, unrecognized by many. It appears, for example, that federal classification of CO2 as both a commodity (by the BLM) and as a pollutant (by the EPA) potentially could create an immediate conflict which may need to be addressed not only for the sake of future CCS implementation, but also to ensure consistency between future CCS and today's CO2 pipeline operations.
In addition to these issues, Congress may examine how CO2 pipelines fit into the nation's overall strategies for energy supply and environmental protection. The need for CO2 pipelines ultimately derives from the nation's consumption of fossil fuels. Policies affecting the latter, such as energy conservation, and the development of new renewable, nuclear, or hydrogen energy resources, could substantially affect the need for and configuration of CO2 pipelines. If policy makers encourage continued consumption of fossil fuels under CCS, then the need to foster the other energy options may be diminished—and vice versa. Thus decisions about CO2 pipeline infrastructure could have consequences for a broader array of energy and environmental policies.
- ^ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Special Report: Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage, 2005 (2005): 190. (Hereafter referred to as IPCC 2005.)
- ^ U.S. Dept. of Transportation, National Pipeline Mapping System database (July 2009).
- ^ Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS), National Transportation Statistics 2009 (2009), Table 1-10. This figure includes pipelines for petroleum and other hazardous liquids such as gasoline, jet fuel, diesel fuel, and propane.
- ^ R.T. Dahowski, J.J. Dooley, C.L. Davidson, S. Bachu, N. Gupta, and J. Gale, "A North American CO2 Storage Supply Curve: Key Findings and Implications for the Cost of CCS Deployment," Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Conference on Carbon Capture and Sequestration (Alexandria, VA: May 2-5, 2005). The study addresses CO2 capture at 2,082 North American facilities including power plants, natural gas processing plants, refineries, cement kilns, and other industrial plants.
- ^ Jennie C. Stevens and Bob Van Der Zwaan, "The Case for Carbon Capture and Storage," Issues in Science and Technology, vol. XXII, no. 1 (Fall 2005): 69-76. (See page 15 of this report for a discussion of safety issues.)
- ^ John Deutch, Ernest J. Moniz, et al., The Future of Coal. (Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology: 2007): 58. (Hereafter referred to as MIT 2007.)
- ^ Ibid.
- ^ Eric Williams, Nora Greenglass, and Rebecca Ryals, "Carbon Capture, Pipeline and Storage: A Viable Option for North Carolina Utilities?" Working paper prepared by the Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions and The Center on Global Change, Duke University (Durham, NC: March 8, 2007): 4.
- ^ See, for example: ICF Internaional, Developing a Pipeline Infrastructure for CO2 Capture and Storage: Issues and Challenges, Prepared for INGAA Foundation (Washington, DC: February, 2009); Michael Murphy, "Carbon Sequestration Options In The Ohio River Valley," Proceedings of the 42nd Annual Meeting of the Geological Society of America, North-Central Section (Evansville, IN: April 25, 2008).
- ^ Model found in: Sean T. McCoy and Edward S. Rubin, "An Engineering-Economic Model of Pipeline Transport of CO2 with Application to Carbon Capture and Storage," International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, In press (November 19, 2007). Cost estimates were provided by Sean McCoy at the request of CRS.
- ^ M.D. Zoback, H. Ross, and A. Lucier, "Geomechanics and CO2 Sequestration," GCEP Technical Report 2006, Stanford Univ., Global Climate and Energy Project (2006):11. [37]
- ^ U.S. Dept of Energy, Office of Fossil Energy, Carbon Sequestration Atlas of the United States and Canada, (2007):38.
- ^ Amie Lucier, Mark Zoback, Neeraj Gupta, and T. S. Ramakrishnan, "Geomechanical Aspects of CO2 Sequestration in a Deep Saline Reservoir in the Ohio River Valley Region," Environmental Geosciences (June 2006), 13(2):85-103.
