text:
Skytec SP1500A PAIR With Speaker Stands Package
Skytec SP1500A PAIR With Speaker Stands...
Need Advice?
Call our helpful sales team now!
01206 845125
Call our helpful sales team now!
01206 845125
Here we have put together a great package for mobile DJs, vocalists and even bands!
This Package includes:
- 2x Skytec SP1500A Active PA Speakers
- 2x Tripod Speaker Stands
- 1x Speaker Stand Carry Bag
Here we have the great value Skytec SP1500A Active Speaker and stand package. Brand New and complete with a 1 year warranty as standard. Buy the amazing SP1500A Speaker and stand package with confidence from the UK's largest Skytec dealer with 100% satisfaction guaranteed or your money back! Getinthemix.co.uk
We are so confident that you will be happy with your purchase, that we also offer a 30 day money back guarantee on all of our products!
Skytec SP1500A Hi-End 15" 800W Active Speaker Features:
- Complete plug and play unit
- 2-Way bass reflex speaker system
- Impact resistant ABS housing
- Amplifier Module with line and mic inputs
- Tone Control
- Equipped for placement on a tripod tophat
- Integrated handles
Skytec SP1500A Hi-End 15" 800W Active Speaker Specications:
- Model: Active
- Power Max: 800W
- Output Power: 400W
- Impedance: 4 Ohms
- Frequency Response: 40Hz - 20kHz
- SPL Max: 126dB
- Woofer: 15"
- Horn: 1 3/8" Titanium Compression Driver
- Top Hat: Yes
- Supplied: Single
- Power supply: 220~240Vac / 50Hz
- Dimensions: 445 x 460 x 735mm
- Weight: 18.3kg
Product Reviews
There are currently no reviews for this product.
Be the first to write a review.
Please Log in or Register to write a review


text:
The epitome of personalised service and club privileges, your all-access pass to the Mira Club Lounge entitles you to complimentary breakfast, all-day beverages and evening hors d'oeuvres. Not to mention private check-in and check-out at the Mira Club on 15th Floor and full scope of business support services.
Furthermore, complimentary pressing service for 3 items per stay, 20% discount on laundry, dry cleaning or valet service and 2 hours usage of boardroom per day per room (subject to availability) is included.
Reservations Toll Free Numbers:
China - 4001 20 2300
Australia - 1800 054132 | Singapore - 8008523 808
The Mira Hong Kong
Tel: +852 2368 1111 | Email: firstname.lastname@example.com
118 Nathan Road,Tsimshatsui, Kowloon, Hong Kong
© Miramar Hotel and Investment Company Limited 2015. All rights reserved.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Fire Marshal Home Fireworks
Using Consumer Fireworks Retail Sale of Fireworks Fireworks Display
Building Services Code Enforcement Fire Marshal GIS Maps & Data Natural Resources Permit Center Planning SEPA Contact Us
Director: J.E. "Sam" Ryan, CBO
5280 Northwest Drive Bellingham, Washington 98226 Telephone: (360) 676-6907 E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.com
The County Fire Marshal's Office is primarily responsible for the permitting and regulation of commercial fireworks displays and the retail sales of fireworks. During the 4th of July holiday period our inspectors also assist the Sheriff's Office in the enforcement of fireworks discharge regulations.
Copyright © 2007 Whatcom County Privacy Policy Webmaster: firstname.lastname@example.com


text:
Irma Boom about clients, handicraft and authority
When Irma Boom makes a book, it's not just a book but the book. The 50-year-old Dutch designer can spend years researching a project, and she insists on being a partner, not an employee. But her imperiousness is in the service of creating an object that, whether it's an acclaimed monograph on Sheila Hicks or a 2,136-page history of the Dutch conglomerate SHV, couldn't have been designed for anyone else. Print's managing editor, Michael Silverberg, met with Boom at a Starbucks on Manhattan's Upper West Side to talk about why she hates "clients," can't stand handicraft, and despises authority.
Interview with Print Magazine.


text:
Cannot Establish a Secure Connection
Shop Our Store
Select your preferred location and we'll note which parts are ready to be picked up TODAY.
Mud Flaps, Custom-Molded, Rear, Thermoplastic, Black, Chevy, Pair
Estimated Ship Date: Today Would you rather pick it up? Select Location
View Similar Products
Brand: Husky Liners
Manufacturer's Part Number: 57791
Part Type: Mud Flaps
Product Line: Husky Custom-Molded Mud Flaps
Summit Racing Part Number:
Position: Rear
Mud Flap Material: Thermoplastic
Mud Flap Finish: Black
Quantity: Sold as a pair.
Notes: Without fender flares.
In-Store Pickup: Choose In-store pick-up (OH, GA, NV) on our web site.
Husky custom-molded mud flaps are one of the most affordable ways to keep your truck looking new. Custom-contoured for today's late model pickups and SUVs, these matte finish flaps protect the side of your vehicle from rocks, road debris, mud, tar, and slush. Other features include a paintable design and the necessary mounting hardware to facilitate installation.
Some parts are not legal for sale or use in California on any pollution-controlled motor vehicles
Back To Results


text:
- dotTech - http://dottech.org -
[Windows 8] How to install Windows Store apps in custom folder (and how to move already installed apps to custom folder)
Posted By Tu Nguyen On January 10, 2013 @ 11:42 PM In Windows | 10 Comments
In Windows 8, there are two types of applications – desktop apps and Windows Store apps (aka Metro/Modern UI apps). As you already know from previous versions of Windows, programs are installed in "C:\Program Files". Windows Store apps, however, are stored in a subfolder — in "C:\Program Files\WindowsApps". If you want to store Windows Store apps in a different folder, you have come to the right place. In this article, I will not only show you how to move already installed Windows Store apps to a different folder but also how to make future Windows Store apps install in the new directory of your choosing.
First of all, you need to make sure that there are no Windows Store apps running. However, I recommend that you should restart your computer before we start moving the folder to prevent the harm to installed apps.
Once there are no apps running, you need to open Command Prompt in Administrator mode. You can do this by pressing Windows key (on the tablet, swipe from the right edge then choose Search" and start typing "cmd." After that, you need to right click/long tap on the "Command Prompt" result and choose "Run as Administrator" in the app bar below.
In the Command Prompt window, you have to run this command:
This command will take ownership for all files in WindowsApps folder, so that you are able to do next steps. You may need to wait for the process finish.
After that, you should run this command exactly:
Once the process has finished, you have to make sure that all files and sub folders moved successfully by reading the summary text. If there is anything was ignored, you need to delete the destination folder and redo this step.
Now when the moving succeeded, you can delete the WindowsApps folder in the old direction by using this command:
What you have to do next is the most important step because it will make the link between the old and the new place. By doing this, when you install an app from Windows Store, it will be placed in the new folder you just moved to.
So, run this command to do it:
Now you are done. You should restart Windows now.
Hope you find this article helpful.
[via xdadevelopers [2]]
Article printed from dotTech: http://dottech.org
URL to article: http://dottech.org/92602/windows-8-how-to-install-windows-store-apps-in-custom-folder-and-how-to-move-already-installed-apps-to-custom-folder/
URLs in this post:
[1] Image: http://dottech.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/0110-1.png
[2] xdadevelopers: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2079461
Click here to print.
© 2008-2012 dotTech.org | All content is the property of its rightful owner.


text:
So, "Department 56" is where we take a book we're currently reading or recently finished and look on page 56. Then share the fifth and sixth complete sentences. You can add a little context if you want. If you're reading on an eReader, use whatever page notation your reader employs as long as it ends with a '56'. I have a Kindle and am happy to say they're going to start featuring real page numbers of their books! Not sure about the other readers.
Want to play? Post your sentences, and I'll enter you into a drawing for a wide-open Reader's Choice giveaway. Yep, anything you want. Read more below.
First, I'm reading two books this week, so I'll do two "Department 56" entries.
From Tamara Hogan's new paranormal romance Taste Me (and Tamara will be a guest here on the blog in a couple of weeks), which I just finished. Scarlett, a siren/rock star who's hung up on a guy from her past, is talking catching up with her sister Annika after coming home from a year-long tour with her band:
Her sister was an erotic adventuress, always on the hunt.
And I just started Mark Hodder's steampunk novel, The Curious Case of the Clockwork Man, so I have no idea what the context is:
Hm...wonder what that's about?
So, what are you reading? (See, this is a sneaky way to hear about some new books.) If your name is picked by our old pal random.org to win this international giveaway, you can literally pick out any book you want to win. My only stipulations: that it be less than US$15 and be available from either Amazon or Book Depository. As always, +1 for comment, +1 for blog follow, +1 for Twitter follow @Suzanne_Johnson, and +1 for Tweeting the contest. Share with me!


