text:
Switchboard, from NRDC tag:switchboard.nrdc.org,2014:http://switchboard.nrdc.org/ 2014-11-22T03:58:35Z Switchboard, from NRDC Another Major Climate Breakthrough: China Will Cap its Coal Consumption by 2020 tag:switchboard.nrdc.org,2014:/blogs/bfinamore//144.17690 2014-11-22T03:58:11Z 2014-11-22T03:58:35Z Barbara Finamore
Barbara Finamore, Senior Attorney and Asia Director, Beijing

Hard on the heels of last week's historic US-China Joint Announcement on Climate Change, in which China pledged for the first time to cap its CO2 emission by 2030, China's State Council has just announced a new energy strategy action plan that includes, also for the first time, a cap on national coal consumption by 2020. This is another major breakthrough for climate and for China's people, since coal is the largest contributor to CO2 emissions as well as to China's dangerous PM 2.5 air pollution.

This latest announcement came just after the Coal Consumption Cap and Energy Transition International Workshop that NRDC organized in Beijing on November 17-18th. NRDC has been working for over a year with over 20 leading Chinese stakeholders, including government think tanks, research institutes, and industry associations, to develop a comprehensive roadmap and policy package for a national coal cap. Our goal is the establishment and implementation of a binding national coal consumption cap at a level that will achieve China's long-term economic, environmental and climate goals.

The State Council's energy action plan calls for capping annual coal consumption by 2020 at 4.2 billion tons and also reducing coal's share of China's primary energy mix to less than 62% by that year. This provides a clear rebuttal to those who claim that China's climate pledges obligate it to "do nothing" for 16 years — or worse — give China an incentive to continue rapidly increasing its CO2 emissions until 2030 in order to have more tons to bargain away. To the contrary, in addition to mounting concerns about air pollution, the Chinese government has clearly taken a long, sober look at the 710-page Second National Assessment Report on Climate Change prepared by its own scientists in 2012. This study determined that China is one of the countries most vulnerable to the adverse impacts climate change.

Putting a lid on coal is the single most important step China can take to reduce its CO2 emissions, and an ambitious yet achievable cap can help China peak its CO2 emissions even earlier than the 2030 date announced last week. But that's not all China is doing. Beijing's pledge to boost the share of non-fossil energy to 20% by 2030 will require it to install the carbon-free energy equivalent of Spain's entire generating capacity each year until 2030, according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance data. Although China already leads the world in renewable energy production and clean energy investment, and installed more new non-fossil fuel capacity than fossil fuel capacity last year, these are major accomplishments, and can hardly be called business as usual.

China's recent climate announcements are not just aspirational statements of future intent. On September 17th, right before the UN Climate Summit, China's State Council approved a 40-page National Climate Change Plan for 2014-2020, which was made publicly available on November 4th. The plan spells out a comprehensive new program — including new and amended climate change legislation, emissions standards, permits and regulations; mitigation and adaptation measures; fiscal, tax and investment policies; steps to improve R&D, GHG monitoring, reporting and verification and personnel capacity; and improvements in governmental coordination and international cooperation.

Most notably, China's detailed climate plan calls for stabilizing total CO2 emissions from China's most highly polluting and energy-intensive industries — steel and cement — by 2020 at 2015 levels. This target, although non-binding, will likely play a key role in implementation of China's latest climate pledge. The plan also calls for the development of GHG emission standards for the power, metallurgy, iron, steel, petrochemical, chemical, transportation and construction industries, as well as other heavy industries. Efforts to develop those standards are already underway.

Power plants in China — still mostly coal-fired — are responsible for approximately one-third of China's emissions. China's plan to limit CO2 emissions from power plants echoes the US EPA's proposed Clean Power Plan, which also targets existing power plants and is a centerpiece of President Obama's climate pledge. This is important news for critics who claim that President Obama's climate agreement with China is one-sided.

Those who question whether China is serious about its new climate pledges would do well to review the September 2014 National Climate Change Plan in detail. The plan was issued to, and imposes new obligations on, every province, major city, ministry and government agency in China. This even includes the two major branches of the People's Liberation Army: the General Logistics Department (GLD), which handles military pay, supplies, healthcare, and transportation, and buildings; and the General Armaments Department (GAD), which manages the PLA's weapons and equipment needs and also oversees China's manned space program. The plan will also ensure that the performance of government officials at every level in implementing this new plan is reflected in their performance appraisal report, which governs every official's future career prospects.

We believe that China's unprecedented climate and coal cap pledges transmit very powerful signals that will drive domestic action and set the stage for even more ambitious targets going forward. As we've seen most recently in the area of wind and solar power development, China has a long history of setting targets that it feels confident it can meet, only to revise them upward repeatedly as its efforts prove successful.

The day before the APEC meetings began in Beijing two weeks ago, I watched in awe as long lines of policemen outfitted in yellow neon vests with multicolored flashing lights stopped traffic on Beijing's major thoroughfare. They strode grimly up and down eight lanes of traffic, searching for cars with license plate numbers that violated the odd/even number restrictions designed to alleviate air pollution during the APEC Summit. This action brought home to me once again the enormous enforcement power that China can wield when it has the political will. This gives me renewed confidence that China can and will move forward boldly in its campaign to rein in carbon emissions.

This blog was co-authored with Susan Finder, author of the Supreme People's Court Monitor blog.

 http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/bfinamore/another_major_climate_breakthr.html Looking Ahead to 2015: Countries Move Forward on Phasing Down HFC Super-Pollutants tag:switchboard.nrdc.org,2014:/blogs/ajaiswal//216.17689 2014-11-22T03:15:41Z 2014-11-22T03:15:55Z Anjali Jaiswal
Anjali Jaiswal, Senior Attorney, San Francisco

The Montreal Protocol discussions concluded today with world leaders unable to achieve a definitive agreement toward a global phase down of HFCs, super potent heat-trapping greenhouse gases.

On one hand, the talks were a major step forward with India along with China and other countries indicating an openness to consider a global HFC phase down, as reflected in Minister Prakash Javadekar's speech during the plenary yesterday. The countries also agreed to an accelerated schedule for talks, starting in April 2015 on HFC limits, as my colleague, David Doniger describes here.

On the other hand, yet again, our world leaders were unable to move forward on taking definitive global action on climate change. Despite showing signs of significant progress earlier in the week, India joined Pakistan and Iran in holding up an agreement to structure future negotiations.

As living standards rise for tens of millions of Indian people, the enormous expansion in room and vehicle air conditioning could strain the country's electric grid, require increased fuel import, and magnify the impacts of global warming as a consequence of carbon dioxide and refrigerant greenhouse gas emissions. Choices made in the next few years, especially on HFCs, will shape whether Indian consumers, companies, and government authorities can turn the challenges of the room and vehicle air conditioning industry's expansion into a business advantage and opportunity, while reducing climate change, improving air quality, and making air conditioning more efficient and less costly to operate.

NRDC and our partners are researching the business case for Indian air conditioning companies to "leapfrog" and phase down HFCs, which are unsustainable technologies based on chemicals with high global warming potential (GWP) and move to a future based on climate-friendly refrigerants and energy-efficient equipment designs. The research shows that some HFC alternatives already exist in the Indian market and funding mechanisms through the Montreal Protocol's Multilateral Fund, as discussed in the talks this week. Reducing the use and emission of these dangerous chemicals, is not only good for the planet, but it is also good for business, with the availability of technology and alternatives increasing every year, as shown by our research (available here and here).

In addition to the forthcoming United Nations' climate discussions in Lima this December, Prime Minister Modi and President Obama have an opportunity to strengthen cooperation during President Obama's visit to India during Republic Day in January 2015. The leaders of the world's largest democracies can come together to propel the world to much-needed action to fight climate change in 2015.

 http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/ajaiswal/looking_ahead_to_2015_countrie.html Countries Accelerate Talks on Phasing Down HFC Super-Pollutants under the Montreal Protocol tag:switchboard.nrdc.org,2014:/blogs/ddoniger//38.17688 2014-11-22T01:37:27Z 2014-11-22T01:38:23Z David Doniger
David Doniger, Director, Climate and Clean Air Program, Washington, D.C.

Delegates from more than 100 countries breathed some life into proposals to phase down production of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) under the Montreal Protocol, the world's most successful environmental treaty. Wrapping up a week of talks in Paris, diplomats agreed to hold talks starting in April 2015 on proposals to replace these super-potent heat-trapping chemicals – used in refrigeration, air conditioning, and other industrial applications – with climate-friendly alternatives.

Two amendments have been offered to the Montreal Protocol to phase down HFCs – a North American proposal offered by Canada, Mexico, and the United States, and another sponsored by Micronesia and other island nations. The European Union has offered some ideas of its own.

HFCs pose a fast-growing threat to the climate. If their growth is left unchecked, they could account for 20 percent of total heat-trapping pollution emitted in 2050. The climate protection benefits of phasing them down would be very large – the North American proposal, for example, would avoid the equivalent of 90 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide between now and 2050.

The vast majority of countries, both developed and developing, favor dealing with HFCs under the Montreal Protocol.

When first offered a half-dozen years ago, HFC proposals were opposed by China, and India, and a handful of other countries. But vigorous U.S. diplomacy yielded agreements to cooperate on HFCs – one announced by President Obama and Prime Minister Modi in September, and the other by President Obama and President Xi this November (building on prior U.S.-China HFC agreements over the last two years).

Saudi Arabia, however, has emerged as a major obstacle, throwing sand into the negotiating gears all through the week. Backed by a small number of regional clients and neighbors, the Saudis opposed formal negotiations based mainly on the claim that adequate substitutes are not presently available for air conditioning in very hot climates.

This objection misses the mark. First, suitable climate-friendly air conditioning products are already available for at least part of their needs. Second, no immediate action is required; the pending HFC proposals allow a decade or more for industries to perfect and market high-temperature solutions before the proposed phase-down schedules would affect those products.

So one is left to think the Saudis are playing a larger game of slowing, if not blocking, climate talks overall.