- ^ S. Julio Friedmann, Site Characterization and Selection Guidelines for Geological Carbon Sequestration, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, UCRL-TR-234408 (September 7, 2007); K. Prasad Saripalli, B. Peter McGrail, and Mark D. White, "Modeling the Sequestration of CO2 in Deep Geological Formations," Proceedings of the First National Conference on Carbon Sequestration, National Energy Technology Laboratory (May 14-17, 2001):11.
- ^ For an example of such research, see: L. Chiaramonte, M. Zoback, M., S.J. Friedmann, and V. Stamp, "Seal Integrity and Feasibility of CO2 Sequestration in the Teapot Dome EOR Pilot: Geomechanical Site Characterization," Environmental Geoscience, v. 53 (2007).
- ^ According to the DOE Carbon Sequestration Atlas (pp. 38-39), there are one billion metric tons of total potential capacity for CO2 in coal seams versus nearly 20 billion metric tons for the Rose Run sandstone.
- ^ Cui, X., R. M. Bustin, and L. Chikatamarla, "Adsorption-induced Coal Swelling and Stress: Implications for Methane Production and Acid Gas Sequestration into Coal Seams," Journal of Geophysical Research, vol. 112, B10202 (2007).
- ^ U.S. Dept of Energy (2007):36.
- ^ IPCC 2005:215; Charles W. Zuppann, "Too Much Fun? — Tales of 'Field Checking' at the Indiana Geological Survey," The PGI Geology Standard, No. 48 (April 2007): 6-9. [38]
- ^ U.S. Dept of Energy, (2007):38.
- ^ Sean T. McCoy and Edward S. Rubin (November 19, 2007). Cost estimates were provided by Sean McCoy at the request of CRS.
- ^ Gemma Heddle, Howard Herzog, and Michael Klett, "The Economics of CO2 Storage," MIT Laboratory for Energy and the Environment, Working Paper MIT LFEE 2003-003 RP (August 2003): 23.
- ^ IPCC report: 347.
- ^ For further information about steel prices, see CRS Report RL32333, Steel: Price and Policy Issues, by Stephen Cooney.
- ^ Minnesota Public Utilities Commission, Order Resolving Procedural Issues, Disapproving Power Purchase Agreement, Requiring Further Negotiations, and Resolving to Explore the Potential for a Statewide Market for Project Power under Minn. Stat. § 216b.1694, Subd. 5, Docket No. E-6472/M-05-1993 (August 30, 2007):15; Minnesota Public Utilities Commission, Staff Briefing Papers — Appendix I, Docket No. E-6472/M-05-1993 (July 31, 2007):78. Cost estimate in 2011 U.S. dollars.
- ^ Jeffrey M. Bielicki and Daniel P. Schrag, "On the Influence of Carbon Capture and Storage on the Location of Electric Power Generation," Harvard University, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Working paper (2006).
- ^ Adam Newcomer and Jay Apt, "Implications of Generator Siting for CO2 Pipeline Infrastructure," Carnegie Mellon Electricity Industry Center, Working Paper CEIC-07-11 (2007).
- ^ National Commission on Energy Policy, Siting Critical Energy Infrastructure: An Overview of Needs and Challenges. (Washington, DC: June 2006): 9. (Hereafter referred to as NCEP 2006.)
- ^ Partha S. Chaudhuri, Michael Murphy, and Robert E. Burns, "Commissioner Primer: Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage" (National Regulatory Research Institute, Ohio State Univ., Columbus, OH: March 2006): 17.
- ^ For further discussion, see CRS Report RL34307, Regulation of Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Sequestration Pipelines: Jurisdictional Issues, by Adam Vann and Paul W. Parfomak.
- ^ Williams, et al., (2007): 4.
- ^ Williams, et al., (2007): 20.
- ^S.M. Frailey, R.J. Finlay, and T.S. Hickman, "CO2 Sequestration: Storage Capacity Guideline Needed," Oil & Gas Journal (Aug. 14, 2006): 44.
