The Revivalists Release New Music Video And Announce Summer Central Park Show

first_imgThe Revivalists had a big day today. SummerStage NYC announced this morning that The Revivalists will be playing Central Park with White Denim later in the year on August 10th. You can get tickets for the show, which will benefit the City Parks Foundation here when they go on sale on Friday at noon EST. Coupled with this announcement, the band released a new music video for “Wish I Knew You,” which you can watch below.last_img

Learn More →

Why city blocks work

first_imgConventional wisdom says that smaller city blocks are better for pedestrians. Research on urban form has traditionally suggested that smaller city blocks are better for foot traffic, and prominent urbanists have advocated them as key promoters of pedestrian access.  Urban planner Leon Krier pointed to the enhanced diversity and complexity of activity generated by smaller city blocks, while the late activist Jane Jacobs noted increased interactions and encounters among pedestrians on smaller grids. But the relationship between block size and walkability appears to be more complex and variable than previously thought. In some cases, researchers now say, larger city blocks may actually be better for pedestrians and communities. Andres Sevtsuk, assistant professor of urban planning at the Harvard Graduate School of Design and director of the City Form Lab, and co-researchers Raul Kalvo and Onur Ekmekci recently reached this conclusion in research published in the journal Urban Morphology. They analyzed a number of well-known cities for their current and potential walkability. They found that while Portland, Ore., could see walkability increase with larger blocks, it turns out that New York City’s street plan, laid out in 1811, remains near ideal. Sevtsuk talked with the Gazette about how city plans shape the pedestrian experience, and where this research could go in the future.  GAZETTE: How do urban planners define walkability, and what about walkability and city blocks do you study in your research?SEVTSUK: Walkability is a complicated term. It’s like sustainability. It’s an umbrella term, and there’s a lot going on underneath it. But generally speaking, researchers agree that there are at least two critical ingredients to any environment being walkable. First, an environment has to offer destinations to walk to. Second, walking paths have to be comfortable and safe. In the urban design and planning professions, there is a widely shared belief that for walkability, smaller blocks are always better. This assumption is so common that many transportation studies, too, use urban block size as a predictor for walking activity. We wanted to question that, and find out if that really is the case, and what’s at play here. There are surprisingly few studies about why particular dimensions have been chosen, historically, for different urban grids. If we look around the world, they come in enormous varieties.GAZETTE: The idea that smaller blocks increase, or enhance, walkability, accessibility — to me, this seems intuitive. What features of smaller blocks have fueled this assumption?SEVTSUK: There’s a couple of things at play. First, if you look at individual walks through a city from one person’s point of view, then smaller blocks always help shorten the walk. If you go from point A to point B through an urban grid, and the blocks are short, you can zigzag right through.But what’s good for individuals is not necessarily good for the community. Part of what we look at in our recent paper is collective access for everyone, not just individual walks. That’s where the conventional wisdom goes astray. The smaller your blocks, the more total perimeter you usually have. This perimeter could be activated through retail and commercial facades, and the more of that you have, the more animated or interesting an area tends to be. But if you take that to an extreme and have many tiny blocks, you start spending more time crossing streets instead of actually walking in front of stores. That’s where smaller is no longer better. Another aspect, which has captivated urbanists historically, is that city centers always have smaller blocks than outside areas. Block sizes tend to get bigger and bigger as we move from the city center out. That’s largely because the city center usually has the highest densities and highest land values, so circulation has to be really effective to handle that density. GAZETTE: You just noted a fairly important distinction: individual benefit versus collective benefit.SEVTSUK: Right, and I think that’s exactly where a lot of urban designers get it wrong. Jane Jacobs is right in saying that I could have a shorter walk in Manhattan if its blocks were half as long. If I were going from one particular metro stop to a particular restaurant, with blocks half as long as they are now, chances are my one walk to that restaurant would be shorter. But if our goal is to maximize access to all destinations in the area, then smaller blocks would produce more frequent street crossings, and we start sacrificing some of the useful destination