Lennon are female champions again … Beat XLCR on penalties to retain title

first_img Lennon had the better play for most of the game with Gordon, Shanesia Smith, Judian Jones and Christine Graham putting the Xavier Gilbert-coached team on the defensive for most of the regular time, but lacked the quality to get the job done. Excelsior were not totally outplayed and did have their moments. They relied heavily on the presence of Tarania Clarke and her deliveries from set-pieces. For losing coach Gilbert, his team exceeded his expectations this season. “The girls were every disappointed they didn’t win, but I am proud of them, we did not expect to reach this far. We did not execute well (penalties) but their legs were tired and I don’t know if played a part,” he said. Lennon High School defeated Excelsior High 2-0 on penalty kicks in the ISSA Schoolgirl football final at Prison Oval yesterday, to win their seventh championship and their second in succession. After battling to a 0-0 regulation and extra-time scoreline, Renae Gordon and captain Petakaye Green converted from the spot for the Clarendon-based school, while Excelsior missed all their four kicks. Lennon had to go through extra-time and penalties in the semi-finals against Denham Town on Tuesday and although they had to do it all over again coach Sherlon Lennon, said they were well prepared. “We got most of the chances in regular time, but we didn’t finish off the game and we had to go to penalties but we were well prepared for it, and winning the title and bringing it back to the community is a wonderful feeling,” he said. BETTER PLAYlast_img read more

Fernandes proud after QPR respond to critics with battling display

first_imgQPR chairman Tony Fernandes took to Twitter after the defeat against Liverpool, insisting he was proud of his team’s display.Widely criticised for their previous showings, Rangers were much more competitive and were unlucky to lose 3-2.“Its a cruel game but we all wanted QPR to play and they played. I’m very proud of everyone in the club,” Fernandes declared.“Despite all the negativity we came out and played with pride. We deserved a point but that’s football. Let hope we build on this.”Despite all the negativity we came out and played with pride . we deserved a point but that’s football. Let hope we build on this.— Tony Fernandes (@tonyfernandes) October 19, 2014Vice-chairman Amit Bhatia tweeted: “Feel like I’ve been punched in the stomach. A cruel end to a brilliant game. So proud of our performance today. Chin up and take positives.“Vargas, Fer, Onouha, Charlie, Isla, Caluker, Dunne, Henry, Sandro, Yun, Traore, all played with guts and heart. And that’s heartening to see.”And chief executive Philip Beard added: “Amazing performance. If we can play like that with that level of support we will be fine.”The performance of goalkeeper Alex McCarthy was a definite plus for Rangers.Thanks for all your messages, so happy to make my @QPRFC debut… Shame about the result as we were the better team! Onto the next game now!— Alex McCarthy (@Alex_Macca23) October 19, 2014He looked assured on his debut and produced a fine save in the second half but was powerless to prevent Liverpool’s three goals.McCarthy wrote: “Thanks for all your messages, so happy to make my @QPRFC debut… Shame about the result as we were the better team! Onto the next game now!”R’s midfielder Joey Barton, who missed the game through injury, tweeted: “Deserved at least a point if not 3. Effort from all was great. Got work to do on training ground but lots of positives from the performance.“We have just got to stick together and show the kind of guts, skill and determination we showed today. No blame culture. It helps nobody.“You win together and you lose together. Pick ourselves up and get ready for another war against Villa A week Monday.”Follow West London Sport on TwitterFind us on Facebooklast_img read more