- ^Massachusetts v. EPA; at http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/06pdf/05-1120.pdf. For further information see CRS Report RL33776, Clean Air Issues in the 110th Congress: Climate Change, Air Quality Standards, and Oversight, by James E. McCarthy.
- ^U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, memorandum (July 5, 2006). Available at http://www.epa.gov/OGWDW/uic/pdfs/memo_wells_sequestration_7-5-06.pdf.
- ^ J. Barrie, K. Brown, P.R. Hatcher, and H.U. Schellhase, "Carbon Dioxide Pipelines: A Preliminary Review of Design and Risks," Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies (Vancouver, Canada: Sept. 5-9, 2004): 2.
- ^ Airco, Inc., "Carbon Dioxide Gas," Material Safety Data Sheet (Aug. 4, 1989). http://www2.siri.org/msds/f2/byd/bydjl.html
- ^ Kevin Krajick, "Defusing Africa's Killer Lakes," Smithsonian, v. 34, n. 6. (2003): 46—55.
- ^ PHMSA succeeds the Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA), reorganized under P.L. 108-246, which was signed by the President on Nov. 30, 2004.
- ^ Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS), "Distribution, Transmission, and Liquid Accident and Incident Data," (2009). Data files available at http://ops.dot.gov/stats/IA98.htm.
- ^ John Gale and John Davidson. (2004): 1322.
- ^ Barrie et al. (2004): 2.
- ^ Gale and Davidson (2004): 1321.
- ^ Chris Baltimore, "BP to Pay $373 Million to Settle Charges," Reuters News Service, (Oct. 25, 2007).
- ^ "Shell, Olympic Socked for Pipeline Accident," Energy Daily (Jan. 22, 2003).
^ John Heilprin, "Ashcroft Promises Increased Enforcement of Environmental Laws for Homeland Security,"
Associated Press, Washington dateline (Mar. 11, 2003).
^ Business Editors, "Olympic Pipe Line, Others Pay Out Record $75 Million in Pipeline Explosion Wrongful Death
Settlement," Business Wire (April 10, 2002).
- ^ National Transportation Safety Board, Pipeline Accident Report, PAR-03-01. (Feb. 11, 2003).
^ El Paso Corp., Quarterly Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Form 10-Q,
Period ending June 30, 2002. (Houston, TX: 2002). The impact of these lawsuits on the company's business is unclear,
however; the report states that "our costs and legal exposure ... will be fully covered by insurance."
- ^ An example is the Gwinville, MS-Lake St. John, LA natural gas pipeline purchased by Denbury Resources, Inc. in 2006 and converted to CO2 transportation for EOR in 2007.


text:
This time around I detected more detail, especially in the northern hemisphere and along the northern equatorial band. While my representation is not 100% accurate, it does capture the "spirit" of what I observed last evening. Seeing was average (III); transparency not as good, but not all that bad.
Thanks for viewing!


text:
Catalog search
Catalog links
Graduate Bulletin 2013-2015 » Academic Programs and Courses » Health Sciences » Courses in Health Education » HEA (DFN) 640: Nutrition and Chronic Diseases.
HEA (DFN) 640: Nutrition and Chronic Diseases.
3 hours, 3 credits. The relationship of diet to health promotion and disease prevention and management. Emphasis on current dietary patterns in the United States and other industrialized nations and the high incidence of degenerative diseases, such as arteriosclerosis, diabetes mellitus, diverticulosis, and cancer. PREREQ: BIO 181 and BIO 182 or equivalents and permission of the Department.
Last modified: 8/4/2015


text:
Chinatown is a neighborhood in southern Algonquin, Liberty City. It is bordered to the north by Emerald Street (Lower Easton), to the west by Columbus Avenue (City Hall), to the south by Calcium Street (The Exchange), and to the east halfway between Borlock Road and Albany Avenue (Fishmarket South).