text:
CHRISTINE TODD WHITMAN: Good morning. If we could have everyone's attention, I hope you've gotten some breakfast and some opportunity to have a conversation.
(Off mike commentary.)
Can't hear? The mike's on? I haven't touched it, I promise. Modern technology is wonderful when it works.
But anyway, good morning, delighted to have everybody here this morning for a discussion that I know will be very exciting and enlightening. This is part of the McKinsey Executive Roundtable Series in International Economics.
I would start with the admonition of please turn off cell phones, BlackBerrys, anything that might buzz, jingle, ring, attract attention to itself. And I will remind everyone this particular panel is on the record, so just know that.
As I said at the onset, this is going to be, I think and can predict, a very lively discussion. We have up here -- I'm not going to go through their bios simply because you have them. But you couldn't have a more distinguished panel, frankly, to discuss this issue covering economics and environmental understanding of climate change. For the purposes of today's panel, what we'll do is make the assumption that the climate is changing and that human activity is having some impact on that. You can debate that if you want, that's fine.
But I think we'll start with that premise and ask the panel to take us through their understanding of the issue and its economic implications and some of the things that we are seeing being proposed today as ways of addressing the issue and what their economic consequences are. Because as we were discussing over breakfast, there are some areas where we have seen unintended consequences to some unanticipated, although I think most of us could have forecast that something would happen, when you move to something like corn-based ethanol and what impact that's having on the food supply around the world, not just in this country.
But leaving that aside for the moment, what I'd like to do is throw open just the broadest question. What is the best approach to climate change? There are a lot of things being suggested out there. There are a lot of areas for discussion. Right now, the focus seems to be on taking economic measures, whether it's tax on carbon, a cap and trade program, regulatory, doing it strictly through regulation, getting Congress to act.
I'd like first to have the panel discuss a little bit about how they've approached and looked at this issue of climate change and what they see, off the top of their heads at the beginning, of probably what they feel is the best way to start to try to approach it.
And maybe I'll just go down the line and, Ian, start with you.
IAN W.H. PARRY: Okay. Well, we favor economy-wide approaches to reducing emissions where you place a price on the carbon content of all fossil fuels in the economy. And as that price is passed forward into fuel prices and electricity prices, that's going to exploit all low-cost opportunities for abatement throughout the economy.
There are two approaches to gauge in the appropriate price -- this broad-based approach is far better than just, you know, trying to pick winners or placing the entire burden of emissions reductions on the transportation sector or the power sector. Far better, far more cost-effective to have an economy-wide approach where you raise the price of all activities which involve carbon emissions. And so you exploit all of the low-cost options for abatement throughout the economy.
In economics literature, there are two approaches to gauging the appropriate price that we should put on emissions. The first is sort of a benefit-cost approach where we attempt to measure the damages from current emissions in terms of the future global warming potential. So here we're assessing to what extent emissions today will lead to future global climate change and have impacts on agriculture, risks to human health perhaps through the spread of tropical disease. It's going to raise sea levels so we need to take into account the costs of protecting against rising sea levels and the loss of land that won't be protected. We also need to take into account the possibility, the risks of more extreme climate scenarios knocking out large portions of world GDP.
So there is a substantial literature that attempts to do this. And most of the estimates come up with a price of about 5 (dollars) to $20 per ton of CO2. Now, most of the studies use conventional or market-discount rates which some have objected to on ethical grounds. But if you take the view that, you know, we should discount these long-range damages to translate them into current dollars, then you pretty much end up with a range of about 5 (dollars) to $20 per ton of CO2.
And if you (entered into ?) that policy, it would cut near-term emissions by something like about 5 to 15 percent, but then you would progressively ramp-up the policy over time. Just to give you some idea, a $10 price on CO2 would increase coal prices by about 60 percent, but it would only increase the price of gasoline by about 9 cents per gallon due to differing carbon intensities of those fuels.
Now obviously, some analysts are not comfortable with this benefit-cost approach because it can't really handle the possibility of really an extreme climate scenario like a runaway greenhouse effect causing a warming of, say, 20 degrees Celsius. So instead, these analysts are focused on an emissions pricing path over time that would be consistent with ultimately stabilizing global warming at acceptable levels.
So if you want to limit warming to about 3 degrees Celsius over longer term, really you should be pricing CO2 on the order of about 5 (dollars) to $20 per ton now. But if, as many scientists think, we should be trying to limit expected warming to 2 degrees Celsius over longer term, really we should have a much more aggressive policy, and we should be pricing emissions in the order of about 25 (dollars) to $70 per ton of CO2. Right now, the price of CO2 in the European trading system is about $35, so they're on the fairly aggressive end.
Then just finally, as regards to the instrument, I think that ideally we should implement this emissions price through a revenue-neutral tax on CO2, on the carbon content of fossil fuels with credits for downstream sequestration activities like a carbon capture at power plants and also credits for forest re-sequestration. But the advantage of a revenue-neutral CO2 tax is that you use the revenues from carbon taxes, which for a 10 (dollars) or $20 price on CO2 would be around 50 (billion dollars) to $100 billion a year. So you're talking about a lot of revenues. But if those revenues were used to cut other taxes in the economy, such as income taxes, payroll taxes, corporate income taxes, those taxes are all distortionary in the sense that they're a deterrent to work incentives or savings and investments. And studies show that when you use revenues to cut the rates of these other taxes, you get a significant economic benefit, and that helps to keep down the overall costs of the policy.
So I would put the costs to the economy of a revenue-neutral CO2 tax of, say, 10 (dollars) to $20 in the order of about 1 (billion dollars) to $8 billion per year, which, to my mind, isn't that substantial.
On the other hand, if we used a cap and trade system where you give all the allowances away for free or you go ahead with a carbon tax but you don't specify revenue neutrality up front in the legislation so there's a risk the revenues might ultimately fund wasteful public spending, then the costs of these -- well, depending on your project, you may be able to like fund some socially desirable programs -- but if the revenue's wasted and not used productively, the costs of these policies is substantially higher.
So I would put the costs of a cap and trade system with free -- (inaudible) -- placed a price on CO2 emissions in the order of 10 (dollars) to $20 at about 15 (billion dollars) to $40 billion per year. So that's a much more substantial cost.
But the other argument for CO2 tax is that is fixes the price of emissions, and this helps to create a stable environment in terms to investing clean technology or energy R&D, unlike under a cap and trade system where the price of the emissions permits could be quite volatile.
So if instead we were to go ahead with a cap and trade system, I think it's very important, first of all, in the legislation we include provisions to limit the volatility of the permit prices. In particular, I think it's important to allow firms to bank allowances during periods when there's downward pressure on permit prices and borrow allowances when there's upward pressure on permit prices.
The European trading system is moving in that direction. They do have full-allowance banking, but they don't allow for borrowed permits. So that system is still vulnerable if there's, say, for example, a shock to natural gas prices. The European trading system is still vulnerable that that could really jack up the permit price and cause severe disruptions. So it's a pity they don't include borrowing provisions in the European trading system.
Then finally, if we were to go ahead with a cap and trade system, in addition I think that we should auction most or all of the allowances and then use the bulk of that revenue to cover the taxes. And again, the European trading system, it's moved away from essentially 100 percent FIAT allowance allocation. And the plan is now to transition to 100 percent allowance auctions by 2020, although it's not quite clear how that revenue would be used.
WHITMAN: Richard, as someone who is actually doing it here in this country with the Chicago Climate Exchange, what's your take on this approach?
RICHARD L. SANDOR: Christine, maybe just, for the audience sake, to put something in perspective, we generally talk about several approaches. One is a command and control approach where you just simply say reduce emissions by 20 percent. Then in the category of other policy tools, you have what are called flexible mechanisms, one being a tax and two being cap and trade.
And what cap and trade does, its says, okay, you have to reduce by economy-wide let's say 20 percent. But it allows the flexibility for those who can reduce emissions by more than 20 percent to sell them to others who, for some reason, need environmental (siting ?), takes three years to install equipment, et cetera. So they can hedge themselves by buying other people's reductions.
We're driven, Christie, by the EPA's SO2 program which, according to the EPA, emissions were to be reduced under the Clean Air Act of 1990 by 100 percent or cut in half from 18 million to 9 million tons. The act was passed in 1990. We indeed, economywide, have cut them from 8 (million) to 9 million. The allocation was free. The price has been very volatile. The EPA estimates that 1 (billion dollars)) to 3 billion (dollars) is the nationwide cost annually. In 2010, the savings associated with reduced medical expenses will be 100 billion (dollars) annually. So there's a model of probably the most successful public program that we've ever had, which includes free allocation, simple cap and trade and no taxes.
We happen to operate three exchanges worldwide. I'm the executive chairman of the company called Climate Exchange, and we were very privileged to have Christie as one of our founding directors. And Climate Exchange, the holding company, operates three exchanges. One in Europe, the European Climate Exchange, and we have about a 91 percent market share. We traded about 35 (billion dollars), $40 billion last year, and we're running at about double the rate now. And it implements both CERs which are a U.N. tool to transfer technologies for the developing world. And then it operates the European Union allowance system.
In the United States, we either operationalize public policy, as the Kyoto protocol in Europe, or in America we have something called the Chicago Climate Exchange which is a legally binding but voluntary program. And it was started with a grant. And I think Paula DiPerna is here. And the Joyce Foundation funded us in 2000 to see if we could get a voluntary program going. And everybody said, you'll never get it off the ground. And the only reason we wanted to get it going was because we anticipated that U.S. policy would go there.
From the moment we got the grant to when we started, everything that could have gone wrong went wrong. I don't mean some of the things but everything went wrong. We got the grant, and then the president pulled out of Kyoto. And we were told nobody would ever join an exchange without the threat of public policy or public policy. That was followed by 9/11, the Afghan war, the dot-com bursting, the stock market crashing, Enron imploding, a deep recession and a war in Iraq. And that was the wonderful background of kick-starting this company.
We now have 11 percent of the Fortune top 102 companies -- Abbott Labs, Ford, Safeway, International Paper, Motorola; 17 percent of the Dow Jones -- IBM, Intel, DuPont, United Technologies, most recently Bank of America, as an emitter, okay, because they own so much building and burn so much fossil fuel; 20 percent of the top power companies -- American Electric Power, Detroit Edison, Alliant, Reliant in Texas, TECO, NRG, Allegheny, et cetera; two states -- New Mexico and Illinois; seven cities -- Chicago all the way to Melbourne; universities from Tufts in the east and, most recently, Scripps and UCSB in the west. A group of companies that represent 16 percent of the United States stationary source emissions. And if we were a country, we would be the largest trading country in the world. Our emission baseline is 550 million tons which is bigger than Germany under the EU scheme.
I mention all of this in the context of the criticisms that are sometimes waged saying, you could never do this. And the fact is we've done it. It cost us $5 million. The European Union, the United Kingdom's pilot program cost $300 million. Our members were required to reduce emissions by 4 percent, and they've actually done it by 10 percent. The cumulative reductions are 180 million tons which is actually close to the output of France and Belgium combined on the EU baseline.
So the message is it's being done, it is simple. We will basically operationalize a national policy when either McCain, Obama or Clinton gets their cap and trade bill. And the only message I can say to you is a lot simpler than anybody believes, you know. It is easy to implement. It's no cost to the public. It's all borne by private investors. We trade futures in SO2, about 4 (billion dollars) or 5 billion (dollars) a year. We trade NOx futures.
We're implementing, and the message is, to John Phelan and others, capital markets. Give some incentives to people and there will be a lot of changes in behavior. Markets work. Set the price too high above the marginal cost of abatement and people build technology. The price is below marginal cost of abatement then they buy allowances. And as long as, as Ian said, you can bank them and you can do a lot of ways to fix the actual architecture of the market, it's pretty easy to implement.
So we're humble operators of exchanges, and we have a joint venture in Montreal. And we just signed an MOU with Petro China to explore emissions trading in China where we have five members. And we have five Indian members and exploring an effort there.
And I guess the message I'd like to get across is the markets are already moving. They are getting globally linked. And they are beginning to see meaningful reductions and having, I believe, attaining reductions at the least-possible cost.
WHITMAN: I would ask then, Dr. Socolow, to say, do we need to do anything?
ROBERT H. SOCOLOW: For God's sake, yes! (Laughter.) No. One way to start is, I think, for a group like you and the audience here, this is a risk management issue. The -- (inaudible) -- you see got a Nobel Prize, and I think people didn't truly identify its most important contribution which was that it has spent a lot of time clarifying how large the uncertainties are in this problem.
I mean, when they proposed the consequences of climate change, there was a very wide error bar. And we could be lucky or unlucky, and that's all inside the picture of the world that is being displayed by the IPCC. So it is about buying insurance and is about terrible outcomes versus much-less-terrible outcomes. So we are going to be betting the planet, and we have to react at some appropriate level.
My simple way of thinking about this problem is to follow the carbon atom. It's coming out of the ground, 30 billion tons of carbon dioxide are going into the atmosphere. And each year, when the carbon that comes out of the ground is burned, that's our number today globally. The U.S. is a little under one-quarter -- 7 billion tons of CO2.
The atmosphere is going to tell the truth. We're going to be able to keep track of that number. There are an awful lot of ways of kidding ourselves. And it's a very sticky system. We've got lots of things we're committed to right now from the interior decorating and the view of what's a well-lit room through to the vehicles we've become very enamored of and are using it in more and more creative ways.
So this is going to be hard. I do not think the word "simple" is correct. I think we have institutions that are going to make a big difference. For example, a very important principle is measure. We've got to spend a lot of time not giving awards for buildings that look attractive and are supposed to do x but measure them after the fact. And we don't like to do that. I've been involved with energy efficiency and buildings as an area for 35 years. The message has never really been accepted for good reason. Who wants to know that their pet project didn't work?
Many of you are in the business of measurement. You know the importance of measurement. We're going to have to make that very critical when we start talking about what a given utility or company has saved or not saved. I'm not saying these savings weren't realized, but we don't know if they were realized.
And another one of these temptations is the offset method. We have offsets trading at a different price from the high-quality product. That tells you there's something inferior about them. And the way I model that in my head is we have bonds rated AAA all the way to junk. And we will have the same thing going on. We will have transactions that make people feel good or that carry high risk but that don't get the job done. And so we've got a very serious challenge.
To have a goal in people's minds that's easy to keep track of, it would be keep the same emissions globally as today some number of years in the future -- 25, 50 -- 30 billion tons of carbon dioxide emitted on the planet in 2030. That is a much more modest goal than the one that people were talking about in Bali. They don't want to settle for that. I say keep that in mind and take that as a target.
The U.S. will have to come down from our current 7 billion tons for the world to stay at 30. I mean, we are just too prosperous relative to everybody else. We have the investment capital and so forth. So we have to do less than our current emissions 25 years from now.
How are we going to do that? Well, it's not that hard to track the carbon atom. Forty percent of the carbon atoms come out of our power plants, 60 percent out of everything else globally. And the U.S. fraction is a little lower than the world average. It may be 35 because we've got more coming out of vehicles.
And the third category is stationary emissions where furnaces are. The power plant and the building go hand in hand. Seventy percent of the electricity emitted from a power plant is consumed in a building with motors, with lights, with air conditioning equipment and other appliances. We built power plants because we're building buildings not very well. China is building power plants because it's building buildings not very well, one-to-one practically. So we've got to deal with the building sector which tends to get lost when you say transport and power.
So we have to go across the entire economy. One of the challenges with cap and trade is to catch most of the carbon. The Europeans are settling for about half of the carbon emissions in their economies right now. (Inaudible) -- by far the most exciting and adventurous policy initiative which is to put a serious price on carbon. They got it wrong the first time around, had too many allowances. And I thought they'd get discouraged. But January 1 of this year, they're starting round two. And there is a political commitment there to keep the price around $35 a ton of CO2.
And so the other thing I want to say is you want to price high enough that things happen. You can't get the price from cost-benefit analysis. We don't know how to do the benefits. These risks are uncertain in probability as well as magnitude. And so we have to work backwards from saying, what will a given price induce, and what will a given price induce when coupled with specific policies that make those alternatives more appealing?
You want to put CO2 below ground, we need a policy regime for crediting CO2 below ground, which we know we can do, but it's going to take some serious effort and some practice before we get there. We need to induce renewables. We need to induce efficiency in buildings. We will have to do, I call it, price-plus. That's my shorthand. And the plus is a whole set of targeted initiatives which don't take a particular technology but do say we put CO2 underground, we're going to have to learn how to do it, and we're going to have to practice it at large scale and lots of places at once.
And then we've got to build infrastructure. Christine and I were talking about that at the breakfast table. It should roll of the tongue that we've got an investment in infrastructure that is not going to get made through a cap and trade or a tax system. It's going to be made any more than our highways were built that way. If you think about that, they were built, in part, by a gasoline tax. We have to build an infrastructure for power. We have renewables, and they have to be brought 1,000 or 2,000 miles to unload.
That's almost surely -- we don't have an electricity transmission system that resembles the highway system. It isn't a national system. We probably need to go there if we're going to move electricity a couple of thousand miles.
So we need integrity, we need commitment. We need a high enough price that we don't end up with my shorthanded mitigation-lite -- L-I-T-E -- avoid mitigation-lite. That will require these higher prices that Europe has. And we can kid ourselves and have a lower price and have all the right words and an awful lot of tax (paying ?) and trading but not reduce the carbon emission.
So we're going to have to work backwards from, what does it take to get the carbon emissions of this country down? And how are we doing at keeping score? And it's relatively easy to keep score because if carbon comes out of the ground in this country or comes across the border and you know what that is every year. The energy industry's doing a very good job with carbon bookkeeping. So we'll be able to keep track of it. We have to have on -- most of you don't know probably that we put 7 billion tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. And in this group, one-third of you do, and the public 1 percent does. So we've got to get that number on the front page of USA Today every day or every month or something so we actually focus on a goal, or the equivalent. So as I say, follow the carbon atom and realize how easy it's going to be to (carry ?) ourselves.
And I guess two final things would be, one, every one of the solutions can be done badly. And we've got to acknowledge that. There isn't a wonderful alternative. Conservation can bring unpleasant and self-defeating regimentation. The nuclear problem really can go well or badly, and it has to be done globally to make a difference. And with the institutions we have right now, it will probably increase the changes of nuclear war. So we've got to improve those institutions.
And we can't think of the world as two tiers -- good people and bad people. We're going to have to assume bad people and have a single system that works. And the coal has to be cleaned up upstream as well as with carbon dioxide capture and storage.
And finally, in the global scheme, we've got to find way, and I think we can come up with one, where it is acknowledged that there are rich people in poor countries. At the present time, half of the carbon emissions in the world are coming from the developed world and half from the non-developed world. If you take OECD to be the developed world, 50-50 -- a little more than 50 now in the developing world -- it crossed a few years back. And yet, per-capita emissions in the developing world are one-fifth of per-capita emissions in the developed world because there are five times as many people in the developing worlds. So we've got to keep both facts in mind.
We can't, any longer, give a free pass to the developing world. A few years ago, the framework we set up in 1992 in the Rio convention did not have any time at which the developing world initiatives kick in, so an indefinite free pass. In the Montreal protocol, there was a 10-year forgiveness period. There's an infinite forgiveness period in the way Rio was set up. The grace period has to be over. We have to say, with our developing country partners, you have as many emissions as we do. It comes largely from people living approximately as we do or a small fraction of your population, a much larger fraction of ours. But we are in this together. Our lifestyles are parallel.
One of the things that I found extraordinary was this India World Bank -- (inaudible) -- and saying this is going to help the poor people in India. No! It's going to air condition office buildings in India. We've got to deal with the fact that we have to all have the same programs because we're all living the same way. Those billion of us out of 6 billion people, about 1 billion of us are putting most of those carbon atoms into the atmosphere by living well.
WHITMAN: Well, before I turn it over to the audience here for questions, I would like to follow up just on what you finished talking about and throw it out to the panel. Is it practicable to think of an economic model that would allow for the continued economic growth of the developing countries with a carbon-intensity target whereas an absolute carbon-reduction target for the developed nations? Or is that something that would so skewer the economics in any kind of system regime you'd try to put in place that you can't do that kind of a separation?