Compared with previous years, China played a more constructive role this week, beginning to engage in the sort of technical discussions needed to work out practical solutions. India's Minister Prakash Javadekar sounded a hopeful note midweek, and India never expressly contradicted the Modi-Obama agreement. But as the week came to an end, India joined just two other countries – Pakistan and Iran – in preventing an agreement to structure future negotiations. One is left to wonder how this squares with the Prime Minister's commitments.

As the talks ended, the parties did agree on an accelerated schedule for talks in 2015 on HFC limits. An extra meeting will be held in April: a two-day technical workshop focusing on air conditioning in very hot climates, followed by three days of talks on HFC proposals, including technical and financial issues. The treaty's technical advisers will gather more data on emerging alternatives. Further negotiations will follow in July and November.

That outcome keeps alive the potential of reaching an HFC agreement under the Montreal treaty next November, one that could give a boost to broader climate talks scheduled to conclude in Paris in December 2015. As the Economist magazine put it: "The road to Paris should run through Montreal."

 http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/ddoniger/countries_accelerate_talks_on.html DRIPE: A Funny Word That Could Mean Serious Savings for Illinoisans tag:switchboard.nrdc.org,2014:/blogs/pkenneally//463.17687 2014-11-21T22:50:55Z 2014-11-21T22:50:38Z Patrick Kenneally
Patrick Kenneally, Staff Attorney, Chicago

Energy efficiency programs save all Illinois ratepayers, even those not doing anything to reduce their energy consumption, $150 million annually by reducing the price of electricity in Illinois. Bear in mind, this is in addition to the approximately $1 billion energy efficiency programs will have saved Illinois consumers in direct bill savings for those who participate in energy efficiency programs and in avoided grid system costs by 2016.

These additional savings are caused by the "demand induced price effect" or DRIPE. The concept is fairly simple. Market energy prices are proportionally driven largely by load levels; load levels being the amount of energy required to meet the demands of energy consumers. This is why you pay more for energy in the afternoon on a hot summer day when everyone is running their air conditioning. Energy efficiency reduces the electric load. As load or demand is reduced, prices fall and Illinois consumers save money. The more energy efficiency programs get approved by utilities, the more money consumers save.

Currently, the Illinois Commerce Commission is deciding whether Illinois utilities, ComEd and Ameren, will implement more or less energy efficiency programs in 2015. When making this decision, DRIPE is one factor that should be taken into consideration, right? Wrong, says Ameren and ComEd.

The utilities have contended that DRIPE should essentially be ignored by the Commission when determining whether to sanction more energy efficiency programs. The utilities, though acknowledging that DRIPE may save their customers money, object because more energy efficiency means that power generators are not able to sell as much electricity at premium prices. In other words, the utilities are taking the position that DRIPE, though it saves all Illinois consumers money, is not a "net" benefit because energy efficiency causes power generators to lose out.

If the utilities succeed and DRIPE is not considered, than Illinois consumers will likely not receive the benefit of a number of energy efficiency programs ready for implementation in the coming year. These benefits are not just limited to reduced electricity bills, but include the entire spectrum of social and environmental benefits derived from not burning fossil fuels, such as reduced emissions of greenhouse gas, mercury, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter emissions, and carbon monoxide; reduced production of nuclear waste from Illinois' 11 nuclear facilities; reduced need for ratepayers to spend money building power plants and transmission and distribution wires; lower chances of blackouts or brownouts; more effective hedging against fuel price spikes; improved health, well-being, comfort, and productivity of Illinois residents; improving the competitiveness of local businesses; and on and on and on…

It's worth noting that renewable energy has similar salutary and price reducing effects. In addition to preventing the expulsion of all the nasty fossil fuel byproducts, a 2014 Study conducted by the IPA found that renewable energy decreased average electricity prices by "several percent" and assisted in hedging against risks posed by electricity price volatility.

Ameren and ComEd are not electricity generators and their profits are not impacted when the price of electricity changes. Lowering electricity costs to their customers should be something they welcome and seek out, not something they try to avoid. $150 million dollars annually is not a static figure, but will expand or contract based on the ongoing implementation of energy efficiency in Illinois. Let's not just ignore the potential to save more millions.

Illinois DRIPE Memo Final

IPA Annual Report 2014

 http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/pkenneally/dripe_a_funny_word_that_could.html Clean Power Plan Protects Iowans' Health in the Hawkeye State tag:switchboard.nrdc.org,2014:/blogs/jdeclet-barreto//440.17686 2014-11-21T21:16:39Z 2014-11-21T21:16:01Z Juan Declet-Barreto
Juan Declet-Barreto, Climate and Health Fellow, Washington, D.C.

This week, my colleague (and Senior Scientist) Kim Knowlton was honored to address Iowa's professional public health community in a webinar about public health threats in the state associated with climate change—and to share some things that can be done to address them.

The webinar comes on the tail of the Iowa Rural Health Association's National Rural Health Day (a big deal in the Hawkeye State, as 43% of Iowans live in rural areas, according to the Iowa Hospital Association).

The presentation at the webinar highlights some of the key climate change impacts negatively affecting public health in Iowa, including:

Extreme heat: Temperatures are reaching more frequent and hotter highs. The frequent high temperatures experienced in Iowa in 2011 will become more common in the future, which can cause illness and death due to heat stress, heatstroke, and worsen cardiovascular, kidney, and other kinds of disease.

Air pollution: 378,000 Iowans suffer asthma or chronic respiratory disease, and high levels of ozone smog will make them more vulnerable.

Allergen risks: Increased warming is extending the growing season and shifting northward the range of pollen-producing plants like ragweed. This is expected to lead to greater allergy and asthma risks for Iowans.

Storms and floods: Extreme precipitation events like the 2008 Cedar Rapids wastewater plant raw sewage discharge can flood homes and expose residents to mold growth and chemical and microbial pollutants.

Infectious disease: Climate change is making it possible for the mosquitoes that transmit the West Nile virus and La Cross virus to appear in Iowa, exposing the population to these vector of transmission.

Very young, elderly, and impoverished populations are at highest risks: Large numbers of these populations are at highest risk of climate change-related health threats, and have the least amount of resources to deal with these impacts.

In addition to the health benefits of reducing carbon pollution emissions as required under the EPA's proposed Clean Power Plan, there will be additional benefits. The EPA estimates that reductions in power plant emissions of mercury, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and fine particulate matter will improve air quality and help to prevent 6,600 premature deaths, 150,000 asthma attacks in children, 3,300 heart attacks, 2,800 hospital admissions and 490,000 missed work/school days annually in the United States.

The public health community realizes the importance of taking action to provide a healthy climate for our children and grandchildren. To combat dangerous carbon pollution that is warming the planet and endangering people's health, NRDC is strongly supporting EPA's Clean Power Plan, which will reduce carbon pollution driving climate change by at least 30 percent by 2030.

The webinar, which we have titled "The Clean Power Plan: Combating Climate Change + Protecting Our Health" will be posted on Kim Knowlton's blog later, so check back. In the meantime, many thanks to the Iowa Public Health Association and the Iowa Environmental Health Association for the invitation, as well as for support from the Iowa Environmental Council and the Environmental Law and Policy Center.

In the meantime, NRDC has rolled out a new fact sheet that outlines climate-related health issues in Iowa. Read up, get healthy and support the Clean Power Plan in Iowa!

Clean Power Plan: http://www.nrdc.org/health/clean-power-plan-states.asp

Iowa Health Factsheet: http://www.nrdc.org/health/files/clean-power-plant-states-IA.pdf

 http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/jdeclet-barreto/clean_power_plan_protects_iowa.html Ready for Prime Time? Arctic Resource Developers Slow Their Push as Regulators Begin to Ask Tough Questions tag:switchboard.nrdc.org,2014:/blogs/ddroitsch//341.17685 2014-11-21T20:53:24Z 2014-11-21T21:27:07Z Danielle Droitsch
Danielle Droitsch, Director, Canada Project, Washington, D.C.

Written by Josh Axelrod, Law and Policy Consultant for the Canada Project

One hundred and seventy-five kilometers north of the Hamlet of Tuktoyaktuk, Northwest Territories, an ExxonMobil subsidiary—Canada's Imperial Oil—is spearheading the oil industry's latest effort to explore deep water oil and gas resources in the Arctic Ocean. Now, nearly two years after the project was first announced publicly, the reality of the risks such a project poses to local communities and the environment are catching up with Imperial and its partners. During the past few months, several developments now make it clear that Imperial's hope to begin drilling during the summer of 2020 may be as far fetched as its continuing assertion that essential well safety measures are unnecessary in deep Arctic waters.

Source: Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development—Map showing current exploratory licenses in Canada's Beaufort Sea.

After granting Imperial Oil's (and Chevron's) late-spring request for an accelerated hearing on the company's well control system, Canada's National Energy Board (NEB) released a finalized list of issues that it will consider during the hearing. Though the list is relatively vague, two key issues appear to have placed a roadblock on Imperial's forward progress. First, the NEB upheld its initial proposal to require Imperial to explain how its well control proposal would mitigate the threats posed by a worst case scenario—a requirement that will require Imperial to define such a scenario in the first place (something the company publicly stated that it was not interested in doing). Second, following public comment, the NEB added an additional issue to its list which will require Imperial to specifically describe how unique Arctic conditions will impact the effectiveness of their proposed well control system.

Source: RPS ASA—diagram of key factors affecting the scope and impact of an underwater oil spill.

Though Imperial Oil had stated in its letter requesting an accelerated hearing before the NEB that it was ready to propose an alternative well control system by Q3 2014, the complexity and risk of what they hope to do has caught up with them. In a letter to the NEB submitted at the end of October, Imperial stated that it would no longer be able to meet its own timeline, and would delay submitting its well control proposal until at least Q3 2015. The letter cites the challenge of describing a worst case scenario and how its proposal will mitigate the risk of such a scenario taking place as the key reason for its delay.

Source: WWF-Canada/RPS-ASA—Map depicting surface oiling probabilities during a major deep water spill.