Science Intrudes Into Morality

first_imgThe Pope recently declared that we need to save humanity from self-destructive behaviors, like homosexuality.  Can science intrude on questions of human behavior and morals?  New Scientist thought so; a blog entry today says the Pope “misuses science to attack homosexuality.”    One would think that moral behavior would lie outside the field for a scientific news source, but online news editor Rowan Hooper went on, mocking the Pope’s claim that the church has a role in saving “human ecology” like scientists have a role in protecting tropical forests.  Hooper called this “a bizarre misunderstanding of science” and “religious values imposed on” a scientific subject.    Justifying homosexuality with appeals to genetics, neuroscience and Darwinism, Hooper claimed that “genetic evidence” suggests homosexuality is “hard-wired before birth,” and that “The idea that homosexuality evolves by natural selection is also well supported.”  Pointing to homosexual behavior in animals, too, he said, “This all strongly suggests that it is an outdated metaphysics to insist on ‘the nature of the human person as man and woman’.”  Most people come in man or woman forms.  His complaint only makes sense if he is endorsing transgender identities and transsexual behavior as well as homosexuality – the whole gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender package.  Would he draw the line at any other sexual behaviors, like pedophilia, necrophilia or polygamy?  Apparently not.  If natural selection is capable of producing one non-reproductive behavior, why not others?  The word “moral” appears nowhere in his blog entry.    Hooper called on ecologists and other scientists to complain about the Pope “misusing science to dress up outdated ideas,” which obviously includes the Pope’s reference to creation and a Creator.  It’s not an “outdated metaphysics,” the Pope had said, “if the church speaks to the nature of the human person as man and woman, and asks that this order of creation be respected.”What business of it is New Scientist to lecture the Pope on morals?  You would think that is the province of a religious leader.  Who is he to talk about outdated metaphysics?  You would think that is the province of philosophy and theology.  The Pope was speaking to his own Curia, for crying out loud.  Do you understand what is going on?  You thought science dealt with ammeters and microscopes and polymerase chain reactions.  Wrong; New Scientist is not like Old Scientist.  It asserts its tyranny over all realms of thought.    Thousands of good scientists quietly continue to do great research in their respective fields, but the scientific institutions of our day have dirty hands.  They have become part and parcel of the radical leftist, atheist, social-progressive empire that controls the courts, media, education, labor unions, the UN, journalism, Hollywood and science.    Did you notice that Hooper justified a sexual behavior that religious (and rational) people have for millennia described as perverted with an appeal to natural selection?  Did you notice he said behavior is genetically hard-wired?  Well, then, out goes any argument based on reason.  You see, Mr. Hooper, natural selection made you say these things.  You can’t help it.  You thought you were preaching a polemic on rationality and values, but you are a captive of impersonal forces from your animal past.  If we wanted to really tease Mr. Hooper, we could say that to be consistent, he would have to agree that natural selection produced the Pope as a mechanism to save the human population from self-destruction.  It’s pointless to fight it, then.    Consistency is apparently not a value to this dogmatic Darwinist.  Without consistency, though, one can prove anything; therefore one proves nothing.  Don’t talk to us about truth, then, Mr. Hooper, you have nothing to say.  Your reason has left you.  You want to model your life on the animals?  Fine; go out into the field, and live like a king of beasts.  We hope it doesn’t take seven years for you to stand up like a Man and get your reason back.    This commentary is not endorsing the Pope; it is simply insisting that science stop looking silly by refuting itself.  The essence of being human is using your reason and conscience to guide your physical passions.  That reason is the basis for science; it presupposes intelligence, which presupposes judgment, which presupposes absolute truth and morals.  Science cannot breathe without these things.    2008 may become known as The Year Science Died.  Or was that 1859?(Visited 9 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0last_img read more