SOCOLOW: A really quick answer is that there's nothing wrong with cap which gets larger with time as long as it's getting larger with time more slowly than the economy would have done without that cap. So China could have a cap that grows at 1 percent a year or 2 percent a year when its carbon emissions were set to grow 5 percent a year, and you would have carbon trading. You don't have to mix intensity and cap.
SANDOR: Yeah, I would agree totally with the comments that were just made. I think you could reach for a smaller growth rate. And actually we find that the people that we talked to, and we work with TADA and a few people in India and a few people in China, and they seem to be open to the fact that if they could grow at a lower rate but continue to grow so that they would have political stability, be able to feed the people and have a standard of living. And I think if you couple that -- and I would go much more aggressive maybe than you might, Bob. I would hope that cap and trade legislation that's before Congress would cut emissions here in the United States by 50, 60 percent and maybe up to 80 percent over a long period of time.
SOCOLOW: I didn't give a number, but I wouldn't disagree with you.
SANDOR: Oh, okay then. I think you could cut it very aggressively in the United States as long as you allow the glide path of industry to adjust. You did what SO2 did, you made it very light in the early years, people learn, and then you ratchet it down. And I think if you had aggressive policies in the European Union, in the United States and a policy like Bob was mentioning in the developing world, you could achieve the goals of 30 billion or even less.
And again, just to put it in an economist's terms and in somebody who runs a market, the carbon promises to be the largest commodity in the world. If you take a look at -- and John, you'll appreciate this -- if you take carbon at $35 roughly Euro prices, you take 30 billion, and you do the arithmetic, that's a worldwide crop of carbon of $1 trillion a year, okay. Just multiply those two. If you take derivatives markets, they tend to trade 10 to 30 times the underlying crop. So the corn production, the corn futures will trade 10 times, beans will trade 20 times, Treasury bonds will trade 30 times.
So we're talking about a market that promises to be anywhere from 10 to 30 trillion a year, ultimately. And by the way, I think it's reasonable because you tell me what the marginal value of error is, and I will say to you that you can't live in this planet without air. So why shouldn't these public goods be valued at enormous prices? They deliver life, and they have to be rationed.
WHITMAN: Well, Beijing is facing some of that with the upcoming Olympics, no question about it.
Ian, did you have --
PARRY: Well, just quickly, I mean, I think, ultimately, you know, ideally we should be aiming for a uniform price on CO2 throughout the whole world. That's the ultimate goal because that's the most cost-effective way to reduce emissions when every country throughout the world is facing the same price on CO2. But clearly, that's going to place greater burden on countries which have greater emissions intensity relative to GDP than others.
But I'm optimistic that there are ways that independent assessments can be made to gauge, well, what will be a fair system of trans (side ?) payments among countries to address these distribution or equity issues. That we could come up with formulas for saying, well, if a particular country, based on its per-capita income and based on its emissions intensity, it's got a relatively much higher burden than a bunch of other countries. I think there are ways that countries could agree on some formulas for side payments to roughly compensate for these concerns.
And that's what they've done within the European trading system. Every country within the European trading system, whether it's, you know, Britain, Germany or Romania which has a substantially lower per-capita income than the other countries, every country has the same price on emissions. But the European countries have come up with an agreed-upon formula to redistribute some of the emissions around so there's a way for the relatively wealthy countries to the relatively poor countries to make it worthwhile for the poor countries to still be in the agreement.
So I guess I'm optimistic that that type of a formula could be more widely developed as other countries come into a broader international agreement.
WHITMAN: Okay. It's now time to open it to the audience. I'd ask that you raise your hand. There are microphones. Wait until the microphone gets to you. If you would stand and state your name and affiliation and limit yourself to one question, that would be wonderful.
Okay, in the back there. Wait until the mike gets to you.
QUESTIONER: Thank you. Steven Kass, Carter Ledyard & Milburn.
My question is for Professor Socolow. Cap and trade relies on a particular in its clean development mechanism, relies upon some independent verification for the avoided emissions. Since both parties to a transaction have a similar incentive to inflate that number, these are supposed to be independently verified. Absent that, you may not be insured. As you indicated, that we're actually going to get the emissions reductions and cap and trade promises. How much confidence do you have in the ability of independent verifiers to perform that essential function, particularly in view of the failure, for example, of the accounting industry to perform that in certain other well known areas? (Laughter.)
SOCOLOW: I think it's harder than just doing accounting well. I have very little confidence that that offset process is going to save a lot of carbon because not only is the question what actually happened, but you have the tougher question, what would have happened if you hadn't had this transaction. This is the issue called additionality. It's extremely difficult to say that something wouldn't have happened. And you have perverse consequences such as a country, and this is going on right now, declines to pass a law that would save carbon so that the offset would be demonstrably producing the carbon savings.
So I think this international offset thing is really flawed, deeply flawed. And my view is that the developing countries, particularly the ones that are emerging and transitional, growing rapidly should have their own carbon policies, complete at a national level, that set a tax or a cap and trade as we've just been talking about. And there would be no cherry-picking from outside. And that offset will be just an investment in that country as any other investment.
And it's worse than just bad accounting, the consequences. There is a lot of money being made on any transaction, but these are really perverse in many directions.
WHITMAN: Richard.
SANDOR: Yeah, I would agree that there are problems, and they will be addressed. But I think we have to be guided by the fact that no matter how imperfect it might be and no matter how you might get it right, as Bob said earlier, or wrong, you might over allocate, I think that you've got to take action. And you cannot let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
There will be measurement problems. In some instances, they will be monitoring, and verification is very easy. At the EPA, they put a continuous emission monitors on stacks. And those are, you know, well known, easy technologies. You can monitor anaerobic manure digesters and the methane that's taken out in some of those CDM projects. And there are independent verifiers. And the U.N. has been careful and loathed. As a matter of fact, the criticism is that they're going too slow and spending a lot more time on monitor and verification.
But we are getting an infrastructure. They will not work perfectly like any market will. And it will have its problems from time to time as, you know, you implied about the current conditions that exist in today's capital markets. But overall, I think we've got to move, and we've got to take action and recognize we're going to get some things wrong, and we're going to get some things right. And we'll change those things as they did in Europe. And they'll change the protocols that they are at the U.N.
But the choice is not for us to make. This is such a serious problem that we've just to get on with it and do the best we can. I'm driven by Santayana's quote, the Harvard philosopher in the 19th century, who said nature rules with a loose rein, and a vitality of any sort will muddle through any predicament in which reason would despair. So I think he meant to take action, recognize if you bang into a wall, assess the damage and go after the wall again.
And I think humankind -- and you've got people like Vinod Khosla working on cellulosic ethanol because he thinks he can make some money. You've got Craig (Ventner ?) just raised $200 million based upon a $6 price on carbon to go out for three years and get genetically modified bacteria that eats sulfur and eats carbon. I mean, there's a lot of creativity.
And you put this price on it, you're going to get a whole green tech industry. I'd rather do that and have some errors in the system and police them and get rid of them than not have a U.N. process that deals with CERs, recognizing that I think 99 percent will be okay and maybe 1 percent we won't get right. But the goal is to do something.
(Cross talk.)
WHITMAN: Okay. Another question right there. Two of them coming at you.
QUESTIONER: Thank you. I'm Mark Levinson with JPMorgan Chase.
I had a question for Ian Parry. As an economist, I'd like to believe that prices change behavior. But I think that the empirical evidence shows that that's really not always true, particularly in the area of transport, all the evidence is that price elasticity of demand is extremely low and in fact is swamped by the income elasticity. When people get richer, they drive more, they fly more. And an increase in the price of doing that really doesn't make a whole lot of difference to them. How do you deal with that in the context of reducing carbon emissions from vehicles? What kind of mechanism do you think here works other than, frankly, a command-and-control type of mechanism?
PARRY: Yeah, I think you're right that the behavior responses in the transportation sector are very limited because at the moment you don't have many alternatives to conventional motor fuels. So for example, the evidence suggests that if you increase the price of gasoline by 10 percent over the long run as people drive their vehicles less and they demand more fuel-efficient vehicles, you'll maybe cut fuel consumption by about 4 percent. So there's some response but it's pretty modest.
And that's why when studies look at what happens when you impose a uniform price on CO2 throughout the economy, a relatively modest portion of the emissions reductions comes from the transportation sector. There's a much greater response within the power sector where there's more scope for fuel substitution, substituting away from coal to natural gas and to renewables and possibly down the road incorporating carbon capture and storage.
So yeah, I mean, it's tough in the transportation. I mean, unless there's some additional market imperfection within the transportation sector, I wouldn't necessarily recommend any supplementary measures. I think, you know, if you're not happy with -- it is tough, you know. You have to impose these 5 (dollar) to $20 prices on CO2, and even then you're only going to cut emissions by 5 to 15 percent in the near term. You know, you do need stiff prices to get substantial reductions. But you know, if you're not happy with the progress in economywide emissions reductions, then I think you should jack up the economy wide price rather than trying to guess, oh, well, this sector's not pulling its weight; therefore, we should have supplementary additional regulations on that sector.
Unless there's some specific market imperfection that's been identified and is evidenced that there's a clear market failure there -- and you know, these are open issues. In the literature, there are some people who think that people undervalue fuel economy improvements from vehicles and that's a justification for tightening CAFE standards in addition to raising carbon prices or gasoline prices.
Other people think that people undervalue the energy savings from more efficient appliances or heating systems or fridges or whatever. And therefore, they think that in addition to raising the price on carbon emissions throughout the economy, we should have supplementary measures tightening energy efficiency standards.
But those are issues that are much disputed among analysts. There's not much evidence on whether there are actually these additional market failings or not. But if future evidence suggests that there is these additional market failures then, yes, in principle, they justify some supplementary measures. But if there is an evidence of these supplementary market failures, I would just say raise the economywide price on emissions if you're not happy with the progress on emissions reductions. And then just let the market decide which are the most cost-effective ways to respond to the higher price.
WHITMAN: Let me just add a little something on that because just last year, as you probably -- I hope everybody here knows about the Energy Star program of the Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Energy. Last year, purchases of environmental Energy Star products, to go to the uncertainty that you were putting out there, reduced the carbon equivalent of taking 27 million cars off the road and saved the necessity of building 50 new power plants in this country. So there's a way to measure, and there are some very measurable results that are real from the voluntary programs. It doesn't mean that that's enough, but you really can measure them.
We have another question over there. We have lots of questions. I'll try to get around to them.
QUESTIONER: Thank you. My name is -- (name inaudible). I'm with Columbia University's Graduate School of Business. I have two short, international-dimension questions on the international dimensions of the problem. The first question is addressed to Dr. Parry and Dr. Sandor. And the second question can be to any of the panelists. In developing countries like China, India and Brazil make a lot of arguments against joining any international agreement that's binding on them. Some are plausible arguments. And one of the plausible arguments I've heard is that industrialized countries during the last (170 ?) years have emitted lots of stuff, you know, without paying for it. And why should now they be subject to or bound doing the same thing? Now, the question is, what is the best -- suppose we just, you know, industrialized countries, give them the credit of all the emissions we have but in the form of a dedicated, technical assistance. What is the best way -- (inaudible) -- in dollar amounts, number one? And with a feasible amount, that's question number one.
Question number two, also on international dimension, I do research on corruption, tax evasion, accounting fraud and so on. And one of the questions in this area is, you know, verifiability. So I mean, I imagine some of the missing activities are easily checked, verified, measured, others are perhaps less. So this is maybe an engineering question, maybe -- (inaudible) -- question, maybe economic question. The question is, you know, how difficult is it to properly measure and verify those emission activities once a globally binding activity agreement is in place, particularly monitoring those activities in a developing country? Thank you.
WHITMAN: Richard, do you want to star with that one?
SANDOR: Yeah, you know, the first question on equity, I think, you know, Professor Socolow spoke to it earlier and I believe is the right approach is the equalize that and to make sure there's political stability, you would not demand a cut from them, you would just have an increasing rate but not quite as high as it might be in order to get a political buy-in from them. And I think that at some particular point, with China's economy, GDP -- it's now the second-biggest economy, it just passed Japan -- there will be a buy-in. Maybe it will take five or six years of slower rates of growth but I think there will be, and India similarly. India, with only an 8, 9 percent GDP growth rate, won't be as much. But I think Professor Socolow's approach is, you know, just reach for the stabilization.
As far as the corruption, it's unambiguously a problem. And it's a problem that you have to address very, very carefully. The monitoring and verification, you can, in cases of China has an SO2 program. And it has what are called scrubbers which are chemical factories that take the sulfur out of the flue gas. Well, you know, I've heard of instances where they just turn them off, you know, or jig with them. And I'm sure it's done in the U.S. I'm sure it's done around the world with different degrees of dishonesty. But you know, you have to recognize that this will go on and build your enforcement procedures as tightly as possible. And I think, just like in the criminal system, you won't catch everybody. But if you get a good enough job done, you'll catch 98 percent of them.
WHITMAN: Ian, did you -- (inaudible) -- and then Bob.
PARRY: Well, just quickly, I mean, to bring in a developing country has got to make it worthwhile. In a sense, they've got to be made better off from being in the agreement from being outside the agreement, which clearly, to my mind, means that, you know, we're going to have to have transitory (side ?) payments to make them really want to be in the agreement.
And then once we've got them wanting to be in the agreement because they're getting this compensation, you know, in a tax system, this would just be, you know, some of the tax revenue from the wealthier countries gets redistributed according to some formula to the developing countries. Or under a cap and trade system, you'd bring them into the trading system but give them relatively lax emissions targets, possibly even have quotas for them, which are about at their current emissions levels, possibly even a little bit greater, to give them some incentive to want to join the coalition.
And once they have that incentive, then you can say, look, to be in this coalition and to make you better off, we have to develop some accounting practices to measure the fossil fuels. And you know, we have to have international inspectors coming in. And you know, if the program is focused on fossil fuels, which is should be, it shouldn't be a downstream program. It's much harder to track CO2 in a downstream program that's focused on the power sector or the transportation sector. Far better to have it upstream on the fossil fuels and just keep track of all the fossil fuels produced in the economy and coming into the economy. Just develop accounting procedures that can be verified by international inspectors to account for the fossil fuels and then, you know, we know the emissions factors for those fossil fuels.
In addition, there's various downstream activities like carbon capture and sequestration. But there again, you know, we can say, well, if you want to be in this agreement, we have to verify when you have carbon capture. And therefore, you have to have continuous emissions monitoring systems installed in the smoke stack. And then we can, you know, then we can meter and make sure that these things are switched on the whole time rather than turned off.
Similarly in the forestry sector, through satellite photography and aerial photography, we can get some measure, we can get an overall picture of land-use changes in Brazil or Indonesia, wherever where there may be changes in forestry. And through the photography, we can gauge which tree species are there so we can get some rough idea of what's happening to the carbon that's either being released through deforestation or that's being stored through land-use changes.
So I guess, in principle, I think that these are problems that can be overcome if we give developing countries incentives for them to want to be in the agreement because they benefit up front. This compensation will be phased out over time. But in the near term, they all want to be in the agreement because they're better off. They want these transfer payments and (side ?) payments. And therefore, it's in the interests of both parties to come up with some scheme for measuring fossil fuels and various downstream activities for capturing emissions.
And again, on the historical emissions, I mean, that's obviously a really important point. But again, we can have independent analyses saying, well, suppose that, you know, we force rich countries to pay a price, say $10 per ton -- for all the emissions they've released into the atmosphere. Or we can say, well, you got 50 years' worth of emissions into the atmosphere for free. What would that be equivalent for other countries coming into the agreement. You could work out roughly how much, effectively un-priced for the rich countries, under different prices for CO2 -- $10, $20, $30.
And again, I'm optimistic that there would be some hope for bargaining over what would be a fair price to transfer to developing countries to say, well, you didn't get these early emissions for free. You have to pay for the emissions. And therefore, you are justified in obtaining some compensation. But we can work out what that compensation would be under different emissions prices. And I guess I'm optimistic that we could work out some fair scheme that would be acceptable to both parties if they have incentives to want to be in this agreement.
WHITMAN: Bob, did you have something you wanted to (add ?) to this?
SOCOLOW: Yeah, well, first of all, the first question, sometimes called the legacy question, we put CO2 into the atmosphere, we have raised the CO2 concentration by one-third relative to the pre-industrial time. That's a very particular amount of carbon.
The legacy numbers, if we really took them into account in some serious way, they would not make a big difference in the way we're thinking about the world. Fifty years ago, we emitted five times less CO2 than we do today -- 1950 compared to today. So we have done most of those emissions in the last 50 years. And we were already pretty developed in the U.S. in 1950 with emissions that altogether haven't amounted to very much. I'm talking fossil fuels, and it's hard to figure out what our deforestation costs and so on.
There's perhaps two-thirds, one-third, industrialized and developing-country emissions up to now. And already 50-50 or 55-45 in favor of developing countries. It's emotionally charged, and we should say legacies need to be taken into account when you're talking any international audience because it diffuses something. But quantitatively, it's not a very big deal.
And the developing countries' self-interest -- two more things than the ones that were mentioned. First of all, developing countries have real potential for damage from climate change. They have their own very serious risk management questions because the worst alternatives are pretty terrible in terms of losing river flow and things of that kind all over the developing world, including the transitional countries and the poorest countries. And most of what we're talking about in terms of carbon markets is about those richer countries.
And the other is self-determination. There is something not very pretty about these CERs when you go into another country and you cherry pick. If they have their own carbon policies, they determine how their country is run, and they drive their own investments toward efficient buildings, toward efficient power plants and so forth, some of which the West participates in, some which it doesn't. They're in charge of their own minds.
But we have this two-tier world institutionalized in the Rio convention, 1992, 16 years of it. It was the best people could do. In this city they negotiated it. It was the best they could do for various reasons that I hope historians will pick apart. But it doesn't solve the problem. And so we have to go past the two-tier world in 2012, and this is the right group to start thinking about or to continue to think about how we actually do it.
I want to say one last thing because there is an extra problem that I've become aware of that I'd like this group to think about. When we talk about the U.S. and we talk about the next 10 or 15 years, we have a lot of sunk costs in our power system. And nobody wants to retire any coal plant or any nuclear plant. But rather, the entire political lament in this is toward life extension in both -- 300,000 megawatts of coal, 100,000 megawatts of nuclear. If we take efficiency seriously, we may not need much more power in this country if we also refuse to retire any.
And so we have people chomping at the bit in the nuclear community to build the next-generation nuclear plants and the coal community -- not them but people joining them, like me -- attach capture and storage to new coal plants. And we've got the renewables people with all kinds of ideas on how to add hundreds of gigawatts of renewables. That's going to happen mostly abroad, I'm afraid. And therefore, our own technological frontier is going to have to be expressed abroad if we can't retire existing plants. And that feature is unlike any developing country's feature where they're building new stuff because they haven't got much in the ground.
We love life extension. We haven't confronted the implications of loving life extension in both nuclear and coal. That's a lot of power that is going to be kept there. And you know how these industries are going to behave. They'll put almost anything on as a bargain to keep going because the entire plant is written off already. So we have to think about that as a special U.S. issue in carbon management. I don't know the way around it. It obviously makes more prominent the idea of capturing CO2 from an existing coal plant, for example. And that requires technologies that we know are pretty expensive but then issues we didn't build the coal plants where carbon storage was nearby in many instances. Some instances yes, some no. People talk about the plant itself not having a lot of room around it. We'd much rather start fresh, but we've got this enormous sunk costs.
WHITMAN: Well, I know there are a host of other questions out there, but given the time and the council's desire to keep on time so you all can keep to your schedules, I'm afraid we're going to have to end this. But you always want to end it with people wanting more so you'll come back again.
I want to thank our panel. I think you couldn't have had a more excellent group.
Thank you all very much.