frontage to not-so-useful street crossings. That’s what starts bringing down the collective usefulness of small blocks.What’s really interesting about block sizes is that they have a nonlinear effect on pedestrian accessibility. It’s not that larger blocks are better, or smaller blocks are better. The ideal blocks size for maximizing pedestrian accessibility varies according to the parcel and street dimensions that are used. With the large parcels used in the Adelaide grid in Australia, for example, the grid would be more walkable if it its blocks were half as long as they are today. Portland, Ore., on the other hand, was laid out with relatively small parcels. We discovered that Portland’s grid would have been more pedestrian-accessible had its planners made blocks more than twice as long as they are today. But after a certain size threshold, if your block gets longer, then we start, collectively, not getting access to as many destinations within a 10-minute walk as we could, at the peak. When a block gets shorter below the same peak, then we start crossing too many streets. There is a kind of critical block-size threshold below which we start spending too much time crossing streets.The four samples within the graphic depict urban grids with optimal block lengths that would maximize pedestrian accessibility. Graphic courtesy of Andres Sevtsuk/GSDGAZETTE: What cities in the United States and around the world do you and other planners consider particularly walkable?SEVTSUK: It’s interesting that the feeling of what is walkable, or what people think is walkable, depends not only on the ground layout of those cities but also on the uses and buildings that have come to occupy the ground layout. We have to keep both things in mind when we talk about experiences of grids. In the best of cases, the ground layout has created preconditions for a good activity mix and good building forms to occupy it. Manhattan is probably one of the most walkable environments in the whole world because the sheer amount of destinations that are accessible to anyone in a five-minute walk is just phenomenally high. Even if you ignore the vertical dimension of Manhattan, the horizontal density of the grid from the get-go was planned such that you just get access to so many more parcels within the same 10-minute walk than you do anywhere else in the world.Other city grids around the country are relatively small and offer decent, walkable block sizes. Portland, Ore., is very walkable; parts of Washington, D.C., are very walkable. Minneapolis, Minn.; Savannah, Ga. But in some cases, the walkability contribution does not necessarily come only from the ground layout, or the grid. It can come from conscious planning of pedestrian-oriented destinations or public transit that serves the urban core. We see very crowded and heavily walked streets in places that are not necessarily, from the perspective of the grid, set out in ideal dimensions. But I think the confluence of walkability benefits arrives when both the ground layout and the built form harmoniously produce an environment that’s both horizontally and vertically accessible, in terms of its programming. Manhattan happens to have all of these factors.GAZETTE: The Manhattan block length, which was laid out in 1811, has turned out to be almost optimal for pedestrian accessibility today. Given the drastic social, cultural, economic, and other changes that have taken place since the early 1800s, what aspects of walkability have been stable and constant enough to permit a plan that was made in 1811 to remain equally favorable today?SEVTSUK: Whenever grids have been historically established to start a new settlement or to plan an expansion to a settlement, there is this critical question at the outset: What timeframe shall we dimension this grid for? Shall we dimension it for our needs right now? That usually means that we need to build larger blocks, because at the very first phase of development, you don’t have high densities, and thus the number of people who can pay for the infrastructure, the tax base, is lower. But what Manhattan did is plan a very generous grid that could handle extreme densities 100 years later. It laid out an extremely fine-grained grid meant for much higher densities than the first phases of development that occupied that grid. Manhattan took a gamble to the future and envisioned a grid that was optimistic in terms of city growth from the get-go. It handled that gamble fairly well, because the grid grew gradually from the densest parts out. It didn’t get occupied all the way into Harlem immediately. It gradually expanded, and the density was following the grid.If you see some of the historic photos of the New York commissioners’ grid, it initially had one-story cottages on these parcels. Now we have 100-story buildings on similar parcels. Fairly soon after the grid was laid out, multistory buildings started appearing, making the infrastructure investment worth the while. But in other cases, in Australia for example, you have urban grids that, for very new settlements and low densities of inhabitation, consist of very large