Now, two weeks later, the Environmental Impact Review Board (EIRB)—the regulatory body that reviews projects proposed within the Inuvialuit Settlement Region of the Northwest Territories—has published its own requirements for Imperial as the company crafts a worst case scenario to determine its potential liability to local communities in the event of a disaster. These requirements, which elaborate the various elements that Imperial must consider, are tough and forward-looking. If Imperial gives them adequate attention, they will provide the EIRB, impacted communities, and the general public with a critical snapshot of just how bad things could get if something were to go wrong in the Beaufort Sea.

The risks of deep water offshore oil and gas exploration are many and its rewards remain unclear at best. As companies continue to eye resource development in the far North, impacted communities, regulators, and the general public should remain wary of industry claims that such development can be done safely and with great benefit to local, regional, and national economies. Spill modeling in the region has already shown the sheer scale that a large spill could reach, and further study will likely reveal the extraordinary fragility of the ecosystems that such a spill would impact. These factors should encourage extreme caution, thorough study, and healthy skepticism of whether deep water oil and gas development anywhere in the Arctic is a risk that should ever be taken on.

 http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/ddroitsch/ready_for_prime_time_arctic_re.html CTBT ratification still uncertain after 15 years of advancement in nuclear test monitoring tag:switchboard.nrdc.org,2014:/blogs/balemayehu//434.17684 2014-11-21T20:00:00Z 2014-11-21T21:05:52Z Bemnet Alemayehu
Bemnet Alemayehu, Project Scientist, Nuclear Program, Washington, D.C.

There is still no timetable for when the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) will appear before the US Senate for ratification, according to Rose Gottemoeller, Under Secretary of State for Arms Control. This was mentioned at a special event under the topic "Nuclear weapons Testing: History, Progress, Challenges". The event was organized by the Embassy of Kazakhstan, the Embassy of Canada, Green Cross International, the Atom Project, and the Arms Control Association to mark the International Day against Nuclear Tests and to discuss the impact of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT).

The CTBT prohibits carrying out or participating in any nuclear weapon test explosion or any other nuclear explosion. The treaty was opened for signature at the United Nations on November 19, 1996, and on behalf of the United States government President Clinton was the first to sign it. But it has not yet entered into force. On October 13, 1999 the US Senate rejected the CTBT, which had been hastily brought to the floor without adequate preparation, or an accurate headcount of Senators. Over the past 15 years, the CTBT's verification system has grown both quantitatively and qualitatively. As of October 2014, 183 countries have signed the treaty, and 163 have also ratified it, including Russia and all major US allies. But 44 named nuclear technology holding countries must sign and ratify the CTBT before it can enter into force. Of these 8 countries are still missing. The US is one of them, along with China, Israel, India, Pakistan, Egypt, North Korea, and Iran – not the assortment of countries one normally associates with US nonproliferation goals and democratic values.

In order to enforce the treaty, a preparatory commission, CTBT organization (CTBTO) was established in Vienna, Austria. CTBTO oversees the treaty's entry into force and the construction and operation of the International Monitoring System (IMS). The IMS consists of 337 measurement stations all over the world. Two major classes of monitoring methods, wave and radionuclide monitoring, are used to detect signals that could indicate a possible nuclear explosion. Seismic, hydroacoustic and infrasound monitoring are part of the wave monitoring methods. Data from these measurement stations will be transmitted for analysis to the International Data Center (IDC) in Vienna through satellite links.

The International Monitoring System. Image credit: The Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization.

Seismic monitoring of nuclear tests is based not only on the depth and location of geologic events, such as earthquakes and undersea volcanic eruptions, but also on inherent differences in the way energy released by natural events and underground test explosions is coupled to the surrounding geologic medium and converted into seismic waves. When seismic waves hit a seismometer, the instrument transforms the vibration into electrical signals. The signals generated are used to detect, and locate seismic events, and to discriminate the subset of events that clearly are or could be underground nuclear explosions. There are 170 seismic stations in 76 countries around the world.

Seismic station PS21, Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran. Image credit: The Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization.

Hydro-acoustic monitoring is based on the study of sound waves in the water, which can travel great distances. When sound waves hit a hydroacoustic monitoring station, they will be registered by hydrophones. Hydrophones are sensitive underwater microphones that convert changes in water pressure to electrical signals. Data obtained from this monitoring will be used to detect and determine the location of a nuclear explosion underwater, near the ocean surface or near its coasts. There are 11 hydroacoustic monitoring stations in 8 countries globally.

Installing the underwater cable of hydro-acoustic station HA03, Juan Fernandez Island, Chile. Image credit: The Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization.

Infrasound monitoring stations measure very low acoustic waves (infrasound) which are inaudible to the human ear. Atmospheric and shallow underground nuclear explosions can generate these waves that cause changes in the atmospheric pressure. These changes are measures using microbarometers at the infrasound network. The microbarometer transforms the infrasound waves into electrical impulses. There are 60 infrasound monitoring stations in 35 countries globally.

Infrasound station IS21, Marquesas Islands, France. Image credit: The Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization.

Radionuclide monitoring measures the abundance of radioactive particles and gases in the air that are caused by nuclear explosions. Currently, there are 80 radionuclide stations in 27 countries worldwide. Out of the 80 IMS radionuclide stations, 40 stations have airborne radioactive particle detection capabilities. However, if the explosion is well-contained, radioactive particles will not be released. The alternative solution is measuring the radioactive noble gas isotopes instead. Because they are inert and exist in gaseous state, radioactive noble gas isotopes can be detected very far away from the explosion site. In half of the currently existing radionuclide monitoring stations, radioactive noble gases are captured and analyzed. Noble gas detection is also useful in detecting undeclared reactor and spent nuclear fuel reprocessing operations that could be engaged in producing fissile material for a clandestine nuclear weapon.

Radionuclide station RN74, Ashland, Kansas, USA. Image credit: The Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization.

The CTBT's monitoring systems and the International Data Center (IDC) have shown their abilities to detect nuclear tests in the three nuclear tests conducted by the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK). According to an article, published in Physics Today, the 2006 nuclear test was detected by 22 seismic stations, including one in San Ignacio de Velasco, Bolivia, more than 17,000 Km away. The event was similar in size to a magnitude 4.1 earthquake, and its location was calculated to be within a circular area with a radius of less than 20 Km. The 2009 test, a magnitude 4.5 event, was detected by 59 seismic stations including one 18,000 Km away in Paso Flores, Argentina. According to the CTBTO press release at the time, this increase was due to the rise in the number of operational stations as well as the larger magnitude of the 2009 test. The 2013 nuclear test, a magnitude 4.9 event, was detected by 94 seismic stations. Between 2009 and February 2014, the number of CTBTO seismic stations has further increased from 130 to 170. DPRK's third nuclear test was also detected by infrasound and radionuclide monitoring stations in Japan and Russia.

The CTBT enjoys wide international support. Today, over 85 percent of the CTBTO's 337 monitoring stations are now operational and capable of detecting, locating and identifying nuclear tests from the global background of seismic and other man-made events. Entry-into-force of the CTBT will bar nuclear weapon states from testing nuclear explosive devices of hitherto unproven design, and it will make vastly more difficult, if not impossible for newer proliferant states to develop and deploy vastly more powerful thermonuclear weapons. Without the CTBT, effective enforcement of the current de-facto global moratorium on nuclear test explosions will be difficult to sustain in a globally unanimous manner. It is time for the US Senate to reconsider ratification of the treaty.

 http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/balemayehu/ctbt_ratification_still_uncert.html This Week in Whales Focus: NGOs Petition the Mexican President to Save the Vaquita in Advance of Major Decision tag:switchboard.nrdc.org,2014:/blogs/zsmith//242.17683 2014-11-21T19:08:13Z 2014-11-21T19:07:05Z Zak Smith
Zak Smith, Attorney, Marine Mammal Protection Project, Santa Monica

For years, people have been working furiously to save the vaquita—a small porpoise species found only in the northernmost part of the Gulf of California. Today, fewer than 100 individuals remain and they are declining at a rate of 18.5 percent per year. If we do not reverse this trend immediately, the vaquita will be extinct as early as 2018, going down in history as the first cetacean species found only in North America to disappear forever from the planet. Fortunately, Mexico can stop this from happening. Will it? We'll find out when it announces a new plan to save the species on November 27. More than 30 groups have called on the President of Mexico to ensure the plan is aggressive and pulls out all the stops to save the vaquita.

Photo credit: Paula Olson (NOAA Contractor)

We know what's wiping them out: drowning after getting entangled in gillnets. And we know the two fisheries largely responsible: an illegal fishery for the endangered totoaba fish and a legal fishery for shrimp. The solution is to immediately ban the use of gillnets in all vaquita habitat, helping legal fishers to transition to vaquita-friendly gear and ferreting out and crushing the illegal totoaba fishery.

Great! Identify problem—vaquita going extinct; identify cause—gillnets; identify solution—ban gillnets. Sounds easy, right? Maybe on paper, but the reality is something quite different. We've known about this problem for years and the Mexican government has been trying to reverse the decline, without success. Unsurprisingly it's difficult to crush an illegal fishery that has the backing of drug cartels and is supplying demand for fish-bladder soup in Asia. And the shrimp fishery has continually resisted change, often with the support of Mexico's National Fishery and Aquaculture Commission. Thousands of families in the upper Gulf of California depend on fishing for their livelihoods and it takes time and effort to change traditions and cultures. Time the vaquita does not have.

Photo credit: Paula Olson (NOAA Contractor)

It's been reported, in recent weeks, that the Mexican government has reached an agreement with fishermen to institute a two-year ban on fishing in the northern Gulf of California. That would be brilliant news, if true. Of course, the devil's in the details. What exactly will be banned? All gillnets, or just gillnets in certain areas? Will it apply to all fisheries, or just shrimp? What enforcement steps will be taken to back up the ban? How does the ban fit into a strategy to eliminate the illegal totoaba fishery? According to reports, we'll find out answers to those questions on November 27 when the Mexican government is supposed to announce the ban.