Shameless Bias in Presidential Science

first_imgWhy do “science” news sites go after the Republican candidate only? This is another arena Donald Trump could show is rigged.This entry is about news bias; it does not take sides. Readers are free to make their own conclusions about the better candidate. But a fair result can only come from getting facts straight and reporting them with balance. Since these news sites quoted below often defend Darwinian evolution, it’s instructive to see if their bias on that subject shares commonalities with bias in the political arena.All the Lies That Are Fit to PrintMedical Xpress often regurgitates articles from The Conversation, a blog-like site written by scientists. Although this piece is marked “Opinion” fair enough, it’s based entirely on a false premise. “Opinion: Trump is wrong, I treat combat veterans with PTSD, and they are not weak,” opines Joan Cook, bouncing off a widely-misreported comment from Trump a few weeks ago. In response to a question from a veteran who began a ministry to serve other veterans suffering mental health problems with PTSD, Trump agreed that they need help. The problem is, Trump never said that veterans with PTSD are weak! (see Fox News YouTube clip of original statement by Trump, and remarks by General Boykin, who was present). The one who asked the question explained on FRC’s Washington Watch (Oct 8) that he didn’t take it that way at all, nor did anyone else in the room. Some reporter took the statement out of context, ran with it in the newspapers, and it became an urban myth. Neither Joan Cook nor the website editors decided to fact-check the statement. Yet the headline shouts in bold type that “Trump is wrong”. Did Cook make any effort to fault Hillary Clinton for her numerous lies that are coming to light from her own emails that she failed to submit to Congress under subpoena, and additional lies she stated under oath? Not a peep.What Hits the Fan Is Not Evenly DistributedThe country can’t stop talking about lewd comments Trump made 11 years ago, and no one – not even his supporters – are defending the statements (certainly not CEH, either). But there’s plenty of mud to sling on both sides of the debate stage. Trump denies actually doing anything to women, although everyone is weighing evidence of claims by seven women who suddenly came out of the woodwork since the second debate to accuse him of groping or inappropriately touching them over a decade ago. Why they never brought these accusations up till now—just a few weeks before the election—seems highly suspicious, a bit like the Anita Hill tactic. Trump is actively trying to present evidence to refute their claims, such as friendly quotations from those same women in recent years (never mentioning abuse), or from eyewitnesses present when the abuse supposedly occurred. At the time of this writing, it’s hard to say who’s right.But for years at least four women have accused former President Bill Clinton, the Democrat candidate’s husband, of worse sexual assaults, and one of them claims she was raped. That’s all in addition to the well-documented Monica Lewinsky affair that led to Clinton’s impeachment in 1998. Fox News anchor Sean Hannity has interviewed all four women. They all described how candidate Hillary Clinton attacked them and threatened them, never defending them. There’s also the tape of Hillary laughing at a rapist she defended in her early law practice; she got him off the hook after he had raped a 12-year-old girl. Then there’s the hypocrisy that Hillary Clinton has stated firmly in speeches that rape victims have a right to be believed. Her website contained that statement, Hannity claims, but it inexplicably disappeared the following day. Hannity says it was because it put her in a vulnerable position: someone could ask, “Then why didn’t you believe Juanita Broaddrick?”So what do you expect from Live Science? Fair reporting of these facts? No; twice no! In one piece, Sara Miller defends the long-delayed accusations of the women who are now accusing Trump, but says absolutely nothing about the Clintons. Same in another Live Science entry by Sara Miller, “Five Misconceptions About Sexual Assault.” Again, there’s no mention of the Clintons. The entire piece is aimed at discrediting Donald Trump, this time spreading the blame at one of the Republican senators who came to his defense. Her article gives an appearance of scientific credibility by quoting “Yolanda Moses, a professor of anthropology at the University of California, Riverside” as an authority. This is the half-truth fallacy, a dangerous form of propaganda, accompanied by card stacking and misuse of authority.Sexual assault, even verbal abuse, is never excusable. Reporters, however, owe it to their readers to give a balanced presentation of the facts. It’s all the more egregious when the bias is on an alleged “science” news site. By common admission, the mainstream media are overtly biased against Republicans and conservatives. Why are science news sites even talking about politics, much less taking sides? Where is the “science”? The last thing a science site should try to become is a propaganda arm for a political party.They’re not even trying to be unbiased any more. This is blatant political advocacy. The media, including the science media, are in the tank for Hillary. They are openly pushing to prevent Trump from winning—whatever it takes—even when it means selling their souls. So this is scientific? (Visited 45 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0last_img read more