blocks. Economically, that makes sense at the outset. What happens over time with those blocks is that they start getting subdivided as the city densifies. New cross streets need to be cut in to make the grid more accessible, generating smaller blocks over time. Manhattan never had to really do that.GAZETTE: Globally, are there cultural patterns here, with certain cultures historically favoring certain block dimensions?SEVTSUK: Indeed, I think there are cultural, and I might even add technological determinants that have historically guided the choice of block sizes. If you go all the way back to monastic societies, you will find that there have been blocks that were more determined by religious and celestial influences. In more recent history, a lot of block sizes have been determined by the car. If we look at L.A., we see a gridiron environment with not just one large grid, but lots of different, smaller grids. This is dimensioned for the efficiency of the car, so that you don’t have to stop at red lights every half a minute, and you have a certain efficiency that you can drive to the next big arterial road. What we argue in the paper is that the times are turning again. City planners are interested in walkability rather than drivability. If we are wanting to make urban blocks more walkable, then we would not do the kinds of superblocks that L.A. was based on anymore.There has been a lot of energy and enthusiasm for more walkable environments in the last decade in American planning. Europe has never really lost interest in the pedestrian environment. Traditional European city centers have always been relatively walkable. It has to do partially with the fact that there has been a demographic shift in America in the last decade, with the rise of the millennial generation and statistically more people being interested in moving back to city centers. Along with that interest to move to the city center comes a collective interest toward more walkable environments.The average American does not walk that much — but if you look at people inside shopping malls, they park their car, then they spend two hours walking in a shopping mall without noticing that they’re actually walking. This is a very stimulating walk because you’re constantly passing stores and other attractions. People do walk if the environment is conducive to it. As planners, we try to get that same level of stimulation to happen on the streets. We want people to come outdoors and engage with public spaces. You could have a destination a mile away and the walk could be very comfortable, very nice granite paving with nice landscaping along the way. But if there is nothing else along the way to stimulate us, our probability of taking that walk starts dropping. The interest aspect, or the stimulation aspect, of the walks is very important.GAZETTE: With bicycling becoming increasingly popular in cities, does the planning field have an entirely new set of considerations to consider in terms of access?SEVTSUK: Today, the most valued cities and the best-serving cities will maximize accessibility on a multitude of transportation options. We can’t make everybody walk [laughs].One extreme is Venice: no cars, entirely walkable. You can’t really bike in most of Venice. Even though many of us enjoy going to Venice on a vacation and staying there and walking around, it’s really contriving in terms of other modes of access. Having a city that provides high-quality public transit, that provides a certain level of vehicular access, that has high-quality and safe bike routes, as well as a favorable pedestrian environment, is, I think, what we all would like to see. But what historically has been a huge problem is that some of these infrastructure systems, like vehicular systems, have dominated overwhelmingly, at the cost of the other systems. We have arterial roads and highways in many American cities, and because of them it’s really hard to walk through those cities. The challenge for the 21st-century cities will be to come up with novel and innovative ways in terms of superimposing and managing these different systems at the same time. So that even in a neighborhood that has good vehicular access, pedestrian systems are able to penetrate through that vehicular system and different destinations are connected most readily.GAZETTE: How would you go about testing these theories on the ground, with actual people?SEVTSUK: Most cities collect traffic data, but we don’t do that for pedestrians. What’s pretty exciting today in the type of research that I do is that technology is making the leap. Image-recognition software that can read activity from a simple camera feed and categorize objects that pass by as pedestrians, bicycles, cars, and so forth is becoming readily available. Also, several of the gadgets that we now carry around, like smartphones and watches, have built-in accelerometers that can detect how much we move or walk. This produces very large data sets that could help researchers understand how people’s walking behavior varies across large territories.This interview was edited for clarity and length.SaveSaveSaveSavelast_img read more