That's why more than 30 organizations supporting whale and dolphin conservation have sent a letter to Mexican President Peña Nieto, urging an aggressive plan to save the vaquita. That plan must implement the recommendations made by the Fifth Meeting of the Comité Internacional para la Recuperación de la Vaquita, including a complete bar on the use of gillnets, no matter the target species, throughout the vaquita's habitat and vigorous enforcement of the ban utilizing all available resource tools, both within and outside Mexico. The plan must also include a personal request from Mexico for assistance from the United States and China to curb the demand for totoaba swim bladders. Only with these actions will the vaquita have a chance to survive.

 http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/zsmith/this_week_in_whales_focus_ngos.html Moving Forward on Climate Protection: India Engages with World Leaders on Phasing Down HFCs tag:switchboard.nrdc.org,2014:/blogs/ajaiswal//216.17682 2014-11-20T22:31:03Z 2014-11-20T22:30:21Z Anjali Jaiswal
Anjali Jaiswal, Senior Attorney, San Francisco

This post is written with Bhaskar Deol at the Montreal Protocol Meeting of the Parties in Paris.

After six years of gridlock, India is stepping forward in discussions with over 180 countries on protecting our climate and moving forward with a global phasedown of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), super potent heat-trapping greenhouse gases. At the Montreal Protocol's discussions today in Paris, India's Environment Minister Prakash Javadekar made it clear that India was ready to take action on HFCs, climate-changing chemicals used in air conditioning, refrigeration, foams and aerosol products, and highlighted key areas for discussion. Minister Javadekar's statement remains faithful to the joint statement issued by Prime Minister Modi and President Obama in September, pledging to cooperate on "the challenge posed by HFCs to global warming."

With India and China dropping prior opposition to discussing HFCs under the Montreal Protocol, this is certainly a major move in the right direction. As our colleague David Doniger points out, "Because those markets are growing so fast, if the HFCs aren't nipped in the bud, they will undo all the positive effects of the Montreal Protocol by 2050." In recent years, India – along with a small number of countries – has opposed discussions about an amendment from getting underway. Minister Javadekar's statement, finds a middle ground, following parties agreeing to the formation of an "informal discussion group" earlier this week.

India's newly softened position demonstrates progress on a global HFC phase down. Here are key highlights from Minister Javadekar's statement:

Recognizing the success of the Montreal Protocol in protecting the ozone layer and India's significant contribution to the progress of phasing out chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs).

Emphasizing the danger that HFCs pose and urgency to act given that HFCs are greenhouse gases with a global warming potential is 1,000 times greater than carbon dioxide.

Stressing that HFCs aren't an issue of the elite, but rather an issue of common people, who need energy efficient air conditioning.

Identifying areas of discussion to include clarity on key issues of technology transfer, financing, transparent demonstration of environmentally-superior alternatives that work in developing countries, and cooperation – rather than confidentiality – on intellectual property rights.

India called for clear roles for developed and developing countries, with different phasedown schedules, and asked that the Protocol's Technology and Economic Assessment Panel step up efforts to provide clarity on current production and consumption patterns of HFCs. The Chinese delegation emphasized that Montreal Protocol has unparalleled expertise in dealing with production and consumption of HFCs, and supported improved coordination between Montreal Protocol and UNFCCC. Meanwhile, China continues to increase efforts to comply with its existing commitments to the international climate community.

The movement by India builds on the Obama-Modi joint statement earlier this year. The two leaders finally broke the deadlock by announcing plans to "use the institutions and expertise of the Montreal Protocol to reduce consumption and production of HFCs, while continuing to report and account for the quantities reduced under the UNFCCC." The overall progress at the international meetings this week also reflects the recent surge of domestic and bilateral action on climate change, including the historic US-China announcements earlier this month. Minister Javadekar's participation in the discussions, after a drought of minister-level participants, also signals that India is taking seriously both the Obama-Modi joint statement and climate change action.

The issues raised by India and other developing countries have been voiced in the past, and can be broadly classified as legal, technical and financial in nature. So far at the meeting of parties this week, resistance is coming from a handful of countries led by Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Pakistan, taking a stand on "principle," that HFCs should be dealt with under UNFCCC as they are global warming gases. The vast majority of countries, however, have been aligned that the way forward is for countries to work together under the Montreal Protocol, with spirit of international cooperation, to solve this problem under this treaty.

Reducing the use and emission of these dangerous chemicals, largely used for cooling, is not only good for the planet, but it is also good for business, with the availability of technology and alternatives increasing every year, as shown by our research (available here and here). Stay tuned for the last day of the Montreal Protocol discussions tomorrow as countries will decide next steps for 2015.

 http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/ajaiswal/moving_forward_on_climate_prot.html California's Appliance Efficiency Standards Get Extra Teeth, Bringing Greater Utility Bill Savings for Californians tag:switchboard.nrdc.org,2014:/blogs/cheavey//462.17681 2014-11-20T21:16:05Z 2014-11-20T21:15:19Z Christa Heavey
Christa Heavey, MAP Sustainable Energy Fellow, San Francisco

The California Energy Commission has approved a much-needed regulation that will allow it to enforce its appliance efficiency standards by fining violators. This good news will help ensure California consumers get the energy savings (and lower utility bills) they expect by reducing noncompliance and creating a level playing field for all retailers.

Consumers can't see inside products to know if they waste energy, so California has established minimum efficiency requirements for certain new appliances, like our televisions and products with rechargeable batteries. These standards are the cheapest and easiest way for us to save energy and meet our carbon pollution reduction goals because utilities don't need to purchase as much power from dirty power plants when our devices use energy smarter.

Making violators pay means lower energy bills and cleaner air

Since the 1970s, the Golden State's appliance standards have saved Californians nearly $40 billion in lower energy bills. However, it is estimated that a significant number of appliances sold in California do not comply with the state's efficiency standards. Senate Bill 454, authored by Senator Fran Pavley and sponsored by NRDC, gave the commission the authority to develop an enforcement regulation in 2011. The California Energy Commission's approval of the regulation this week makes Senator Pavley's vision a reality because it finally gives the commission the ability to enforce the standards by assessing penalties on any retailer or manufacturer selling noncompliant appliances for use in California.

Enforcement is important to ensure that the appliance efficiency standards reach their full potential and achieve the intended energy savings. By saving more energy, California can rely less on the polluting power plants that are harmful to our health and that spew greenhouse gases that cause global warming, which also means big savings on consumers' utility bills. Effective enforcement of the standards could save Californians several billion dollars over the next decade.

Leveling the playing field for good actors

This enforcement regulation is also important because it creates a level playing field for appliance sales in California. When retailers sell appliances that do not meet the standards, they have an unfair advantage by undercutting their competition. The enforcement regulation means that all retailers, distributors, and manufacturers will have to play by the same rules and sell appliances that meet California's efficiency standards, or pay the price.

The regulation establishes a maximum penalty of $2,500 for each appliance unit sold in violation; however, in practice the commission has full discretion to determine the appropriate amount to ensure the total fine is both effective and reasonable for each incident. For example, the commission will consider items such as the willfulness of the violation, the seriousness and persistence of the violation, and the harm to consumers and the state as a result of the energy wasted.

The regulation covers violations that occur from any point of purchase (i.e., on the internet or physical sales) and applies to any violators, including manufacturers, distributors, and retailers. Violators will be alerted to enforcement action through a written Notice of Violation, which will include the assessment of a penalty. This enforcement regulation is an important step to ensuring that California consumers get the most efficient equipment for their homes and businesses.

Setting a precedent that will benefit consumers beyond California's borders

Given that California is home to one in eight consumers in the nation, effective enforcement of the efficiency standards will likely extend sales of more efficient appliances beyond California's borders. When manufacturers design appliances to meet California's efficiency standards, they often sell the efficient products elsewhere, rather than manage different specs and inventory for different states. This leads to more efficient appliances and greater energy savings nationwide and even worldwide.

Appliance efficiency standards have clearly benefitted California over the past four decades. This enforcement regulation is the missing piece that will ensure even more energy and utility bill savings for consumers and will create a fair market for all product sales. NRDC applauds the commission for developing an effective and balanced regulation that will ensure the appliance efficiency standards meet their goals and benefit Californians in the process.

 http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/cheavey/californias_appliance_efficien.html Fact Checking the WaPo Fact Checker on Keystone XL and exports tag:switchboard.nrdc.org,2014:/blogs/aswift//321.17680 2014-11-20T19:38:17Z 2014-11-20T19:37:40Z Anthony Swift
Anthony Swift, Attorney, International Program, Washington, DC

Written with Lorne Stockman, Research Director at Oil Change International

The President recently took on claims that the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline would help American consumers, noting that the carbon-intensive project is designed primarily as a route for tar sands to reach the international market. Unfortunately the Washington Post Fact Checker, relying on a variety of outdated and in some cases demonstrably inaccurate information, took exception to the President's comments. The President is right as we will show. The Keystone XL tar sands pipeline is an export pipeline through the United States, designed to increase the tar sands industry's access to the international market.

I won't hide my opinion about this, which is that one major determinant of whether we should approve a pipeline shipping Canadian oil to world markets, not to the United States, is does it contribute to the greenhouse gases that are causing climate change?"

–President Barack Obama, news conference at G20 summit, Brisbane, Australia, Nov. 16, 2014

Let's examine the facts.

FACT: Gulf Coast refineries do not need Keystone XL. The Fact Checker quotes an outdated Washington Post report from two years ago that argued that "the refineries in the Gulf Coast are eagerly waiting crude for the Canadian, since there isn't enough oil in the area anymore to feed the refineries."

This is simply no longer the case. When Keystone XL was proposed in 2008, Texas's Gulf Coast refineries were operating at 81% of their total capacity – a level that was generally on par with the national average. Gulf Coast refineries have gotten far busier since then as a flood of light oil from Texas and North Dakota has flooded the markets. In recent months, these refineries have operated at 95% capacity or higher. This is a level of utilization that is hard to sustain, given routine maintenance and outages, but clearly shows that these refineries do not lack for supplies.