text:
Bushnell Ticket Contest: "The Tenors"
Enter to win a pair of tickets to see The Tenors perform live at The Bushnell in
This award-winning Canadian quartet has garnered international fame for their unique style that combines classical music and contemporary pop. The group – including members Remigio Pereira, Victor Micallef, Fraser Walters and Clifton Murray – has shared the stage with Sarah McLachlan, Neil Young, Paul McCartney, Brian McKnight and Natalie Cole, among others, and their performance at the Bushnell will include renditions of songs from their new album Lead With Your Heart, as well as past hits.
To enter for a chance to win a pair of tickets to see The Tenors, fill out the form below. Entries must be submitted by Wednesday, May 1 at 3 p.m. ET (Eastern Time). Good luck!


text:
Experience this charming vacation or business executive private studio apartment in our 1880's fully restored Victorian home. Our location for Mardi Gras and Jazz Fest is IDEAL - 5 minute walk to Jazz Fest at the Fair Grounds Race Track - most venues are within walking distance. Bicycling is the best way to travel long distances during Mardi Gras. Walk to grocery stores, restaurants, Bayou St. John & City Park. Relax and BBQ in the completely landscaped lush and tropical backyard. Plenty of street parking. All the comforts of home, just pack your bags and make your way over!
New Orleans has so much to offer! Start your day with Mimosa's, coffee, eggs benedict or beignets. Enjoy a leisurely walk in the Quarter or Garden District, a Steamboat Ride on the River, or cocktails on the balcony before dancing the night away on Bourbon Street. If Bourbon isn't your cup of tea, relax while listening to some of the country's best Jazz Musicians at clubs within blocks of the unit. The City is one of America's Jewels, don't blame us when you want to return to her again and again and again!
When it's time to take a break, this studio comes complete with a 42' flat-screen TV with full cable to keep you amused and informed during your stay, along with a full kitchen - gas range and oven, microwave, coffee maker, and toaster-oven provide all the basics for snacking or cooking a full meal. The king bed can convert into 2 twin beds along with a pull out twin-size couch for a third guest!
Come be a part of the party in New Orleans and 'Laissez Les Bons Temps Rouler'!
Keywords: Bed & Breakfast, Studio, Cottage, B&B
A true born and raised New Orleanian who loves to share the history, architecture, music, art/sculpture, cuisine/recipes, parades, festivals, sporting events, and the wonderful and one-of-a-kind, cross-cultural joie de vivre that we've lived here for centuries - rich, beautiful and outright fun !!!
Herb's Home was perfect for our NOLA vacation. The house is located in a picturesque New Orleans neighborhood walking distance to most places, including restaurants, grocery stores, coffee shops AND just a 5 min. walk to Jazz Fest which was amazing to be so close to all of the action. We took short taxi's rides to all of our favorite Music Halls, hung out in the back yard and really enjoyed the place!!! Getting to know Herb was awesome too, he knows everything about the city and it was really helpful to have some local advice.
"Lagniappe - something extra that's unexpected, a little extra; best concierge/host in town!; relaxing landscape, patios and garden room; great décor and amenities By the time you depart, we hope to have imparted a sense of why New Orleans is called The Big Easy, the Crescent City and The City That Care Forgot...."
Walking distance to several New Orleans festivals including the Jazz and Heritage Festival and Voodoo Festival. Also close to City Park which includes the Carousel Gardens Amusement Park & Storyland, boat & bike rentals, the Botanical Gardens, the Bestoff Sculpture Garden, Golf, Tennis, Canoeing, Parkway Tavern Cafe, NOLA City Bark, Equest Farm, New Orleans Museum of Art and the free and awesome Sculpture Garden (a must-see!)
Rate Period | Nightly | Weekend Night | Weekly | Monthly | Event | ||||
Apr 22 2015 -
May 5 2015
Changeover Day: Wednesday 5 night minimum stay
My Standard Rate
3 night minimum stay
Notes: Rates are based on 2 guests; add $45 per night, per additional guest |
Payment is usually accepted in the quoted currency (USD) unless the currency and the amount is specifically agreed in advance with the owner / advertiser.
Lagniappe Suite rates subject to change for special events. Rates based upon 2 occupants, 3 maximum - for additional charge. We keep things simple: RATES ARE ALL-INCLUSIVE, so no additional taxes or fees! Lagniappe given gratuitously. Be sure to ask what this means! Please contact me to obtain the most accurate quote, or other options for minimum nights and variables.
"Location - close to everything you need by public transit, taxi or concierge chauffeur service - when available."