Learn More →

People everywhere are on the move

first_img With help from Hutchins Center, Schlesinger Library acquires papers of scholar-activist Angela Davis Related Davis was guest speaker at a screening of “Asmarina,” an event co-sponsored by the DACA Seminar. The seminar has organized events highlighting immigrant issues such as the future of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), an Obama-era executive action that shields young immigrants from deportation. President Trump has vowed to terminate the program, and this past weekend intensified his attacks, calling it “dead.”The film documents the struggles and joys of the Eritrean and Ethiopian communities in Italy. It was directed by Medhin Paolos, who was born in Milan to Eritrean parents and is now a research scholar in the Department of Romance Languages and Literatures.,“I wanted to fill in the blanks in the history we learn in schools, but I also want to bring the stories of the Eritrean and Ethiopian communities to life,” said Paolos, in a conversation with Davis after the screening. “Their stories are part of Italy’s history.” It’s a story familiar to immigrants in the U.S. and all over the world, said Lorgia García Peña, Roy G. Clouse Associate Professor of Romance Languages and Literatures and of History and Literature. Davis said the movie might help people connect the U.S. immigration debate to what’s happening in other parts of the world.“We have come to a historical moment when human aspirations exceed the possibilities of the nation-state,” said Davis. “We see this in the closing of the U.S. border, and the criminalization and demonization of immigrants, and in the insistence of defining citizenship not in a way that emphasizes their relationship to community and to democracy, but rather only as a function of papers and documents.”Other sponsors of the screening were the Department of Romance Languages and Literatures, the Harvard Art Museums, the Inequality Initiative (Social Science Dean’s Office), the Charles Warren Center for Studies in American History, the Hutchins Center for African and African American Research, and the Schlesinger Library. Famed political activist and scholar Angela Davis took the stage at the Harvard Art Museums’ Menschel Hall on Thursday to share her views about immigrants’ rights. And she didn’t hold back. “I believe that the major civil rights issue of the 21st century is the issue of immigrant rights,” said Davis, distinguished professor emerita at the University of California, Santa Cruz. “Not only in Europe or the United States, but everywhere — from South America to Africa and Australia.”But the struggle for immigrants’ rights has to be seen in a larger context of global migration, added Davis, a phenomenon that is bound to continue as vast groups of people flee war and destitution at home for better opportunities elsewhere.“We tend to see the struggles, but we often fail to see the larger context in which migration takes place, and the persistence of colonial frameworks during this post-colonial era,” said Davis, whose papers were recently acquired by the Schlesinger Library. “It’s important to recognize this as we engage in acts of opposition and activism.” A radical archive arrives at Harvardlast_img read more

Learn More →

Water survey

first_imgMore people value water quality over water quantity, according to a recent survey conducted by University of Georgia researchers. And, they trust local water information sources over federal ones.The study, “Water Issues in Georgia: A Survey of Public Perceptions and Attitudes about Water,” was part of a national water effort funded by the United States Department of Agriculture. The goal of the larger project is to collect views on water issues from people around the country. So far, the survey has been conducted in 35 states.The survey is “allowing us to compare states and see where we stand among states, to see our differences and similarities,” said Jason Evans, an environmental sustainability analyst with the UGA Carl Vinson Institute of Government.The results of the Georgia survey were slightly surprising, said UGA Cooperative Extension engineer Mark Risse. “In general, it came out in the survey that people really place an importance on clean water,” he said. “Anything that had ‘clean’ in it ranked very high.”Of the respondents, 94 percent ranked clean drinking water as very important. Following clean drinking water was clean rivers and lakes, at 76 percent, and clean groundwater, at 75 percent.People were less concerned with interstate water issues, which have been debated heavily in recent years with Georgia’s bordering states. Survey respondents were also optimistic about how much water their communities will have in the future. And only 22 percent believed that an adequate water supply is currently a problem.“Around the state, most of the planning has been focused on water quantity instead of water quality,” Risse said. “Part of the state water effort is identifying shortages, but Georgians also want it to be clean.”Federal officials were surprised to see that those surveyed prefer to get their water information from local officials. “When we asked people who they trusted, local sources were trusted more than state, and state more than federal,” Risse said.The local finding is an important one, he said, because Cooperative Extension, through the UGA College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, “is all about giving information at the local level. This survey points out that this is exactly what we need to be doing, giving local education on water. We in Extension can do that.”The survey results are helping Risse and others in Extension plan water education programs. They’re now focusing more on drinking water in rural areas and septic tank upkeep.Many of the respondents were from metro areas of Georgia and therefore on city sewage, while others used septic tanks, Evans noted. Only 15 percent said they had their septic tanks cleaned every four years. When tanks aren’t cleaned regularly, solids can build up, which can clog and destroy septic tank drain fields. Fixing those problems can be expensive.As for well water, as long as it looks clean, most respondents said they weren’t worried.“A thing that I found a little strange and discouraging was that only 5 percent had tested their water quality,” Risse said. “The bulk of respondents were municipal, but some are on wells. People feel like they have good water, but they don’t know whether they do unless they’re testing it.”The 59-question survey was mailed to 1,998 randomly selected Georgia households. Of those, 26 percent (519 surveys) responded. Researchers were not surprised to find that people conserve more water when they have concrete reasons to do so. “There were people adopting low-flow faucets,” Evans said, “but when you dig in a little for more detail, things like irrigation scheduling, which was required by state law, was more widely adopted. When people are forced to, they will change their practices.”UGA recently implemented a new program called the 40 Gallon Challenge www.40gallonchallenge.org designed to encourage greater adoption of a variety of conservation practices. Most survey respondents viewed groundwater as higher quality than surface water. Groundwater quality received 24 percent on “good or excellent;” surface water got 10 percent; and ocean water came in last at 8 percent. Most respondents indicated they did not know.Evans and Risse found conflicting results when it came to water pollution sources. Respondents ranked industry problems the highest at 45 percent, followed by erosion from roads and/or construction, suburban development, stormwater and then agriculture. But, in a different part of the survey, 35 percent of respondents suspected or believed that fertilizers and pesticides from agricultural sources have some impact on their local water resources.“Georgia as a state has done a great job of managing our water resources,” Risse said. “We do have areas where water is not as clean as others. Areas where we have high population, we generally have lower quality. Ultimately, people and their practices contaminate water, and they’re really the biggest problem when it comes to impaired water.”For more information on water in Georgia, visit www.uga.edu/water.last_img read more