Chinatown is a residential and commercial neighborhood, Chinese descents and immigrants Tongs as residents, business owners and activity. It's a working class ethnic enclave, serving as a stark contrast to the busy nature of surrounding City Hall and The Exchange.
The district features a significant number of narrow streets, and a mixture of small tenement buildings and large low-rise office buildings and shops, some decorated with Oriental or modernist designs. The district is also uniquely adorned with large, overhanging signs reminiscent of those seen in the streets of Hong Kong, despite this practice not being commonly seen in New York City's Chinatown (which signs do not usually extend too far past the edge of sidewalks). The businesses in the neighborhood are Chinese-owned and are tailored specifically for Chinese only. The district is the main territory of the Algonquin Triads in both GTA IV and GTA Chinatown Wars.
The Liberty City Subway system serves Chinatown. The Emerald station, located on Emerald Street between Luddite Row and Albany Avenue along the neighborhood's border with Lower Easton, is served at all times by the Algonquin Outer Line.
Most of the people are Chinese in ethncity. The spoken lagnuages are Cantonese Chinese and English as it appears in the game. Other things in this topic are unknown. Most of the Chinese businesses get names with Chines/Hong Kong's style. Besides there are some firms which suppose to be unique in the Hong Kong Society, such as "tea restaurant" ("卜街茶餐廳", could be found in the Chinatown is a "tea restaurant"). Interestingly, some Chinese names of the businesses have similar pronunciation with Chinese foul language, such as "卜街茶餐廳" and "杏家富貴",or with some special colors, including "吉川春代", "奔周物業貸款", "藝技文化中心", "柯蘭詩職業服務社" and "黃色網吧". Most of these above have similar pronunciation (in Hong Kong Cantonese") with Chinese phrases, which consist of meaning related to sexual organs and stool, etc.
Points of interestWhen originally featured in GTA IV, Chinatown boasts only one useful facility, an underground weapons shop is located across the street from the intersection of Cavity Lane and Bismarck Avenue.
Other landmarks in the district were also featuring over the course of GTA IV's storyline, particularly during "Three Leaf Clover", when Niko Bellic assists Patrick McReary and his peers in robbing the main Bank of Liberty branch in The Exchange/Chinatown and escaping along the narrow alleyways of the district to escape into Emerald station.
The "Dragon Heart Plaza" is a mixed-use office building and shopping center in Chinatown which interior was added for both The Lost and Damned and The Ballad of Gay Tony. In The Lost and Damned, Johnny Klebitz and Jim Fitzgerald attempted to sell the heroin that they stole during "Action/Reaction" back to the Algonquin Triads; the Triads shoot at Johnny and Jim, as they fight their way out of the roof of the Dragon Heart Plaza. In The Ballad of Gay Tony, Luis Fernando Lopez and Anthony Prince must fight their way down from the upper floor of the building's interior against an army of Algonquin Triad members in "Chinese Takeout".
An Al Dente's restaurant may also be found at Albany Avenue and Calcium Street.
When requested for Stevie's Car Thefts, a Super GT can be found parked across the street from the 69 Exchange.
Algonquin's Chinatown is directly inspired by New York City's own Chinatown in Manhattan. Many buildings in GTA IV's Chinatown are apparently based on those situated within Manhattan's Chinatown as well as adjacent Lower East Side districts.
- 51 Bowery at Canal Street (HSBC Bank and former Citizen's Savings Bank). Depicted in game as a Bank of Liberty branch at the southwestern corner of Chinatown at Columbus Avenue and Calcium Street, and prominently featured during "Three Leaf Clover".
- The Manhattan Bridge approach arch in Lower Manhattan.[1] Although the Algonquin Bridge (which is based on the Manhattan Bridge) exists, the game's rendition of the approach arch is placed in front of Broker Bridge, a representation of the Brooklyn Bridge, and features two arches instead of one in the real life rendition.