When it comes to "The Facts" about the Gulf Coast oil market, it has been widely recognized for some time that the Gulf Coast refiners are no longer in the position described by the Washington Post Fact Checker of being concerned about getting enough crude to fill their refineries. They will certainly buy Canadian crude if it can be delivered by pipeline but they are no longer under pressure to secure Canadian crude. This is reflected in the declining price of crude on the Gulf Coast compared to international markets and is a major reason why some Canadian producers are positioning to export their tar sands crude to international markets where prices may be higher.

FACT: Hundreds of thousands of barrels of unrefined crude are exported from the Gulf Coast every day. The Washington Post Fact Checker mistakenly concludes that unrefined crude oil exports from the Gulf Coast are unlikely, relying on the State Department's final environmental impact statement. Both the Fact Checker and the State Department have missed the boat – or tanker – on this assumption. The U.S. Energy Information Administration shows that every day hundreds of thousands of barrels of unrefined crude are now being exported from the Gulf Coast to the international market. In fact, unrefined oil exports from the Gulf Coast now exceed the entire volume of Canada's crude by rail exports (which include shipments of conventional crude and tar sands to the East Coast, Rockies, Midwest, Gulf and West Coasts). This isn't the only assumption that the State Department got wrong, but it is beyond credible dispute that unrefined oil is being exported from the Gulf today.

In fact, Canadian tar sands are likely to comprise a disproportionate share of the Gulf Coast's crude exports. While only small volumes of Canadian tar sands are making it to the Gulf Coast now, the tar sands industry is already exporting increasing volumes of it to Europe and Asia. Tidal Energy Marketing, a subsidiary of the tar sands shipping company Enbridge, has received and used a license to re-export Canadian crude from the Gulf Coast. Platts reports that between 500,000 to 600,000 barrels of raw tar sands was loaded onto tankers from Freeport, Texas to go to refineries in Spain. According to the Globe and Mail, over 1.2 million barrels of raw tar sands were shipped from ports in Houston, Galveston and New Orleans to Spain, Italy, Singapore and Switzerland in July and August alone. In October, the tar sands producer MEG Energy applied for its own export license to begin re-exporting unrefined tar sands from the Gulf Coast.

As Martin King, an analyst with FirstEnergy Capital in Calgary observed about growing volumes of raw tar sands exports from the Gulf Coast:

"This is a viable opportunity for Canadian barrels to get out into the wider world. It's another source of revenue other than big brother United States." Martin King, FirstEnergy Capital analyst, April 2014

FACT: Majority of refined product from coastal refineries in Gulf exported internationally. By only considering exports of certain refined products and including "Gulf Coast" refineries that don't have access to the coast and wouldn't be supplied by Keystone XL, the Fact Checker underestimates the percentage of refined product being exported by coastal refineries in the Gulf Coast – concluding only 35% is exported. It's actually over half.

According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, refineries in PADD 3 (called the Gulf Coast refineries district) produced 6.8 million bpd of refined product in August – the latest month data is available. However, some of these refineries are located in West Texas, New Mexico, Northern Louisiana and Arkansas, places too far inland to have access to the water for loading tankers. Coastal refineries in Texas and Louisiana produced about 6 million bpd of refined product, of which they exported 3.1 million bpd last month – over half of their production. Incidentally, the State Department environmental review which the Fact Checker relies on elsewhere, also found that the majority of refined product in Gulf Coast refineries was exported internationally. (State Department DSEIS, March 2013, pg. 1.4-15).

FACT: Gulf Coast refineries that would receive tar sands oil from Keystone XL are likely to export even higher quantities of their product internationally. Keystone XL will deliver crude primarily to refineries in Port Arthur and east Houston, Texas as well as those in Lake Charles, Louisiana. These refineries all have good access to the water and are known to be leading export refineries. As examples:

The Motiva Port Arthur Refinery – a 50/50 joint venture between Royal Dutch Shell and Saudi Aramco – completed the biggest refinery expansion in U.S. history in 2012. The $10 billion, 5-year project added 325,000 bpd of refining capacity to create the country's largest refinery at 600,000 bpd. Much of this capacity is configured to process heavy oil. At the plant's official opening in May 2012, Shell's CEO Peter Voser told journalists that "clearly exports are part of (the) thinking".

An analyst at Bank of America-Merrill Lynch told the Investor Daily that, "The bulk of the Motiva plant's production is — like a growing share of refinery capacity along the Gulf Coast — geared for export (…) (w)e can export gasoline and diesel to northwest Europe cheaper than they can produce it locally".

Motiva Port Arthur managers told the New York Times in April 2013 that Motiva is "prepared to export much of their production, especially diesel to Latin America where the market is growing."

Phillips66 is aiming to almost quadruple its exports from 60,000 bpd in 2010 to 220,000 bpd in 2015 (see presentation slide below). It has a 240,000 bpd refinery in Lake Charles, LA, with access to KXL and boasts on its website of this refinery's ability to export through its marine terminal.

Data from the Gulf Coast today show that some of the tar sands from Keystone XL will be exported internationally before it sees a U.S. refinery. Meanwhile, coastal refineries in the Gulf are already export a little over half of their refined product – and based on industry statements, refineries interested in heavy tar sands from Keystone XL are very likely to be exporting an even larger share of their product.

The Keystone XL tar sands pipeline is primarily about providing an avenue for tar sands crude to reach the international refinery and refined product markets. It will increase global carbon emissions and put America's communities, lands and waters at risk of spills. This is a proposition that Canadians facing proposed tar sands pipelines through their own provinces are rejecting.

The President has every reason to reject Keystone XL.

 http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/aswift/fact_checking_the_wapo_fact_ch.html Leading Multifamily Buildings are Recognized by EPA ENERGY STAR Program tag:switchboard.nrdc.org,2014:/blogs/mwright//413.17679 2014-11-20T17:15:23Z 2014-11-20T17:16:31Z Melissa Wright
Melissa Wright, Associate Director, City Energy Project, New York

Last Thursday, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released a list of the first multifamily and condo buildings to earn an ENERGY STAR certification. These multifamily properties were the first in the nation to receive the certification which shows that they are more energy efficient than similar buildings nationwide. Most of the properties on the list were concentrated in cities that have benchmarking ordinances — Boston, Chicago, New York City, Seattle, and Washington DC.

There is tremendous potential for energy savings in multifamily housing. About a third of the U.S. population lives in the country's 500,000 multifamily buildings. Multifamily building residents spend about $22 billion on energy every year. Current estimates show that multifamily properties can become 30% more efficient and save about $9 billion by 2020, all while averting 35 million metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions per year.

The ENERGY STAR certification is given to multifamily buildings with twenty or more units which, from a scale of 1–100, receive a score of 75 or higher. The score indicates that they are more energy efficient than 75 percent of similar buildings nationwide. An ENERGY STAR certified building has many benefits. Building owners save money by reducing their expenses in common areas and outdoor lighting. Increased energy efficiency also lowers energy costs for tenants which results in more affordable, comfortable, and sought-after living spaces. And, many buildings have the potential to be ENERGY STAR certified. In fact, some of the multifamily buildings recently certified were affordable housing properties. These building owners are helping to make the units more affordable for their low-income tenants by reducing energy costs.

Whole-building energy consumption data is required to earn an ENERGY STAR certification. A challenge facing some multifamily building owners looking to achieve an ENERGY STAR certification is in acquiring all of the tenant's energy data in buildings. Some leading utilities can provide anonymous whole building data to building owners without master meters. This data can then be used to achieve the ENERGY STAR certification. However, if the utility does not provide this critical service, then it comes nearly impossible for a building to obtain this honor.

The City Energy Project (CEP) encourages utilities to make whole-building energy data available. CEP works with cities and utilities to allow building owners to obtain critical data they need to control their energy use and costs. Building owners that choose to go after ENERGY STAR certification realize that they are not only saving on energy long-term, but they are using data to prove it.

Find out how your building can be a leading energy performer at Energy Star.

 http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/mwright/leading_multifamily_buildings.html Fossil Fuel-Backed Lobbying Group Is Up to Its Old Tricks, This Time Duping Wisconsin's Utility Customers tag:switchboard.nrdc.org,2014:/blogs/swilliams//425.17678 2014-11-20T16:41:30Z 2014-11-20T21:32:11Z Samantha Williams
Samantha Williams, Staff Attorney, Chicago

Consumer Energy Alliance (CEA), a fossil fuel industry group that claims to advocate for "fair" electric rates for all consumers, was caught red-handed this month falsifying a customer petition to support a handful of hotly-contested electric rate restructuring proposals from Wisconsin's major utilities.

Surprising? No.

Disappointing? You bet.

Petition Fails all Tests for Truth and Accuracy

CEA claims to be "the voice of the energy consumer" and to "provide consumers with sound, unbiased information" on energy issues. But its recent actions demonstrate just the opposite.

Earlier this month, the Houston-based firm (which has no on-the-ground presence in Wisconsin), sent the Public Service Commission a petition with the names of 2,500 electric customers hailing from We Energies and Madison Gas & Electric (MG&E)'s service areas, claiming these consumers support recent rate restructuring proposals. It stated that those listed on the petition "believe changing the current rule will ensure that all ratepayers are treated fairly and electricity bills remain affordable."

But where were these "supporters" when residents came out in droves to protest the We Energies and MG&E hearings last month?

As I wrote about last month, the rate changes — two of which have been largely approved — are like kryptonite for customers looking to invest in energy efficiency and rooftop solar. And I didn't see one person at the MG&E hearing heralding the proposed near-doubling of fixed charges as "fair" and "affordable" for consumers.

Also sensing something amiss, the Capitol Times started calling folks on the petition soon after it was filed. It didn't take them long to discover that CEA had cooked the books.

The Times spoke with an MG&E customer who is one of thousands of highly-engaged residents in Wisconsin actively tracking the rate hikes. She opposes MG&E's plan to increase the fixed charge portion of her bill from $10 to $19 per month. Yet CEA listed her as a supporter on the pro-rate restructuring petition. While she recalls speaking on the phone with a CEA staffer and letting the group use her name, she states that she was under the impression that the petition would be opposing the utility plan.