text:
Tuesday, June 14, 2011
The Vegemite sticks to the screen
6 comments:
- Sandy said...
Now that's a great duck photo! It looks like he's bearing down on the cheeky heron in the 2nd picture, no doubt trying to get your fish back.
- June 14, 2011 at 7:21 PM
- esbboston said...
Maybe someone will make an audible page rustling noise app to imitate newspaper reading, or an option within the online newspaper itself.
- June 14, 2011 at 9:29 PM
- fmcgmccllc said...
Oh yes, we get the China Daily and it is my go source for all comedy and drama. My mother-in-law gave Big Daddy a subscription to The Smithsonian for his birthday. We are still staring at each other on that one.
- June 14, 2011 at 9:32 PM
- Cheers! said...
I've about given up on newspapers completely, in paper or on the ipad. I'm tired of reading someone else's opinion...jus the facts please, I'm perfectly capable of drawing my own opinion. In this house of boys that I live in I pretty much only get sports center anyway...the amount of useless sports knowledge running around my head is ridiculous! ;)
- June 15, 2011 at 10:35 AM
- Merisi said...
I miss the heavy thud with which the Sunday paper arrived on the steps in the early morning. Or not: I remember one snowy winter day when we could not find it until a couple days later, when the snow started melting.
Every now and then I happen to read a "real paper" after having perused the web edition. It is such a different experience: not only the tactile pleasure of holding the paper, but also the content opens itself in a different way. I find articles I did not notice online. Somehow I feel dumbed down by reading only online. - June 15, 2011 at 4:24 PM
- Badger said...
Sandy: That bloody heron is eating all my fish
esbboston: Brilliant idea for an App
fmcgmcclic: It doesn't get any better over there does it
Cheers: Fox news is supposed to be fair and balanced you could try that
Merisi: Yes me too. I love actual PAPER. - June 15, 2011 at 5:50 PM