- 241 Canal Street (former Golden Pacific National Bank), depicted in game as the Dragon Heart Plaza. Located in game at Diamond Street and Albany Avenue, the interior of the Dragon Heart Plaza is prominently featured in The Ballad of Gay Tony, during "Chinese Takeout".
- 277-289 Canal Street (The Oltarsh Building; former Major Theater); its in game replica is located at Columbus Avenue and Emerald Street. The game's rendition was modified to feature the fascia of 277 Canal Street on all four corners of the building. The building also houses the Videogeddon video game arcade, which is a destination in "Ruff Rider".
- 185 Canal Street (pre-2008/2009 renovation) (United Orient Bank); its replica in game is located at Albany Avenue and Diamond Street. While making use of the building's facade and lobby entrance design, the building is significantly smaller. And unlike 185 Canal, the GTA IV rendition also features a stock and news ticker.
- B.A.H. Finance
- Bridal Make Up & Hair Styling (Creative Trendy Styling House)
- Common Travel
- Cum Ming Traditional Massage
- Go-Go-Gold Jewelry
- Dim Sum
- Fashion Jewelry
- Hack Computer Inc
- High-End Massage Spa
- J.J. Frozen Food Co.
- Lax Convenient Store
- Lee Finance
- Liberty City Telecom
- People Sport
- Super Real Fashion Jewelery
- Sweet Potato Hair
- 自由城銀行 Bank of Liberty
- 吉川春代文化書局 Kak Chuin Chun Doi (Pierce balls) Bookstore
- 奔周物業貸款 Ben Zhou (Penis) Property Loans
- 傻逼翻譯軟件 Sha Bi (Idiot) Translation Softwares
- 回春整容外科美容院 Beauty Money Can Buy Beauty Saloon
- 何氏鴨店 S' Ho Duck Shop
- 波佳超级市場 Bo Gai Supermarket
- 杏家富貴 Heng Ka Fu Gwai (Whole family going dead)
- 騎呢健康食品有限公司 Kyle (Weird) Health Food Co. Ltd.
- 黄色網吧 Yellow (Porn) Cybercafe
- 地中海髮廊 Dei Zhong Hoi (Mediterranean Ocean *means bold in Cantonese*) Hair Saloon
- 番薯髮型屋 Sweet Potato Hair Saloon
- 柯蘭詩職業服務社 O Lan Si (Shit Happens) Job Service Center
- 藝技文化中心 Ai Gei (Homophone of Geisha) Cultural Center
- 香港菜粵語菜食物餐廳 Hong Kong Food Cantonese Cuisine Restaurant
- 新加坡菜中國菜食物餐廳 Singapore Food Chinese Cuisine Restaurant
- 利壹利財務 Lei Dab Lei (Debt cover Debt) Financial Company Ltd.
- 大耳窿財務 B.A.H Finance (Loan Sharks Finance in Chinese)
- 貴利王 Lee Finance (High Interests Finance in Chinese)
- 超假珠寶首飾 Super Real Fashion Jewelery (Super Fake Fashion Jewelery in Chinese)
- 睦福珠寶金行 Fortune Jewelry
- 超世紀水療按摩 High-End Massage Spa
- 佘王士多 Lax Convenient Store
- 自由城購物中心 Liberty City Shopping Center
- 粵港居點心坊 Dim Sum
- 黃綠藥房 Y G Drugs (Yellow Green Pharmacy)
- 流氓旅行社 Liu Mang (Hooligan) Travel Agency
- 貳叔公珠寶金行 Uncle E Jewellry
- 壹天堂中藥研究院 Institute of Chinese Medicine
- 大大煲廚具 Great Burning Kitchen
- 老來旺餐廳 Big Wang Restaurant
- 新萬年小食 New Centry Fast Food Restaurant
- 自由城電信 Liberty City Telecom
- 歡樂旅館 Happy Motel
- 中華樓 People Restaurant (China Floor)
- 金元寶珠寶首飾 Go-Go-Gold Jewelry
- 卡明古法按摩 Cum Ming Traditional Massage
- 大帝夜總會 Li Yi Nightclub
- 駭客電腦硬件 Hacker PC Components
- 補鞋大佬 Buxie Boss


text:
The Jetmax (also known as the Cuban Jetmax in GTA Vice City) is a cigarette boat available in Grand Theft Auto: Vice City, Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, Grand Theft Auto: Vice City Stories, Grand Theft Auto IV, Grand Theft Auto: Chinatown Wars and Grand Theft Auto V.