Learn More →

Blue Ribbon Commission issues draft nuclear waste report

first_imgADDITIONAL FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS â ¢ The current division of regulatory responsibilities for long-term repository performance between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is appropriate and should continue. The two agencies should develop new, site-independent safety standards in a formally coordinated joint process that actively engages and solicits input from all relevant constituencies. â ¢ The jurisdictions of safety and health agencies should be clarified and aligned. New siteindependent safety standards should be developed by the safety and health agencies responsible for protecting nuclear workers through a coordinated joint process that actively engages and solicits input from all relevant constituencies. Efforts to support uniform levels of safety and health in the nuclear industry should be undertaken with federal, industry, and joint labor’management leadership. Safety and health practices in the nuclear construction industry should provide a model for other activities in the nuclear industry. â ¢ The roles, responsibilities, and authorities of local, state, and tribal governments (with respect to facility siting and other aspects of nuclear waste disposal) must be an element of the negotiation between the federal government and the other affected units of government in establishing a disposal facility. All affected levels of government (i.e., local, state, tribal, etc.) must have, at aminimum, a meaningful consultative role in important decisions; additionally, states and tribesshould retain’or where appropriate, be delegated’direct authority over aspects of regulation,permitting, and operations where oversight below the federal level can be exercised effectively andin a way that is helpful in protecting the interests and gaining the confidence of affected communitiesand citizens. At the same time, local, state, and tribal governments have responsibilities to workproductively with the federal government to help advance the national interest.â ¢ Recognizing the substantial lead-times that may be required in opening one or more consolidatedstorage facilities, dispersed interim storage of substantial quantities of spent fuel at existing reactorsites can be expected to continue for some time. The Commission sees no unmanageable safety orsecurity risks associated with current methods of storage (dry or wet) at existing sites in the UnitedStates. However, to ensure that all near-term forms of storage meet high standards of safety andsecurity for the multi-decade-long time periods that they are likely to be in use, active researchshould continue on issues such as degradation phenomena, vulnerability to sabotage and terrorism,full-scale cask testing, and other matters.â ¢ The Commission recommends that the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) be tasked with carryingout an assessment of the lessons learned from Fukushima and their implications for conclusionsreached in earlier NAS studies on the safety and security of spent fuel and high-level waste storagearrangements.â ¢ Spent fuel currently being stored at shutdown reactor sites should be ‘first in line’ for transfer toconsolidated interim storage.â ¢ Although regulatory standards for different types of facilities will differ, the new organization shouldbe responsible for developing consolidated interim storage and permanent disposal facilities andshould apply the same principles of decision making to all aspects of the waste managementprogram (i.e., science-based, consent-based, transparent, phased, and adaptive).â ¢ Siting processes for future waste management facilities should include a flexible and substantialincentive program.â ¢ The current system of standards and regulations governing the transport of spent fuel and othernuclear materials has functioned well, and the safety record for past shipments of these types ofmaterials is excellent. However, planning and coordination for the transport of spent fuel andhigh-level waste is complex and should commence at the very start of a project to developconsolidated storage capacity.â ¢ The federal government should take steps to resolve ongoing litigation between the Department ofEnergy and the utilities regarding fuel acceptance as expeditiously as possible.â ¢ A well-designed federal RD&D program will enable the United States to retain a global leadershipposition in nuclear technology innovation. Public and private RD&D efforts should focus on twodistinct areas of opportunity:– Near-term improvements in the safety and performance of existing light-water reactortechnology, as currently deployed in the United States and elsewhere as part of a once-throughfuel cycle, and in the technologies available for storing and disposing of spent nuclear fuel andhigh-level waste.– Longer-term efforts to advance potential ‘game-changing’ nuclear technologies and systems thatcould achieve very large benefits across multiple evaluation criteria compared to currenttechnologies and systems.