text:
Vero Webcast: Data Breach & Identity Theft – What CUs Need to Know
What data breach events could occur inside or outside the walls of your credit union, and how would they impact your operations? What steps can you take today to help your credit union and your members mitigate the effects of data breaches and/or ID theft events?
Get the answers to these critical questions and more during an informative webcast conducted by Vero, a leader in ID Theft solutions to the credit union industry.
Discover how your credit union can gain the inside track on minimizing these risks and solving risk mitigation issues specific to Red Flag requirements, while providing member solutions that enhance service offerings and improve retention.
Join us on August 26th at 11am EDT and discover more!
Statistics reveal that individuals are more likely to have their identity stolen and used by thieves in ways that go well beyond just damaging credit. Find out how your credit union can elevate its value proposition with more service offerings and better protection for its members, improving member loyalty, while also providing additional resources for increasing non-interest income and your credit union's bottom line.
Who Should Attend:


text:
But WaitThere's More
Find other great ideas in these related stories:
- The Best New Hotels with Great Food ›
- The Most Delicious Macarons in the World ›
- Gorgeous Vineyards Across the Globe ›
- 5 Great Inns for Foodies ›
- Buenos Aires Eats ›
- Madrid's Best Restaurants and Bars ›
- Go Irish in Boston ›
- Austin's Best Restaurants, Bars & Shops ›
- 29 Restaurants on 11 Caribbean Islands ›
- Alternative Wine Trails ›
- World's Best Farm Hotels ›
La Grande Plage and Villa Eugénie, Biarritz, France
Ride the waves: Parisians have been summering in Biarritz in droves since the 18th century, but for the surfer set, October through April is high season. Even though wet suits are a must ten months of the year, don't expect to have this surf spot to yourself. Six beaches, spread out along nearly four miles of coastline, offer prime waves for every skill level. It's always fun to find surf in the city, and the beach breaks at La Grande Plage (best for advanced beginners) are right off Biarritz's main casino-lined strip—think of it as Waikiki for Francophiles.
Tide your appetite: Empress Eugénie, wife of Napoleon III, built the gothic Hôtel du Palais in 1854. And, yes, to dine in her white-tablecloth, crystal-chandeliered, Michelin-starred namesake restaurant, Villa Eugénie, you'll have to swap your swimsuit for something a little less revealing (jackets are required). The kitchen's classic French masterpieces, perhaps spider crab velouté or Pyrenean suckling lamb, are well worth the sartorial effort. Plus, the views of La Grande Plage through the floor-to-ceiling French doors will whet your appetite for tomorrow's surf.
Villa Eugénie
Hôtel du Palais
1 Avenue de l'Impératrice
Biarritz, France
Tel: 33 5 5941 6400
Dinner entrees $47—$98