The Jetmax is one of the fastest boats in GTA Vice City, GTA San Andreas, and GTA IV, but in GTA Vice City Stories, the Jetski beats its speed. The Jetmax is referred to as the "Cuban Jetmax" in GTA Vice City, affiliating the boat with the Cuban gang and occasionally appearing in a number of missions where Cuban gang members are present. In addition, the Jetmax is designed in GTA Vice City to appear in only a red and yellow paintjob, but assumes a wider range of colors in games after. The Jetmax in general is distinguishable by its large back-mounted supercharged engine, connecting dual exhaust pipes and jet-only propulsion; these features were removed in the GTA IV rendition of the boat. The GTA San Andreas rendition of the Jetmax is also given a "Jetmax II" designation at the back of its hull, similar to has been done with the Squalo.
The Jetmax's capabilities are evidenced by its use as a reward for certain actions or missions. In GTA Vice City, the Jetmax is unlocked by purchasing the Boatyard. In GTA San Andreas, Carl can unlock the boat by achieving all gold medals at the Boat School.
The Jetmax is referred by police radio chatter as a Grotti boat in GTA IV.
GTA Vice City
- Docked at the Boatyard after it has been purchased. Activates "Checkpoint Charlie" when entered.
GTA San Andreas
- Found in Bayside Marina by Boat School after all gold medals is achieved.
- Docked at the pier in Rockshore West, Las Venturas.
- Docked at the pier in Palisades, San Fierro.
GTA Vice City Stories
- Docked at the pier at Ocean Beach.
- Can be obtained with a cheat code (938-555-0100).
- Usually found parked next to a Reefer, next to a ramp, near the Hickey Bridge.
- Found commonly in the waters of Liberty City.
- Featured as the enemy boat in the mission Buoys Ahoy.
Grand Theft Auto V
- In GTA IV, the default radio station in the Jetmax is The Vibe 98.8.
- In The Ballad of Gay Tony, the player has the option of stealing a Jetmax to get on the yacht in the mission Sexy Time.
- The Cuban Jetmax is the only gang boat in the 3D Universe.


text:
Discover the best food for your dog.
Find the best breed for you.
Learn about Just Right® dog food, and see how you can make a custom dog food that meets the personalized nutrition need for your dog.
We're here to help you with all things pet. Got a question, concern or fun idea?
Tweet @Purina
@acpoirier Thanks for reaching out and sharing your heartfelt sentiments. Your feedback has been shared with our team.
@acpoirier Thanks for reaching out and sharing your heartfelt sentiments. Your feedback has been shared with our team.
Keep your pet happy, healthy and strong with Purina®. Bright eyes, a shiny coat and a playful personality are the telltale signs of any healthy pet, and it all starts with a proper diet. See how Purina is leading the way when it comes to advancing the science of nutrition, health and food products for pets.
Tidy Cats is committed to combining high quality ingredients to create a fresh-smelling home. We offer numerous types of litter to fit any lifestyle.
Purina ONE's goal is to provide pet owners with tailored nutrition for the pets they love, featuring dry dog food, wet dog food, dry cat food and wet cat food.
We believe that every dog and cat can be great. We fuel their greatness with dry and wet pet foods for every life stage, as well as dog snacks and cat snacks
Purina® Dog Chow® brand dog food offers the Total Care Nutrition® your dog needs in the form of dry dog food targeted for your dog's life stage.