â ¢ A portion of federal nuclear energy RD&D resources should be directed to the NRC to accelerate aregulatory framework and supporting anticipatory research for novel components of advancednuclear energy systems. An increased degree of confidence that new systems can be successfullylicensed is important for lowering barriers to commercial investment.The Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future (BRC) was formed by theSecretary of Energy at the request of the President to conduct a comprehensive reviewof policies for managing the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle and recommend a newplan. It is co-chaired by Rep. Lee H. Hamilton and Gen. Brent Scowcroft. OtherCommissioners are Mr. Mark H. Ayers, the Hon. Vicky A. Bailey, Dr. Albert Carnesale,Sen. Pete Domenici, Ms. Susan Eisenhower, Sen. Chuck Hagel, Mr. Jonathan Lash, Dr.Allison M. Macfarlane, Dr. Richard A. Meserve, Dr. Ernest J. Moniz, Dr. Per Peterson, Mr.John Rowe, and Rep. Phil Sharp.The Commission and its subcommittees met more than two dozen times betweenMarch 2010 and July 2011 to hear testimony from experts and stakeholders, to visitnuclear waste management facilities in the United States and abroad, and to discuss theissues identified in its Charter. A wide variety of organizations, interest groups, andindividuals provided input to the Commission at these meetings and through thesubmission of written materials. Copies of all of these submissions, along with recordsand transcripts of past meetings, are available at the BRC website (www.brc.gov(link is external)).This draft report highlights the Commission’s findings and conclusions to date andarticulates a preliminary set of consensus recommendations for public review and input. Senator Patrick Leahy issued a statement regarding today’s release of the Draft Report On Nuclear Waste Management of The Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future. The report follows President Obama’s decision to give up on trying to site a single, high-level radioactive waste facility at Yucca Mountain, NV. The federal government is required to build and maintain such a site, but since guaranteeing to nuclear power companies for 50 years that such a site will be built, none has been. Yucca Mountain was the most recent proposal.REPORT July 29, 2011 Leahy’s statement: “In its draft of its final report today on nuclear waste management in the United States, the Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future has made constructive recommendations. If appropriately implemented, their conclusions can become an action plan to renew confidence in the nation’s nuclear waste management program. Forging the structure of a sensible and workable program is not an option, it is an imperative. We have gone too long without a plan, leaving waste piling up across the country and leaving many communities vulnerable to nuclear disasters. “The Commission’s recommendation for an independent organization to run a national waste management program could well be the right way to move a program forward. The federal government has collected about $25 billion so far from nuclear utilities and ratepayers to finance a consolidated waste management program, but the funds remain largely inaccessible. Meanwhile, it is costing taxpayers billions of dollars as the government pays damages to utilities for not honoring its contractual commitment to accept this waste. It is time for the federal government to live up to its obligation to use these set-aside funds for the consolidated storage of the nation’s nuclear waste. But choosing appropriate storage sites should not be unilateral decisions without local input. “Forcing communities to live long-term with nuclear waste has done nothing but generate frustration, animosity and distrust in today’s deeply flawed system. I could not agree more with the Commission’s recognition of the fact that host communities, states, and tribes need to have their interests adequately protected and their wellbeing improved if a storage facility is located nearby. The federal government, or a newly created waste management organization, needs to work closely with state, local, and tribal governments on siting interim and permanent waste facilities. This should be the cornerstone of a successful waste management program.”Where legislative action is necessary, Congress should work promptly and thoughtfully to fulfill its obligation to create an effective waste management program. Citizens in our communities, like those in Vermont who live near one of the nation’s 104 reactors, deserve a national plan to move forward with the safe consolidation and storage of nuclear waste.”From the draft report itself The Blue Ribbon Commission concludes that the United States needs a new, integrated strategy for managing the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle, including, in particular, a new approach to siting nuclear waste storage and disposal facilities.  The strategy recommended has seven key elements: 1. An approach to siting and developing nuclear waste management and disposal facilities in the United States that is adaptive, staged, consent-based, transparent, and standards- and science-based. 2. A new, single-purpose organization to develop and implement a focused, integrated program for the transportation, storage, and disposal of nuclear waste in the United States. 3. Assured access by the nuclear waste management program to the balance in the Nuclear Waste Fund and to the revenues generated by annual nuclear waste fee payments. 4. Prompt efforts to develop, as expeditiously as possible, one or more permanent deep geological facilities for the safe disposal of spent fuel and high-level nuclear waste. 5. Prompt efforts to develop, as expeditiously as possible, one or more consolidated interim storage facilities as part of an integrated, comprehensive plan for managing the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle. 6. Stable, long-term support for research, development, and demonstration (RD&D) on advanced reactor and fuel cycle technologies that have the potential to offer substantial benefits relative to currently available technologies and for related workforce needs and skills development. 7. International leadership to address global non-proliferation concerns and improve the safety and security of nuclear facilities and materials worldwide.  last_img read more