DNA detective work could end poaching

first_imgThe work by a team of scientists could mark the beginning of the end of elephant poaching. Using DNA from dung and seized ivory, they were able to locate and isolate poaching hotspots in Africa to two main regions. Researchers in a lab have made headway in isolating areas where elephant poaching is rife. (Image: South African Tourism) Priya Pitamber The solution to poaching elephants for their tusks could be found in a scientific laboratory, if the latest research findings concerning the issue are anything to go by.A study, published in the journal Science, showed that using DNA and data mapping of elephant ivory compared to dung, might help countries and international organisations to fight poaching.The findings were co-authored by University of Washington biologist Samuel Wasser, his colleagues, and an Interpol wildlife crime expert. It revealed how DNA mapping was able to trace and isolate the location of elephant poaching.The dataWhen ivory seized between 2006 and 2014 was compared to elephant dung, the DNA data revealed that it originated from two major areas. “Wasser and his team analysed the genotypes of 1 350 samples of dung collected from 29 countries in Africa,” wrote National Geographic.“They plotted what they found – the unique genetic signatures of different elephant populations – on regional maps, creating a dung reference base against which they could compare the DNA signatures from the ivory.”News website Mashable noted there were two main areas of origination of forest elephant ivory and savannah elephant ivory.“More than 85% of forest elephant ivory was traced to Central Africa’s Tridom, a protected ecosystem across north-eastern Gabon, north-western Republic of Congo and south-eastern Cameroon, as well as the adjacent reserve in south-western Central African Republic.“The ivory belonging to the savannah elephant showed that more than 85% of the ivory was traced to East Africa, primarily within the Selous Game Reserve in south-eastern Tanzania and the Niassa Game Reserve in northern Mozambique.”Watch an interview with Wasser:Impact of the dataWasser’s wish was that the results of the research would significantly boost anti-poaching initiatives.“I hope the results will lead to a major crackdown of poaching in the two primary hotspots we identified,” Wasser told Mashable, “and [prompt] better strategies to deal with the corruption that allowed them to become hotspots.”In the journal article, the authors opined that if there were as few hotspots as the data showed, it could help international law enforcement focus efforts on those key areas to help reduce poaching.“Any tool that allows us to pinpoint poaching spots is critical to better deploy enforcement and put more boots on the ground,” Jan Vertefeuille, senior director at World Wildlife Fund’s crime division, told Mashable. “[This study] confirms what our teams on-ground have been seeing.”How it startedTo obtain samples for his ivory and dung research, Wasser began by creating a network of park rangers and conservation workers. He asked them to send him samples of elephant dung tagged by their location, indicated by latitude and longitude.Wasser and his team analysed the samples they received and plotted what they found on regional maps, creating a dung reference list to compare the DNA from the ivory.According to National Geographic, the team got shipments of seized ivory from Kenya, the Philippines, Taiwan, Thailand, Malaysia, Hong Kong, Singapore, Malawi, Sri Lanka, Togo, and Uganda.Countries that had signed the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (Cites) agreed that if there were seizures larger than a ton, samples should be sent for assessment to Wasser’s lab.South Africa was one of the first countries to join Cites after it came into effect in 1975 and since then the country had been active in the work needed. In fact, the next Cites meeting of the Conference of the Parties (CoP17) will take place from 24 September to 5 October 2016 in Johannesburg, South Africa. The World Wildlife Fund says poachers kill elephants only for only one body part – their tusks. Click on the image for a larger view. (Image: World Wildlife Fund)Wasser’s workOn his profile as a contributor to The Conversation, the academic and news website, Wasser wrote that his laboratory aimed to use the best possible science to help direct wildlife conservation and management policies around the world.“Currently, we are collaborating with the Interpol Working Group on Wildlife Crime to investigate the origins of all major ivory seizures in the recent past.”Wasser has a Masters of Science in zoology and a PhD in animal behaviour. It is hoped his efforts in the lab will make poaching a thing of the past. The goal was to solve elephant poaching within the next two years – though preferably by next year, Wasser said.last_img read more