Other MG&E and We Energies customers contacted by the Capitol Times have similar accounts — they either don't recall ever speaking with anyone from CEA, or do recall such a conversation but never signed a petition.

Just this last Monday, State Representative Christine Sinicki called on District Attorney John Chisolm to open an investigation of possible criminal behavior on the part of CEA, after her husband was listed as a supporter on the petition filed in the We Energies case. Both Rep. Sinicki and her husband have made clear that they vehemently oppose any of the fixed charge increases, noting that they would harm "homeowners, seniors, and clean energy development."

And the judge overseeing the utility proposals is the latest to cite CEA's antics.

Amidst serious concerns about the petition's authenticity, in the last few weeks the Public Service Commission declined to accept it into the record on both the WE Energies and MG&E cases. Not only did the petition omit the necessary evidence proving that the signatures were real, but the judge also found that it "fail[ed] all the Commission's tests for truth and accuracy it typically applies to comments."

Did CEA Make a Mistake? Not Bloody Likely

The group's top advisor, lobbyist Michael Whatley, denies that any Wisconsin residential customers contacted by CEA were misled about the group's intentions or duped into allowing their names to be submitted to the Public Service Commission.

This claim seems implausible, though, given the number of customers — and lawmakers' family members — who have come out of the woodwork denying their inclusion.

But that's not the only reason to question CEA's intentions. A few years back, my colleague Liz Barratt-Brown dug into CEA's attack campaigns against the shift to cleaner fuels, specifically rooted to Canada's tar sands. She discovered that, while CEA masquerades as a "consumer voice" it actually specializes in "astro-turfing," i.e. crafting public relations campaigns designed to appear as grassroots support. At that time, CEA shared many members with EnergyCitizens, the API campaign that organized town halls back in 2009 against climate legislation pending in Congress.

So, if CEA's "voice" was suspect that many years ago, is it to be trusted now as the mouthpiece for Wisconsin's energy consumers? As it would appear, no.

Setting aside the very damaging fact of the misleading petition filed in the We Energies and MG&E cases, a perusal of CEA's website reveals that the group does not even purport to represent Wisconsin's residential energy consumers. Its list of 250 members is heavy on fossil fuel and business groups, but lacking in any clear residential or consumer protection organizations.

Tellingly, the national groups that typically advocate for fair energy rates for low-income communities, senior citizens, and minorities are nowhere to be found amongst CEA's members. Yet these very groups, including AARP, National Consumer Law Center, NAACP, and several Wisconsin-based consumer organizations, were outspoken opponents of the utility proposals.

Moreover, there are only three Wisconsin-based organizations that CEA lists as members—Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce, Wisconsin Motor Carriers Association, and Wisconsin Industrial Energy Group. But these are heavy-hitting industrial and large commercial trade associations, none of which represent the everyday residential energy consumers that CEA listed on its petition. And none of these three Wisconsin-based groups are even amongst those affected by the residential and small commercial rate hikes at issue in the MG&E proposal.

Thus, there can be no truth to CEA's claim that is the "voice of the energy consumer" when it comes to Wisconsin.

CEA is Running Scared, But What Does that Mean for Consumers?

Oddly, even though the petition had already been rejected by the Public Service Commission, CEA still saw fit to submit a formal letter a few weeks ago withdrawing its comments from the two cases.

While conceding defeat on the petition, it closes its letter with a request for a "sensible, balanced approach" to electricity pricing in Wisconsin.

But this statement is the crux of the problem with CEA's involvement in these cases. As countless opponents of the rate restructuring have made clear, the proposals pending in Wisconsin are anything but balanced. If CEA were truly "the voice of the energy consumer" then the petition would have opposed the rate restructuring, rather than supporting it.

One thing is for sure, the petition shines a spotlight on the duplicity of fossil fuel-backed lobbying organizations increasingly claiming to represent grassroots interests. As State Representative Chris Taylor pointed out with respect to the MG&E proposal, "public input is supposed to be a really important piece of consideration in rate cases."

But the events of the last few weeks reveal only one clear thing about CEA — just how ill-equipped they are to represent that public.

 http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/swilliams/fossil_fuel-backed_lobbying_gr.html US Financial Support of Green Climate Fund is in America's Interest tag:switchboard.nrdc.org,2014:/blogs/jschmidt//134.17677 2014-11-20T16:16:59Z 2014-11-20T16:17:39Z Jake Schmidt
Jake Schmidt, Director, International Program, Washington, DC

The U.S. and other countries have pledged initial resources to help the Green Climate Fund (GCF) spur emissions reductions in developing countries and assist the most vulnerable in adapting to the impacts of climate change. The U.S. pledge of $3 billion is a serious commitment to helping achieve a strong climate agreement next year. The U.S. joins other countries that have already pledged to the GCF and more countries are expected to pledge in the coming days. This new fund is in America's interest. It helps spur global action on climate change that is damaging the U.S. and countries around the world, it helps companies tap into the growing demand for clean energy, and minimizes the need for even greater investments to clean up the mess of extreme weather damages around the world.

As NRDC's President put it:

"This powerful signal shows that President Obama is serious about helping reduce global warming pollution, both at home and abroad. Coming on the heels of the landmark U.S. and China climate agreement, this is another important piece of the puzzle for a strong agreement next year in Paris."

The U.S. pledge of $3 billion to the GCF is an outgrowth of the fund launched by President Bush and Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson in 2008. In 2008, Secretary Paulson penned an op-ed in the Financial Times with his counterparts in the U.K. and Japan that detailed the need for a "Clean Technology Fund". This Fund was later expanded to support a broader array of efforts to address climate change including adaptation and deforestation. Secretary Paulson pledged $2 billion to this new fund and subsequent Members of Congress from both parties voted for annual appropriations bills to mobilize the necessary U.S. funding to meet this pledge. In response to the pledge from the U.S. to the GCF Former Secretary Paulson said:

"I was also pleased to see the President's leadership at the G-20 Summit in Brisbane today through the U.S. pledge to join other countries through an investment in the Green Climate Fund. This fund is conceived of the same principles that governed the Climate Investment Fund, which I helped to establish as Treasury Secretary. It sought to leverage market forces to incentivize the development and deployment of new clean technologies in China and other developing nations, which will create American jobs and help us deal with the massive risks of climate change. Believing this was in our national interest – both economically and environmentally – President Bush received bipartisan support for his $2 billion commitment to that fund in 2008 – and I urge our lawmakers to support this parallel effort through the Green Climate Fund."

The GCF is an important component of global efforts to address climate change since it is one part of an effort to help mobilize even larger financing in efforts to address climate in developing countries. In Copenhagen countries pledged to help mobilize $100 billion in funding to support action in development countries. The GCF is one part of this effort to expand public financing and steer private finance towards a low carbon economy. Countries around the world have been aiming for an initial resource mobilization of over $10 billion. To date $8.6 billion has been pledged to the GCF thanks to contributions from fourteen countries including Mexico, South Korea, Germany, U.S., U.K., France, Japan, and Norway. More countries, including Canada and New Zealand, are expected to pledge at the international pledging conference on November 20 and larger amounts may be pledged from some countries that have already pledged.

The initial resources to the GCF are in line with the level of investment that the U.S. and other countries have dedicated for other major global challenges such as recent contributions to the Global Fund to Combat Aids, Tuberculosis, and Malaria where countries made a fourth round of pledges totaling $12 billion – with the U.S. contributing $4-5 billion.

The U.S. contribution is in America's interest as the GCF will help:

Spur global clean energy deployment, creating new markets for renewable energy and energy efficiency companies. Leading U.S.-based companies are already tapping into the growing clean energy market and more are poised to join. U.S.-based companies have already taken advantage of the predecessor funds ranging such as Iowa based Clipper Wind securing a purchase of 27 wind turbines thanks to a wind project in Mexico supported by the Clean Technology Fund.

The GCF will help speed up these markets by working with key countries to develop tangible projects that will help transform markets for wind, solar, energy efficiency, and geothermal around the world. For example, a GCF clean energy project will include resources for transformative renewable energy projects that combine small public-sector investments in a particular large-scale renewable energy project (e.g., a wind or solar farm), financial tools that help leverage large private sector financing for the project, and necessary policy reforms to ensure that this project spurs wide-scale renewable energy deployment beyond the individual project. You can see some elements of this in the World Bank managed Climate Investment Funds where every $1 of public financing from the fund has spurred almost $6 of other financing from the private sector and the budgets of the recipient countries.

Increase the resilience of the most vulnerable countries to the impacts of climate change, avoiding much larger costs. Countries around the world are already feeling the impacts from extreme weather events caused by climate change and these impacts will get worse if critical steps aren't taken. The U.S. is always one of the first to respond to such disasters as witnessed with the response to the recent typhoon in the Philippines and Ebola in Africa. And evidence from disaster response around the world shows that spending $1 today helps avoid around $7 of investments needed after the disaster hits. Upfront and early funding to assist countries strengthen their resilience will help countries avoid damages from climate change.

Reduce deforestation emissions through efforts such as ensuring deforestation-free supply chains. Deforestation is a major driver of climate change throughout the world. There are emerging signs of progress with key countries such as Brazil significantly reversing their forest loss in recent years and major companies committing to end deforestation in their supply-chain by demanding products that aren't driving deforestation. The GCF will help such promising efforts into lasting reforms in key countries that will (hopefully) end deforestation by 2020.

The GCF is structured to help deliver critical change on-the-ground. It includes a number of strong and innovative structures including:

targeted efforts to help mobilize large private financing flows through innovative financing tools – i.e., there is a dedicated private sector facility and advisory board integrated from day-one that will hopefully unleash the hundreds of billions of private finance that is sitting on the sidelines;

leveraging existing financing infrastructures so that there is no need for a large bureaucracy, unnecessary institutions, or duplicative efforts;

strong financial safeguards including an independent evaluation unit to ensure that funding is spent well;

contributions from a new group of countries including financing from several major emerging economies and maybe even the private sector; and

a clear focus on only funding actions that have a huge impact and truly transform the dynamic on the ground in key countries.