Learn More →

PacifiCorp to close Unit 4 at Arizona’s Cholla coal plant in 2020, 15 years early

first_imgPacifiCorp to close Unit 4 at Arizona’s Cholla coal plant in 2020, 15 years early FacebookTwitterLinkedInEmailPrint分享Associated Press:Oregon-based PacifiCorp has announced plans to close one of the three generators at the Cholla coal-fired power plant in northern Arizona by the end of this year.The remaining two units are scheduled to close in 2025.Cholla Unit 4 is a 395-megawatt coal-fired generator at the Cholla plant in the small town of Joseph City, Arizona.It is operated by Arizona Public Service, the state’s largest utility.PacifiCorp, headquartered in Portland, provides power in Oregon, Washington, California, Utah, Wyoming and Idaho.The company originally planned to retire Cholla Unit 4 in 2035. In a statement Monday, PacifiCorp officials said continued operation of Cholla Unit 4 was no longer economic for the company’s customers beyond 2020 compared to other resource alternatives.More: Power company to shut generator at Arizona coal-fired plant earlylast_img read more

Learn More →

Blunt Leftist Ex-Rebel Sworn In As Uruguay President

first_imgBy Dialogo March 03, 2010 Jose Mujica, who decades ago tried to topple the “bourgeois state” in an armed conflict and went to prison for it, was sworn in Monday as Uruguay’s new president. Mujica is locally beloved for being a straight-talker, and appears now able to win over business interests and even political foes. A mellower but certainly fiesty senior citizen, the 74-year-old grows flowers at his ranch and calls himself a pan-theist. Seen as colorful and charismatic compared to respected outgoing president Tabare Vazquez, political opponents have been enthusiastic about what Mujica says is his willingness for dialogue. Vazquez was the country’s first elected leftist leader, and Mujica is now its second. Mujica has become the second former Latin American rebel to be elected president recently, after Nicaragua’s Daniel Ortega, an ex-Sandinista. He has said he models himself on popular Brazilian president Lula, a left-leaning former labor activist who is known for a centrist approach. The new Uruguay president was co-founder of the radical leftist Tupamaros movement back in the 1960s. Mujica has said he will not move to the presidential palace, and will instead stay at his small ranch in Rincon del Cerro. He also is putting most of his salary into a fund for housing Uruguayans who have no home.last_img read more