The Carbon Footprint of Minisplits

first_imgHow much CO2 is emitted by my state’s electric utilities?Since the EPA has promulgated its Clean Power Plan (CPP), Americans can, at least for the time being, make reasonable estimates of just how much carbon is emitted by their electricity use.But first, some basics on the carbon emissions of different fuels. The U.S. Department of Energy’s Energy Information Agency has tabulated a short list showing the pounds of CO2 per million BTU (MMBTU) of source fuel. The most common space heating fuels on that list are:    Heating oil:         161.3 lbs/MMBTU    Propane:             139.0 lbs/MMBTU    Natural gas:         117.0 lbs/MMBTU It’s often presumed that heating with high-efficiency heat pumps has a lower carbon footprint than heating with other equipment (and often it is). But how do you really know?Do the math! Heating appliance efficiency mattersTo reach a reasonable first estimate for an apples-to-apples comparison, it’s important to factor in the heating equipment’s efficiency. Better class oil-burning appliances have an AFUE (efficiency rating) of about 87%, while better-than-average appliances the burn propane or natural gas burners are in the 95%+ range. So, after adjusting for appliance efficiency, the carbon emission numbers look like this:    Heating oil:     161.3 / 0.87 = 185.4 lbs/MMBTU    Propane:         139.0 / 0.95 = 146.3 lbs/MMBTU    Natural gas:     117.0 / 0.95 = 123.2 lbs/MMBTU Dana Dorsett has lifelong interests in energy policy, building science, and home efficiency. He is currently an electrical engineer in Massachusetts. To determine the heat pump numbers for comparison purposes, start with the heat pump’s HSPF specification (an efficiency rating). An HSPF number can be converted into an efficiency percentage by dividing the HSPF by 3.412 (the number of Btu in one watt-hour of electricity). For example, a heat pump with an HSPF of 8.0 has an efficiency of 235%.If a heat pump is properly sized for the heating load, the HSPF rating will be reasonably close the actual in-use efficiency for Climate Zone 4. In Zone 3 and warmer zones, the in-use efficiency is likely to be a bit higher than the HSPF, while in Zone 5 and colder zones, the in-use efficiency is likely to be a bit lower than the HSPF. You can assume a 0.85 multiplier to determine the degradation of a heat pump’s efficiency for each climate zone colder than Zone 4. (There are exceptions to this rule of thumb, but a close examination of the topic is beyond the scope of this article.)For example, if the HSPF of a heat pump is 11.3, the “adjusted” efficiency of the heat pump when installed in Climate Zone 6 (two zones colder than Zone 4) will be something on the order of:    0.85 x 0.85 x HSPF 11.3 = 8.2The units of HSPF is BTUs per watt-hour, but electricity is metered and billed in increments of kilowatt-hours (=1000 watt-hours). So an HSPF of 8.2 means on seasonal average basis it delivers 8,200 BTU per kWh of electricity used. From there we can calculate the kWh input per MMBTU delivered:    1,000,000 / 8200 = 122 kWh/MMBTU Tracking Our Company’s Carbon FootprintStrength in NumbersReducing Our Carbon Footprint — Part OneReducing Our Carbon Footprint — Part TwoHow Deep Is Your Footprint?Life-Cycle Assessment is a Tool, Not a Silver BulletEnergy Return on InvestmentAll About Embodied Energy Q&A: Experience with carbon footprint modeling for construction? RELATED ARTICLES Heat pumps make sense in “low carb” statesRight away it’s obvious that in this state with a lower-carbon grid, the heat pump is “lower carb,” far and away, than any appliance burning one of the common fossil heating fuels. And the heat pump will be even lower carbon going forward.Clearly, in states like Wyoming with a high-carbon grid, even when the grid reaches the 2030 CPP target, a heat pump won’t beat a condensing appliance that burns natural gas. But that’s not to say it’s impossible to get there in other ways. In deregulated electricity states like Michigan, it’s possible to buy grid-supplied electricity from greener sources. A 100% renewables package purchased through brokers or a direct power-purchase agreement would provide electricity for the heat pump that is essentially zero-carbon power.Wyoming has very favorable wind resources — resources that could be developed if there is a retail market for 100% wind power — but state regulators in Wyoming promote vertically integrated utilities, and haven’t yet decoupled electricity markets. Wyoming also lacks net-metering for behind-the-meter (residential) PV, so until the regulatory framework changes, most heat pumps in Wyoming are going to have a higher carbon footprint than condensing gas, even if the state meets its CPP targets.This isn’t intended to be a precise model of what’s going on; it’s just a reasonable rough cut. There are many factors that can raise or lower a heating system’s efficiency, and often local utilities within a state have much higher or lower carbon output per MWh than the statewide averages. But as a quick estimate, it’s way better than a guess. Utilities in each state have carbon targetsMeanwhile, the CPP has defined carbon targets for every state (except Vermont, which was exempted due to a dearth of fossil fired power generation in that state). The carbon targets include the 2012 estimated carbon intensity per megawatt hour (Mwh = 1,000 kWh), as well as a projection for 2020 in a “business as usual” without the CPP, and a target for 2030 with the CPP.So, let’s compare how well a heat pump fares in say, the Climate Zone 6 portion of Michigan, a state with a grid with medium carbon intensity:    2020 Projections (without CPP):     1,588 lbs/MWh = 1.588 lbs/kWwh   1.588 lbs/kWh x 122 kWh/MMBTU = 193.7 lbs/MMBTUUnder these circumstances, the heat pump is has a slightly higher carbon footprint than an 87% efficient heating appliance that burns #2 heating oil. (The oil-burning appliance has a carbon intensity of 185.4 lbs/MMBTU of heating.) When you include the electricity used by the air handlers, pumps, and burners, it’s probably a wash. But the carbon footprint of the heat pump is considerably higher than the 123.2 lbs/MMBTU of a gas-burning appliance.But assuming that Michigan hits its 2030 target under the CPP (and remember, by 2030, a heat pump installed in 2016 would have reached more than half its anticipated lifecycle), the heat pump will be at 1,169 lbs/MWh, or 1.169 lbs/kWh.At that point the heat pump will have a carbon footprint of:    1.169lbs / kWh x 122 kWh / MMBTU = 142.6 lbs/MMBTUThat’s considerably better than an appliance burning #2 oil, and right in there with the 146.3lbs/MMBTU for condensing propane, but still well above that of natural gas.But for comparison, take a look at parts of Maine that are in Climate Zone 6:    2020 Projections (without CPP):     736 lbs/MWh = 0.736 lbs/kWh    0.736 lbs/kWh x 122 kWh/MMBTU = 89.8 lbs/MMBTUlast_img read more