We believe food choices are the most important daily decisions we make for our health and well-being, and it's not any different when it comes to feeding our pets. At Beyond®, we believe that when we connect with what's natural, we reconnect with what's good in food.
At Beneful, we believe in filling bowls with the goodness of healthy & the joy of happy. Made with good-for-you ingredients like real meats & vitamin-rich veggies, Beneful dog food brings your best buddy tons of tastes & textures to nourish both inside & out.
You can trust ALPO dry dog foods and wet dog foods to deliver real quality and real nutrition in every bowl.
Friskies provides taste adventures that feed a cat's playfulness and curiosity. With a wide variety of wet, dry and snack foods, Friskies feeds the senses.
Make every day special for your cat with gourmet wet cat foods, dry cat foods and cat appetizers from Fancy Feast.
Beggin' are mouthwatering dog treats with an aroma that bacon-craving dogs love.
Purina® is committed to helping make pets' lives better all over the world. You are currently on the Purina USA site, if you would like to go to another country site, select from the list on the right.


text:
Click on the broken link graphic and fill in the form
Range of antique maps specialising in good value items from c1900.
British History Online - Historical Geography
Digital library containing some of the core printed primary and secondary sources for the medieval and modern history of the British Isles. Created by the Institute of Historical Research and the History of Parliament Trust. Historic Ordnance Survey maps in 1:10,560 scale for each county in England.
Gazetteer of British Place Names
Contains the ancient or geographical County of over 50,000 place names in Britain along with modern administrative areas information.
Guide to the interpretation of the names of England's cities, towns and villages, drawing on the work of the English Place-Name Society.
Maps of Northampton town (late Victorian), map of Northampton town showing pubs, inns and hotels. Map of Far Cotton, St. James End and Kingthorpe.
Old Towns of England - Northamptonshire Towns
Contemporary descriptions of British towns written in 1836. Also old maps for sale.
Gazetteer County List - Choose a County
Organized by the counties of England, Scotland, and Wales, this site contains scanned images of historic Ordnance Survey maps dating from 1846 to 1899. Over 40,000 places are indexed alphabetically first by county and then by locality name.
Online searchable database of the geographic location of churches, registration districts etc in the UK, with details of their founding and closing dates. From GENUKI.
Your Old Maps Online - Northamptonshire
Scans of original maps & etchings.


text:
Illinois Public Media News
In-depth reporting from WILL, NPR, the Associated Press, and other sources
Contact WILL News at email@example.com
April 01, 2013
(Chris Park/AP)
March 30, 2013
Same-Sex Marriage and the Evolving Language of Love
(Alex T. Paschal/AP)
March 30, 2013
New Federal Scrutiny in Wake of NPR Grain Bin Reports
Page 551 of 1015 pages ‹ First < 549 550 551 552 553 > Last ›
WILL Newscast audio
NPR News
Malia Obama Will Attend Harvard, White House Says
Iran Parliamentary Election: Moderates, Reformists Make Gains, Fall Short Of Majority
President Obama Has His Last Laughs At 2016 White House Correspondents' Dinner
PHOTOS: 33 Rescued Circus Lions Airlifted From Peru To South Africa
#NPRreads: Take Your Pick Of Space, Race Or Celebrity
The Bison Is Poised To Become The U.S. National Mammal
Friend Of Charleston Shooter Pleads Guilty To Hiding Information
Pentagon Report Says Airstrike On Afghan Hospital Wasn't A War Crime
Cracker Jack's Prize In The Box Will Now Be Digitized
K-Tel Founder And Infomercial Icon Philip Kives Dies At 87
More NPR News
WILL Highlights
The 21st
21st century radio for the 21st state. Weekdays at 11 am on WILL-AM 580.
2015 Illinois Public Media Annual Report
Our 12-page Annual Report with highlights of Illinois Public Media's activities in 2015.
Plowing Ahead
Uni High and WILL look at local farming in the 21st century in new 5-part radio series