Learn More →

Suffolk Police Officer Injured Responding to Shirley Robbery

first_imgSign up for our COVID-19 newsletter to stay up-to-date on the latest coronavirus news throughout New York A Suffolk County police officer was injured Sunday night when a driver crashed into his police cruiser as the officer was responding to a robbery call in Shirley, a police spokeswoman said.The officer was driving south on William Floyd Parkway around 10 p.m. when a female driver heading west on Victory Avenue T-boned the officer’s car, police said. The officer, who was not identified, was trapped inside the vehicle and had to be extricated, police said.The officer was airlifted to Stony Brook University Hospital with non-life-threatening injuries and was treated and released, police said. The female driver was taken to Brookhaven Memorial Hospital for treatment.The injured officer was responding to a call of three males robbing a Dunkin Donuts when the crash occurred, police said. One of the males displayed a handgun during the robbery but nobody was injured. It wasn’t immediately clear what was taken.Both the officer’s crash and the robbery are under investigation, police said.last_img read more

Learn More →

Cops: Store Owner, Son Arrested for Deceiving $1M Lottery Winner

first_imgSign up for our COVID-19 newsletter to stay up-to-date on the latest coronavirus news throughout New York A grocery store owner and his son were arrested Friday for shortchanging a $1 million lottery winner so they could claim the winnings for themselves, Nassau County police said.The father and son—57-year-old Nabil Jaghab and 26-year-old Karim Jaghab, both of East Meadow—were charged with grand larceny.Police said the 34-year-old “Unwrap the Cash” scratch off New York State Lottery ticket jackpot winner became suspicious of Karim Jaghab who allegedly paid the man $1,000 for the $1 million ticket when he went to redeem it Thursday.Authorities were called to the Peninsula Deli & Grocery one day later when the man returned and questioned the clerk about his winnings, police said. Kairm Jaghab allegedly told the victim, “Ok, I will pay you $10,000 as long as you don’t involve the police.” His father also told the man he was only a $10,000 winner.Police recovered the winning ticket during their investigation and arrested the store owner and his son for allegedly deceiving the victim so they could claim the winnings for themselves, police said.Authorities also said Karim and Nabil Jaghab failed to follow proper protocol when dealing with lottery winners. According to police, any prize worth more than $600 can only be redeemed at a New York State Lottery office.They will be arraigned Saturday at First District Court in Hempstead.last_img read more

Learn More →

Does the credit union difference matter to millennials?

first_imgAs of a week ago, I am proud to say that I am now a Credit Union Development Educator (CUDE) after attending Development Education (DE) Training – Fall 2015 best class ever! To keep it short, because I could go on for pages about this experience, it was truly life changing and invigorating. If you’ve heard about DE and have contemplated going – do it! It will change your life in more ways than one.That aside, one of the aspect of DE (spoiler alert) is working on a final case study. With a group of classmates, you work together to problem solve and propose solutions for credit unions to help alleviate or eliminate challenging situations in any given area.  My group (image on the right-all phenomenal credit union people!) was given the issue of millennial membership growth, something that is written about and discussed heavily in the credit union industry. According to Credit Union Times, the average age of a credit union member is 47, leaving plenty of room for improvement. Being a millennial myself, this cord strikes close to home.One of the questions we had to answer was – does the credit union difference matter to the younger generation? To answer this question, we had to first paint a picture of this generation and figure out what this generation value’s in life and in a financial partner. Here’s what we know about millennials:They want to belong to an ethical institution that is bigger than themselves, and they want to feel a sense of connection to their community. continue reading » 28SHARESShareShareSharePrintMailGooglePinterestDiggRedditStumbleuponDeliciousBufferTumblrlast_img read more

Learn More →