text:
At Least 48 Dead in Hurricane
Hope all Patterico readers are staying safe.
Hope all Patterico readers are staying safe.
this is terrible so many people have no home to go back to just cause of a stupid storm
And many of them were felled by falling trees- of all things– probably the last thing they thought of happening– both figuratively- and literally. Even with so much warning, so tragic. And so costly on so many levels.
Barak Obama doesn't like white people.
–Hip hop artist
I walked around the upper west side for about two hours yesterday – I telecommute to CA so if I have power, I need to be working, which limits my daytime manueverability.
It's surreal; in the upper westside, except for the lack of subway service, some felled trees, and intermittently closed places (because employees can't get to work without the subway), it's almost as if nothing happened.
And yet just a few miles from here …
Foolishly, I was outside walking home from my neighbor's house (on Long Island) on Monday night and it was terrifying! The trees were creaking and whipping around. Fortunately I got home safely, but I just got word a friend of mine from college was killed around that same time — by a falling tree. Tragic.
SPQR, i'm not seeing how that story tells of Democrat incompetence.
aphrael, New York state has a Democrat governor, does it not? Andrew Cuomo (who I can't think of w/o recalling Phil Hartman's impression of his father during the '92 campaign season).
I'm not seeing how it indicates incompetence by the governor.
Looks to me like it's a bureaucratic organization running on autopilot until someone points out that their autopilot is idiotic. I no more expect the governor to know everything that's in the national guard's autopilot than i expect the ceo of my company to know everything in my department's autopilot.
FWIW, Mayor Bloomberg has expressly requested that the national guard *not* be involved in recovery efforts in the city, although he's accepted help from the Army Corps of Engineers.
aphrael, ah that's right. The ol' "fall of the sparrow" principle only applies to GOP administrations.
I keep forgetting.
National Guard Adjutant Generals (the state guard commander) are appointed by the Governors of the respective states.
It is a political position.
A competent NY ANGAG would have consulted immediately with the Governor, and redeployed his troops "to the sound of the guns".
Bloomerburg, or his Commish, doesn't want to have the NG troops showing up the NYPD, and/or having to liason/consult with another chain-of-command.
It is typical NYC arrogance.
Ironically the main impact the storm had on me was indirect. I've been offline all week, not because I had no electricity, let alone anything worse, but because my computer crashed on Saturday night, and I haven't yet been able to get it to a repair place, what with them being closed and me having no public transport to get around on. Tonight I borrowed a laptop from a friend until I can get mine repaired.
So while I was holed up indoors during the storm, instead of being online the whole time I actually watched TV for the first time in months. I don't know why I still pay for cable.
It's more than 48, and yet most of this can probably be characterized as freak accidents.
Falling trees, and being caught in the water, sometimes in basements.
The death toll in New York City went up because they just began yesterday to pay attention to Staten Island.
Overall, the death toll is now in the 80s. yet nobody lost in the fire that destroyed 119 houses in Breezy Point including that of Congressman Bob Turner. Nobody lost in hospitals. One woman at home died when power was lost to her respirator.
A very small number of houses destroyed, sometimes with people in them.
Powered by WordPress.


text:
356 comments
Here is an experimental recipe that turned out to be a huge hit! I had many of these ingredients 'left over' from a catered luncheon, and decided to give my creativity a try. My family was glad I did!
Prep Time: 20 Min
Cook Time: 1 Hr 10 Min
Ready In: 1 Hr 30 Min
1/4 cup butter
6 tablespoons all-purpose flour
1/2 teaspoon garlic powder
1/4 teaspoon salt
1/4 teaspoon pepper
2 1/2 cups milk
3/4 cup shredded Cheddar cheese
3/4 cup shredded Swiss cheese
6 large russet potatoes, sliced into 1/4 inch slices
1 small onion, finely chopped
1 pound cooked ham, chopped
1 (16 ounce) package frozen cauliflower
1/4 cup crushed cornflakes cereal
1. Preheat oven to 375 degrees F (190 degrees C). Lightly grease a medium baking dish.
2. To prepare the cheese sauce, melt butter in a medium saucepan over medium heat. Whisk in flour, garlic powder, salt, and pepper. Mix in milk, and stir constantly until thickened. Mix in Cheddar cheese and Swiss cheese, and continue to stir until smooth. Reduce heat to low.
3. Layer potatoes in the bottom of the prepared baking dish. Layer onion and ham over potatoes. Top with cauliflower. Cover with the cheese sauce.
4. Bake covered 1 hour in the preheated oven. Remove cover, sprinkle with crushed cornflakes, and continue baking 10 minutes, until vegetables are tender and surface is bubbly and lightly browned. Allow to cool about 10 minutes before serving.
Nutritional Information
Amount Per Serving Calories: 452 | Total Fat: 19.7g | Cholesterol: 59mg
Source: AllRecipes.com
by KAGS217
August 29, 2014
by BOBLAT9
June 09, 2012
by BOOBEAT1984
May 28, 2012
by LINDAKELLY
April 24, 2012
picture looks like broccoli, not califlower...but guess you could use any veggies you want
by JPOTTS1
April 23, 2012
by JELLYBEAN2
April 23, 2012
by 8182122
April 23, 2012
I make something like this with leftover meat, it is good with chicken, ham, steak, whatever. I usually put in broccoli too. Make a tossed salad and you have a great dinner.
by FAMJR
April 23, 2012
by CHRISUSA46
April 23, 2012
the picture looks like a dressing/stuffing concoction rather than a potato casserole.
by HEATHER (OHIO)
April 23, 2012
Let's face it -- the photo is a huge turnoff. But I imagine the recipe is good.
by SCHEEPY
April 23, 2012
Go back to the Main Page of the Archives.
Do you have a Helpful Hint of your own?
Tell us about it and we might publish it.
Do you have problem? Maybe we can help.
Click Here to tell us about it.


text:
Date of the Event:
Saturday, April 13, 2013 - 8:00pm - 10:00pm On Saturday, April 13th from 8:00pm to 10:00pm, Brian Copeland presents "Not a Genuine Black Man" about how our surroundings make us who we are. This event takes place at 200 North San Pedro Road San Rafael. Tickets are $25 in advance and $30 day of concert. For details, call 415.444.8000


text:
Rita Ora feels that she deserves all the success she has achieved this year as she has "paid her dues" in the music industry.
With the help of Jay-Z's management label Roc Nation, the 'R.I.P.' singer has become of the hottest acts of the year, scoring three number one singles and a debut album which topped the charts in its first week of release.
Rita told The Sun that she deserves all the perks she now receives as she has grafted hard to get to the top of her game.
"I really have paid my dues. When I get to stay in fancy hotel suites these days, I remind myself of that," Rita told The Sun.
"I did endless nights in Travelodges, nasty hotels and motels where the walls were paper-thin. You could hear people making love or farting in the next room. Gross."
There's no denying Rita has worked hard this year!
PopDash's Hottest Women of 2011...
You can keep up to date with all the latest news from PopDash by following us on Twitter and liking us on Facebook.


text:
This restaurant is notorious for the rude waiters. I thought they were rude but only a little more so than usually encountered in a Chinese restaurant. Eating at this world famous restaurant, even if for the wrong reason, means another notch on the post!
We spent the day on the subway system at a furious pace going from Big Ben to the Big Eye to Westminster Abbey to the Buckingham Palace to..., seemingly keeping pace with the fast, stressed, and efficient British population. Mission accomplished. It was now time for dinner.
Having eaten at a buffet the night before, we weren't in the mood for buffet. Fish and chips didn't appeal. Nothing British was appealing. We didn't want to eat at the many Middle Easter restaurants. We ate here in the Chinatown for lunch. We were running low on the pounds and we fell back on what we generally know to be true. Chinese food is cheap compared to other foods. And so it was dinner at Wong Kei based upon a recommendation by a local.
The place was packed with Chinese customers. They seemed to be having a grand old time dining. For me? The food wasn't memorable which explains why I can't remember what we ate. I believe we ordered fish hot pot, a pork dish, and? I'm struggling. Also why didn't I take photos?
I liked London but from a food standpoint, it was a grand disappointment. Three restaurants and three thumbs in the middle to thumbs down. The British can't cook and even the Chinese in Britain can't cook.
Wong Kei
41-43 Wardour St
London, W1D 6PY, United Kingdom


text:
With custom themed designed bouncy castles, we have been hiring out inflatable bouncy castles to the local and surrounding areas since 1990, with £5m public liability insurance.
Since being founded by Olympic medallist Brian Jacks, we have grown as a business which has supplied inflatable fun and games to corporate clients including Virgin Media, Homebase, McDonalds, Sainsburys, Tesco, HSS and Celebrity Big Brother. We also offer our services to schools, nurseries and garden parties.
We can deliver a Bungee Run in Croydon, a Spiderman bouncy castle in Bromley, or try a Wrecking Ball in Carshalton, The Supa Assault Course is popular in Chelsfield and Knockholt. We deliver to Halstead, Pratts Bottom and Sevenoaks, along with Sumo Wrestling Suits, Football or Pirates Bounce'n'Slides in Hayes, Purley and Shirley, Croydon and Wallington, Sutton and Coney Hall.
For inflatable fun and games, call BJ's Bouncy Castles on 07956 838 687
We can do Princess bouncy castles in Beckenham, Bexley, Sidcup and Swanley, and the Jungle bouncy castle in Keston, Otford or even Bexleyheath. We also do Adults bouncy castles in Orpington, Biggin Hill, Chislehurst and Sidcup, with Super Heroes Wrestling Suits in Westerham and Brasted, along with Slides in Downe and Cudham, a popular delivery area for the Pirates, Barbie bouncy castles. What about trying the Gladiator Duel for the adults and kids in New Addington, Selsdon and Sanderstead.


text:
I thought that the Djemaa el Fna square was an overrated kind of place. What a Mistake it was ! I was astounded by the incredible ambiance of that market place : lightnings, multiple sounds and this huge crowd of people totally get you !
Registered on: 04/09/2008 Score: 8271 hits


text: And now your aging or injured canine friend can benefit from and enjoy therapy and massage in a beautiful, indoor pool dedicated to canine hydrotherapy. Veterinarians recommend Cherie, a certified Member of Association of Canine Water Therapy, to care for your beloved pet whether - home or away. We have experienced and competent staff that will come to your home anywhere in Rockford and surrounding districts. We aim to make the experience as pleasurable and comfortable both for you and your pet. With only a few hour's notice we can be there to assist you in whatever you need to take care of your pet(s). You can click the contact tab at the top of page to fill out the information sheet or you can call me, Cherie, at 815-703-0414 or 815-623-7946. We look forward to meeting you and caring for your pets. Feel free to browse through the photo gallery and vid tab to see some of the pets in our care or check out the tab to see compilations of various pets in our care.