Strong and sustained U.S. investments in the GCF will help to unleash these benefits, ensure that the fund delivers, and support the most vulnerable countries in their efforts to reduce climate pollution and adapt to the impacts of climate change. It is an idea that has support from a bipartisan and diverse group of American leaders and organizations.

This is a strong U.S. pledged contribution that should be strongly supported by the U.S. Congress.

Photo: Clipper Windturbines installed in Mexico; Walmart, on Flickr.

 http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/jschmidt/us_financial_support_of_green.html Senate Votes Down Effort to Rubber Stamp Keystone XL Tar Sands Pipeline tag:switchboard.nrdc.org,2014:/blogs/fbeinecke//81.17676 2014-11-20T15:46:23Z 2014-11-20T19:06:05Z Frances Beinecke
Frances Beinecke, President of NRDC, New York City

We had a victory for climate action and clean water this week. The Senate rejected an attempt to approve the Keystone XL pipeline for tar sands oil on Tuesday night. Keystone XL has sweeping implications for our health, our communities, and our efforts to reduce climate change pollution. Yet this bill would have bypassed the official review and rubber stamped the project. The Senate voted it down.

We know this isn't the last Keystone battle, of course. Republicans have promised to bring it up again when they take control of Congress in January.

President Obama has already pushed back, saying recently, "Understand what this project is: It is providing the ability of Canada to pump their oil, send it through our land, down to the Gulf, where it will be sold everywhere else. It doesn't have an impact on US gas prices." If the president vetoes a bill approving Keystone XL, the tar sands pipeline supporters in Congress won't have enough votes to override it.

I am grateful to the many Senators who rejected this bill and who spoke out about why Keystone XL is such a bad idea for our nation.

Explaining why she was voting against Keystone XL, California Senator Barbara Boxer asked, "What does XL stand for? To me it stands for extra lethal. This is a serious environmental threat…Building the pipeline will make things worse for the people we represent. Misery follows the tar sands."

I am also grateful to the millions of Americans who have raised their voices against unchecked fossil fuel development and mounting climate change pollution. In the past few years, people from all walks of life — ranchers, farmers, nurses, executives, climate justice leaders, college students, small business owners — have demanded a more sustainable energy future.

The proposed Keystone XL pipeline has galvanized many of these concerned citizens. They know tar sands oil generates 17 percent more climate change pollution than conventional crude. They know Keystone XL is the lynchpin in industry's plan to expand tar sands strip mines in Alberta's great boreal forest. And they know the project would expose countless towns, drinking water sources, and working landscapes to the hazard of pipeline blowouts and oil spills.

That's why so many have taken action. From Nebraska to Washington, DC, the Lakota Nation to Los Angeles, people have gathered together and called on leaders to reject the Keystone XL pipeline.

The vote this week shows that our voices are being heard.

But we can't rest yet. We must continue fighting efforts to bypass the official review of Keystone XL, override environmental laws, and turn Congress into a permitting authority. The final decision rests with the president, and he must choose to reject Keystone XL.

Click here to tell the president you oppose this pollution pipeline.

Photo: Tar Sands processing plant; David Dodge, Pembina Institute.

 http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/fbeinecke/senate_votes_down_effort_to_ru.html


text:
A longer version of this article for Search Engine Watch members examines how Yahoo's drop may not be due to Google and how MSN is performing better than you might think.
New stats from web analytics firm WebSideStory highlight the news often heard before: Google's most popular, when it comes to search. But they also reveal that Yahoo's recent replacement of Google results with those from its own crawler-based technology doesn't appear to have cost it visitors.
WebSideStory's StatMarket service measures search referral traffic to web sites. This means it can estimate how many people are driven to sites based on searches they perform.
In general, much-used search engines generate more referrals than less-used ones. Thus, having a high-share of search referral traffic can give a search engine bragging rights about being most popular.
Google Has Biggest Slice Of Referral Pie
On Tuesday, March 23, 2004, WebSideStory examined a sample of over 25 million visits and found that Google had the top share of search referrals, 40.9 percent. It was followed by Yahoo at 27.4 percent, then MSN at 19.6 percent:
WebSideStory also released trend data showing how all three search sites performed for the corresponding Tuesday over four years. Not surprisingly, Google appears as a giant success:
Dropping Google Didn't Hurt Yahoo
A key question many are wondering is whether Yahoo's switch from Google to its own search technology has had an impact. The fear for Yahoo is that if its quality isn't as good as the results previously provided by Google, searchers might start abandoning it.
Personally, I've felt Yahoo's own search technology has often been close to Google's and doubted many typical Yahoo searchers would even notice the change. Stats from WebSideStory for the beginning of this year that seem to support this:
The lines show the average of search referral traffic share estimated for Google and Yahoo for each month. As you can see, Google's showing a rise. However, this hasn't come at Yahoo's expense. Yahoo, which dropped Google in mid-February, has so far come through the changeover apparently without any major loss of searchers.
Google Big Outside US
While search remains very competitive inside the US -- even "dominant" Google doesn't have more than half the search referrals -- WebSideStory stats paint a different picture for some selected counties:
A longer version of this article for Search Engine Watch members examines how Yahoo's drop may not be due to Google and how MSN is performing better than you might think.
Search Headlines
NOTE: Article links often change. In case of a bad link, use the publication's search facility, which most have, and search for the headline.
| Hold all bets: Search engines end casino ads...
IHT Apr 4 2004 10:41PM GMT
| Google's 'Gmail' raises concerns...
SiliconValley.com Apr 4 2004 7:38AM GMT
| Google is watching you...
Observer Apr 3 2004 11:17PM GMT
| Google mail is evil - privacy advocates...
The Register Apr 3 2004 9:52PM GMT
| Cyberstalking law should be used as anti-spam weapon...
Seattle Times Apr 3 2004 9:30AM GMT
| Google Users Feeling Yucky...
New York Post Apr 3 2004 7:49AM GMT
| Yahoo promotion upgrades email for some...
CNET Apr 3 2004 0:39AM GMT
| Closing the Last Mile Gap: Local Search...
Internet News Apr 2 2004 11:27PM GMT
| Yes, Yahoo Can Search for Growth...
Business Week Apr 2 2004 4:28AM GMT
| Briefly: Google to align ad prices, conversions...
CNET Apr 2 2004 4:24AM GMT
| Hacking the Google Numrange Operator...
WebProNews Apr 2 2004 1:41AM GMT
| ICANN Reports On WHOIS Inaccuracies...
asia.internet.com Apr 1 2004 12:44PM GMT
Search and traffic sourcing are both crucial to luring shoppers to your website. In this article, "2 Successful Holiday Strategies for Online Retail", you'll learn how to use a two-pronged approach for your holiday search campaigns that combine top keywords with the best referral sites. Data in this article comes from SimilarWeb.

subset: commoncrawl


text: ""; ?> Babes In Toyland guitar chords, guitar tabs and lyrics - chordie guitar tabs, guitar chords and lyrics Artists Songs Public booksPublic My songbookSongbook ResourcesDiv Forum Browse artists: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z # -first letter-A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z # All songs - change Chordie needs editors! Improve this page Babes In Toyland MusicBabes In Toyland Songs There was no article about Babes In Toyland in Wikipedia. If you know anything about Babes In Toyland, please contribute to the free encyclopedia by writing an article. Babes In Toyland Ariel (2) Blood (1) Bluebell (1) Bruise Violet (2) Dust Cake Boy (1) Gone (1) Handsome & Gretal (1) Handsome and gretal (3) Hes My Thing (1) Memory (1) Mother (1) Real Eyes (1) Right Now (1) Ripe (1) Say What You Want (1) Short Song (1) Spun (2) Sweet 6 (1) Sweet 69 (2) the quiet room (1) Vomit Heart (1) Wont Tell (1) play their songs - buy their music - support the artists copyright © 2011 chordie guitar chords 5 popular songs Everythingidoidoitforyou Brian Adams Honky Tonk Women Rolling Stones Hit The Road, Jack Traditional Let It Be Beatles Take Me Home Country Roads John Denver


text:
Municipality of Anchorage
"As far as governments go, a great place to work "
- Comp & Benefits
- Work/Life Balance
- Senior Management
- Culture & Values
- Career Opportunities
I worked at Municipality of Anchorage full-time (more than 8 years)
Predictable as far as salary and benefits, good benefits, optional 80 hours over 9 days instead of 10, union contracts
Union contracts are sometimes annoying to deal with, and often protect the lazy and unmotivated, depending on where you start in the pay scale, you might top out after only 4-5 years; also, the general nature of government is that sometimes things get a little unstable due to property values and tax receipts; also politics play into what is expected of you sometimes. The mayor I worked under liked to grandstand and puff him self up, while mostly ignoring the folks on the ground doing the work
7 Other Employee Reviews for Municipality of Anchorage (View Most Recent)Sort: Rating Date
I have been working at Municipality of AnchoragePros
The Muni is a great employer because they have an equal opportunity approach, pay well, and go to more than reasonable lengths to train, support and retain employees. In other words, anyone with proper qualifications will have an equal shot at a job, and once hired, the muni will do everything reasonable to keep from letting that person go.Cons
I suppose you could make an argument that the fairness can work against a motivated, outstanding employee, because I have found that promotions are based almost solely on seniority, regardless of other factors. I've seen much less-motivated individuals promoted over harder working and more dedicated ones just because they started earlier. That's life...Advice to ManagementAdvice
Pay attention to the quality of work and employee's dedication when considering individuals for promotion.Recommends
I worked at Municipality of Anchorage full-time (more than 5 years)Pros
Fellow workers are creative and enthusiastic. Everyday is different.Cons
A shortage of resources causes stress at times.Advice to ManagementAdvice
Hang in there.


text:
Totakeke 'Digital Exorcist' album artwork and tracklisting revealed
Artwork and tracklisting revealed for the upcoming new Totakeke album 'Digital Exorcist'.
Electronic music for the rest of us…
Artwork and tracklisting revealed for the upcoming new Totakeke album 'Digital Exorcist'.
This entry was posted on January 26th, 2013
and is filed under Updates.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response or Trackback from your own site.
Leave a Reply
Pre-order new albums by Tineidae, Dirk Geiger, and Poordream.#
Haujobb on tour in North America with Skinny Puppy and Frontline Assembly. Tickets here.#
Comaduster confirmed to perform live at 2015 Resistanz Festival#
Zinovia confirmed for live performance at Elektroanschlag 2015.#
Please help our dear friend Don Hill aka Millipede fight cancer by donating here.#
Igloo Magazine and Brutal Resonance both offer nice reviews of 'Emerging Organisms vol. 5'.#
Stendeck shares his Russian tour video diary.#
Video for Dreissk's song contribution to 'Emerging Organisms vol. 5'.#


text:
Senior User Experience Designer / UX Consultant bio from Twitter
Co-founder of UXPin, UX Designer bio from Twitter
Experienced UX practitioner, design process freak, blogger, beer lover, lover and dad: Just what the world needs!
I think, draw and code. In loops. ❦ UX Design Director @ VML Poland bio from Twitter
Editor, new formats at Trinity Mirror. Runs @ampp3d, @MirrorRowZed, "social content" and other bits and bobs. Writing about the media on the web since 1862. bio from Twitter
Independent UX and product consultant specialising in the internet of things. Also likes shouty/bleepy music and proper beer. bio from Twitter
7th–8th April 2011


text:
Archbishop's praise for Cumbrian farmers
Published at 14:56, Tuesday, 05 February 2013
THE Archbishop of York praised the resilience of Cumbrian farmers during a recent visit.
Dr John Sentamu was in Cumbria for two days at the end of last month and met with some of the region's farmers during his trip.
He heard about the struggles faced by those in the industry and was told about the ways farmers have fought through adversity.
He praised that spirit and said he had respect for the way they go about their work.
He said: "I would say that farmers are facing a difficult time but the word that comes out again and again from everyone I speak to here is resilience.
"I want the country to hear about this resilience. I will also take away with me the fact that farmers should be respected for keeping the countryside the way it is."
Dr Sentamu spoke with some of those hit by the foot and mouth crisis in 2001 and how people came together to cope during a particularly difficult time.
A local Farm Crisis Network is now in place and the auction mart chaplains also provide help.
The archbishop, who is one of the highest-ranking clerics in the Church of England, was in Cumbria on January 23 and 24 to see the work carried out in the county.
His visit also included outings to see some of the county's schools, including Cartmel Priory, and a tour of the University of Cumbria's Fusehill campus.
Published by http://www.nwemail.co.uk
Editor's picks
- Funniest Twitter responses to best ever Apprentice episode
- Roman fertility god banned by Facebook
- £450,000 boost to Rosehill theatre redevelopment
- Firm uses Skype to help client in Ebola zone
- Will Lloyds Bank branches in Cumbria be saved from the axe?
- Firms urged to aim higher at Growth Twenty14
- Over 2000 new businesses set up in Cumbria this year
- MPs press rail minister to invest in Furness line
- 20,000 will use Carlisle airport to get to USA
- Cumbria business discovers amazing Roman treasure
- Cranston's: we won't leave to grow
- Hotel wins top Facebook award
- Cumbria businessman lauded nationally as visionary
- Keep ownership until cash is in the bank
- Never underestimate the importance of lists
- Eight global markets already lined up for Lakes Gin
- Lakeland kitchenware predicting rapid growth
- Nuclear skills time bomb can be halted
- Should firms support Labour's minimum wage plans?
- Carlisle Living Awards: winners revealed
- Cumbrian village digs its own broadband network
- Story Homes submits plan for 190 houses in north Carlisle (46 comments)
- Record occupancy for Cumbria hotel
More news
- Barrow glassmaker's exhibition aims to be clear winner
- West Cumbrian firm plans to open store in Carlisle
- New director for West Cumbria Rivers Trust
- Home-grown firms in spotlight at Carlisle's Small Business Saturday
- New firefighters' burning ambition to help save lives
- West Cumbrian distance learning firm opens Middle East office
- Year of success for Cumbria university's business interaction centre
New vacancies
Useful links
BBC News business headlines
in-cumbria features
- West Cumbrian distance learning firm opens Middle East office
- Year of success for Cumbria university's business interaction centre
- Gold medal for Brampton apprentice at national auto competition
- New hotel team is ready to push the business forward
- Scotland move for motorway services empire
- What is a grant of probate?
- Look ahead
- Herd instinct grips crowded ringside
- Andrew brings his skills and flair to the table
- Foreign growth secret to playground firm's success
- Council dismisses call-in bid for £11m leisure centre project
- Cumbrian girl, 5, 'amazing' after life-changing surgery
- 999 crews sent to Carlisle crash
- Carlisle builder accused of breaching restraining order
- Planning chief turns against Barrow housing plans
- 'High risk' missing Cumbrian teenager found safe and well
- Planning go-ahead for Cumbria council's new £10m HQ (19 comments)
- Police traffic warning ahead of Ulverston Dickensian Festival
- Salon robber jailed for more than seven years by Carlisle court
- Pub chain's dream of 52-bed Barrow hotel unveiled


text:
The UIA and its partners committed to work together to phase out CO2 and fossil fuel emissions by 2050, by means of design strategies and socially responsible construction.The "Declaration 2050 Imperatives," put forward by the Director of the Australian Institute of Architects, David Parken, was discussed and amended by the partners for presentation before the UIA General Assembly on 8 August 2014, where it was unanimously adopted.
The 14th International Architecture Exhibition will take place from 7 June to 23 November 2014 at the Arsenale, Venice. This year's theme for VB2014 is "Fundamentals" and the curator is Rem Koolhaas. Theme for the Malaysia Pavilion is "Sufficiency".
Error: No articles to display


text:
xxAskingForestxx posted a message to TheSmexySkittleBoyz
Hey! This account is shared between 4, yes 4 smexy beasts! WE use our nicknames on here. These are not our real names just in case a psycho ex stops by.. http://thesmexyskittles.tumblr.com/ ^ our tumblr!! http://ask.fm/TheSmexySkittleBoyz Tazer: What's up! I'm Tazer. I'm 18. Green eyes/black hair. I'm the smart one in the group. Also, apparently the weirdest one, although I don't go around kissing JB posters like someone I know cough*Blake*cough Emmett: Boo! Did I scare ya? No? Well, that's a shame. I'm Emmett. I'm the kid of our group. I'm 16. Brown eyes/blonde hair. R.I.P Blake. Alive physically, not mentally... (BLAKE IS ALIVE, PEOPLE) Elmo: Heyyo! I'm Elmo! NO! Not Elmo, the stalker puppet with red fur and creepy ass bug eyes. I'm 18. Black hair/blue eyes. I'm the most random one of us all. Skittle obsessed. TASTE THE RAINBOW, BEUTCH! We Love Evanescence!, FALLOUTBOY!, A7X,GREEN DAY, FOO FIGHTERS, BLINK-182, MEXICAN VOLDERMORT. Don't worry, we don't bite...hard. Just kidding, guys..and girls. We won't bite you...unless you're a bitch, then we will bite yo ass off *innocent smile* But other than that, talk to us? We are pretty friendly dudes. Ask us whatever you want. We will answer honestly, but it might take a while if we're not online. All of us are street dancers; swimmers; WSR (Wild.Single.Rebel), footballers; Elmo and Tazer are gemo (goth+emo); and we are all a bunch of random guys so don't get freaked out if we start talking about unicorns. We are all pretty random, but Elmo is the most random. Also, don't call him the Elmo from Sesame Street. The rest of us learnt that the hard way..... Anyway, PM us if you want it private, then put one of our names or something up so we won't look. We listen to your shit and actually care so unload your shit on us if you want. We are flirty ;). So we will add to this or one of us will some point. Thank you for reading this :D.
The songs that inspire us, keep us alive, or we generally just like. We will add the meanings of the son...
Haiii. follow back???
u ppl r sooo kewl. skittles r yummy and so is u. and pizza. wats pm mean? the monsters don't live under the bed they live in your head. I like pizza. did I mention my obsession for pizza? got cats..? I got seven. how bout dat anime. color red? pizza? so is how and what for if they because they will although. if will don't, shall they not or so not to be.
Oh and you should really look up Pierce the Veil. Its an awesome band and I love it when Kellin Quinn from Sleeping with Sirens features in their songs.
AVENGED SEVENFOLD!! (M. Shadows is awesome)
you guys are so Insane I love it, everyone have their personality thats so cool, messahe me if some of you want :3 Lobe you guys
reading through your bio then had a small spazz attack when i read what music you like...bruh(s) we are soulmates n stuff xD also i am a unicorn. it says so on my bio so it must be tru af do you guys play video games?
dear mr.Blake , Maybe i can help you get threw what ever you are going threw right now :) , i know you dont know me but you can trust me because i dont lie when i say i have scares too <3 Love, Annmarie Dawn
aya Elmo i love skittles too my fav candy
Damn. 16.3K followers.
Both you and this user will be prevented from:
You will still be able to view each other's stories.
Select Reason:


text:
Food safety a multi-pronged pursuit in packaging
Jim Offner
Related Articles
Comments (1) Leave a comment
Corrugated packaging may be more sturdy than custom chipboard packaging, but it is not neccessary because chipboard does the trick. Good chipboard boxes are just as good as corrugated boxes and allow for better graphics that bring consumers to your product.
- Ag labor not part of Obama's immigration plan
- Paramount Citrus replaces Cuties brand with Wonderful Halos
- Produce execution plagues Wal-Mart
- Thanksgiving Twitter party for Produce Mom
- Wiggle room needed on sourcing GMO fruits and vegetables
- Sun Pacific buys Cuties brand, breaks ties with Paramount Citrus