text:
The first hostel in Barra de Sao Miguel / Alagoas is only 25 minutes from Maceio a place with beautiful beaches for... More Info »
Video guides, travel podcasts, city maps & free city guides. What to eat, where to stay and things to do and see - our travel guides have it all.
Find a guide »We offer the most comprehensive selection of hostels on the internet with over 35,000 great places to stay in 180 countries. The ultimate online resource for hostels everywhere.
Find great value hostels »


text:
Diary of a Foodie
Miso-Marinated Salmon with Citrus and Shiitakes
Diary of a Foodie: Season One: Zen and the Art of Cooking
- Active Time:45 min
- Start to Finish:25 hr
January 2007
Watch this Diary of a Foodie episode and view its accompanying recipes. Plus, explore all episodes and more recipes from the show.
- 2 (3-lb) whole salmon fillets with skin, any small bones removed with tweezers
- 500 grams shiro miso (white fermented-soybean paste) (about 2 cups)
- 2 tablespoons sake or white wine
For shiitakes with citrus zests
- 3 tablespoons plus 1/2 cup olive oil
- 1 lb fresh shiitake mushrooms, stems discarded and caps thinly sliced
- 3 navel oranges
- 3 large lemons
- 1 cup fresh cilantro leaves
- 1/2 cup (1/2-inch) lengths of fresh chives
- 1/2 cup fresh orange juice (preferably from juice oranges)
- 3 tablespoons fresh lemon juice
Marinate salmon:
Line a large shallow (1-inch-deep) baking pan with plastic wrap and arrange salmon fillets, skin sides down, in it. Stir together miso and sake and spread over flesh sides of salmon to completely cover. Cover with plastic wrap and chill 24 to 48 hours.
Make shiitakes with citrus zests:
Heat 3 tablespoons oil in a 12-inch nonstick skillet over high heat until hot but not smoking, then sauté shiitakes with salt to taste, stirring occasionally, until golden brown and nearly dry, 15 to 20 minutes. Transfer to paper towels.
While mushrooms are cooking, remove zest from navel oranges and lemons in long, thin strips, preferably with a 5-holed citrus zester.
Heat remaining 1/2 cup oil in a 10-inch skillet over moderately low heat until hot and cook zests in 4 batches, stirring frequently, until curly and crisp, about 1 minute.
Transfer to paper towels with mushrooms. When mushrooms and zests are cool, transfer to a bowl. Just before serving, toss together with cilantro and chives.
Roast salmon:
Preheat oven to 500ºF.
Gently scrape miso from salmon with a rubber spatula and discard miso. Arrange salmon fillets, skin sides down, in 2 well-greased large shallow (1-inch-deep) baking pans (tail ends may hang over ends of pans slightly). Roast salmon in upper and lower thirds of oven, switching position of pans after 10 minutes, until edges begin to brown and salmon is just cooked through, 15 to 20 minutes total.
Transfer each salmon fillet to a platter using 2 large metal spatulas. (If fillets break as you're transferring them, simply piece them together on the platter.) Pour orange and lemon juices over salmon and sprinkle with shiitake mixture.
Cooks' notes: We like the tangy flavor the juice oranges bring to the salmon, but you can use the juice from navel oranges for a sweeter note.
Shiitakes and zests may be cooked 1 day ahead and kept, covered, at room temperature.
Shiitakes and zests may be cooked 1 day ahead and kept, covered, at room temperature.
- Keywords
- diary of a foodie,
- seafood,
- fruit,
- japanese,
- orange
More Diary of a Foodie
- Chiles en Nogada con Salsa de Chocolate (Stuffed Poblanos with Nut Sauce and Chocolate-Pomegranate Molasses Drizzle)
- Easy Seafood Paella
- Gazpacho
- Chile and Bell Pepper Frittata
- Pollo Alla Cacciatora con Peperoni (Hunter's-Style Chicken with Peppers)
- Porcini and Honey Ice Cream
- View All Diary of a Foodie


text:
WinsorLearning.com Terms and Conditions
General Access Agreement
This web site and its contents are the PROPERTY OF Winsor Learning, Inc., and/or its affiliates, unless otherwise indicated. The contents of this web site are protected, without limitations, to United States and International copyright and trademark laws. By accessing this website, you agree to comply with all United States and International copyright and trademark laws in addition to the following terms and conditions below. Violating will result in legal action.
General Terms
You are AUTHORIZED to download a copy of the material found on this web site on one computer for only your personal and non-commercial use. In doing so, you may not remove or in any way alter information, pricing, any trademark, copyright, or other proprietary notice.
You may NOT distribute, copy, modify or republish any of the material found on this website in any form without prior written consent of Winsor Learning, Inc. The content of this web site is the property of Winsor Learning, Inc and/or its affiliates and by accessing this site NO rights are transferred to you in any way.
Winsor Learning, Inc. makes NO guarantees with respect to the web sites or linked web sites contents, which are provided for use "as is". Winsor Learning, Inc. also makes NO guarantees as to whether the information found on this site or other sites linked to this site are accurate, complete or current. It is your responsibility to evaluate the accuracy and completeness of all posted information, opinions and other materials on this web site or any web site linked to this site. Product, services, photos, samples and price information are subject to change without notice on this site and linked sites. It is your responsibility to receive the most current information and if in question contact Winsor Learning or linked sites directly for confirmation.
Winsor Learning, Inc. and its employees, suppliers and contractors shall in NO EVENT to the fullest extent permitted by law BE LIABLE, for any claims, charges, demands, damages, or expenses of any nature, including loss of use, loss of data, loss caused by a computer or electronic virus, loss of income or profit, or damage of property arising out of connection with the use of this web site or any web site which is linked to this web site. You assume total and complete responsibility for establishing such procedures for data back up and virus checking as you consider necessary.
Privacy Statement, Information Provided To Third Parties and Security
In the event that Winsor Learning, Inc/www.winsorlearning.com collects customer information for an order or to enhance your site experience we confirm that safeguards are in place and your information is not sold. Winsor Learning, Inc may ask for personal information for email notifications/mailings, to shop online and/or if you sign up to receive information about our products. Order information collected general includes: name, address, email, phone number, organization name, credit card/payment information, tax information and messages. Personal information that Winsor Learning, Inc collects is used to fill informational requests and orders.
When ordering you are entering a secure part of the web site, protected by SSL (Secure Sockets Layer). When you make an online order, your personal information is safe and encrypted. Winsor Learning, Inc. may use third parties to fulfill an order, process payment or for improving site performance. If personal information is collected and a third party assists Winsor Learning, Inc. the personal information collected in relation to the third party is for the purpose of providing services for Winsor Learning, Inc and to you, is not sold and transferred in a secure manor.
In the event that an order is placed online, personal information is collected. Basic contact information will be collected when an order or request is made in any form (PO, online, phone, mail, in person or fax) and added to the company database. Details of fulfillment of the order may be noted but payment information is not stored in the main company database. If you chose to establish an online account for your ordering convenience you will be asked at the time of each order to provide payment information in order for your orders to be processed. If Winsor Learning, Inc. is contacted concerning an account past payment account detail information, example account number, the requested information will not be provided.
Personal contact information placed in the company database may be used for catalog mailings, e-mail mailings, product notification or special offers on products and services for Winsor Learning, Inc published materials and/or its affiliates. This information may be provided to a third party to provide a service for Winsor Learning, Inc or for you but the information will not be sold.
Linking To The Site
We welcome education faculty, students and clients to establish links to our website by use of standard hypertext links. Winsor Learning, Inc. requires no formal notice that you've linked to our site, but we do request standard notifications be sent to firstname.lastname@example.com , attention web coordinator, when you have done so. This will allow us to notify you in the event that the site and or products have change.
However, linking to our site or posting materials found on our website without proper permission, copyright and trademark notices is uninvited and unwelcomed. Material and products found on this site are copyrighted by Winsor Learning, Inc or its affiliates and by accessing this site and linked sites you agree to obey all aspects of copyright and trademark law for the United States and Internationally.
Winsor Learning, Inc/ www.winsorlearning.com uses a browser feature known as cookies. A cookie is a small data file that is stored in your web browser (examples: Internet Explorer, Mozilla Firefox, Apple Safari or others) and are to aid in tracking and passing on information as you go through the web site. To initiate an online order, you will need to allow your cookies to register your shopping cart session. Please note: All online shopping at WinsorLearning.com is safe and secure, protected by SSL (Secure Sockets Layer). When you make an online order, your personal information is safe and encrypted. If you are having problems placing an order online or accessing parts of the web site it most likely is because your cookie setting on your computer is too high and you will need to lower your computer's setting. If you wish to re-enable your cookies after your order is complete, you may of course do so. If you are part of an organization that gives you limited control of these settings, please consult with your IT department.
Questions or Concerns
If you have additional questions or concerns feel free to email Winsor Learning, Inc. at firstname.lastname@example.com and address your email to the web coordinator.
If you are currently in a checkout process, simply close this window.
Last Updated: 7-13-09


text:
Fireworks Could Be Legal For The Fourth In Pueblo
Wednesday, June 18, 2014
(Pueblo, CO) -- People in Pueblo may be able to enjoy fireworks for the Fourth of July. Fire officials told the City Council last night there aren't any bans under consideration in the area. The "Pueblo Chieftain" reports a final recommendation won't come until after the Forest Service weighs in on the issue. Fireworks may be allowed due to good moisture levels.


text:
Capital Saratoga Studio Vacation Rentals(1)
1 Result
Didn't find what you're looking for?
View all 306 Capital Saratoga Vacation Rentals or all 11785 New York Vacation Rentals
Recent Capital Saratoga Reviews
Perfect place for a one-person Saratoga getaway!
I found this one-person place in Saratoga which I was in town for some Phish shows at SPAC. Although it lacks a kitchen (although it has mini-fridge and microwave), it was otherwise a perfect place for one who wants to be close, not in the downtown madness, or spending their weekend traveling back and forth between venue and hotels. It was affordable, clean, comfortable, and I hope to be back. Although it is walkable, I drove. And the homeowner was both lovely and accommodating.