Cyclone alert for Bay of Bengal

first_imgN-E monsoon may be delayed After the Arabian Sea, it is now the turn of the Bay of Bengal to host a tropical cyclone, with a prevailing ‘well-marked’ low-pressure area already intensifying into a depression. The depression lies about 720 km South-South-East of Gopalpur (Odisha), 690 km South-East of Kalingapatinam (Andhra Pradesh) this noon. Cyclone on TuesdayIndia Met Department (IMD) expects it to intensify further into a deep depression by tomorrow and into a cyclonic storm by Wednesday. It is very likely to move northwestwards towards Odisha and adjoining North Andhra Pradesh coasts by the weekend. Due to the presence of intense systems in the Arabian Sea and now in the Bay, the wind regime has changed over the Bay of Bengal and the adjoining sea areas. This has prompted a review of North-East monsoon forecast made earlier, and the IMD has clarified that the systems would temporarily interfere with the pattern of rainfall over the South Peninsula. This is because both these systems are active at the extremities of the respective ocean basins and have away-going flows feeding into them farther away from the coasts. While cyclone Luban in the Arabian Sea has easterlies to southeasterlies feeding into it, the wind regime in the Bay, where the North-East monsoon should establish first, the winds are south-westerlies. Conditions reassessedThe IMD has therefore assessed that the rainfall activity may decrease over the South Peninsula from Tuesday onwards. Hence, the commencement of the North-East monsoon, which was originally forecast to take place today, is not likely to take place. Development of favourable conditions will be closely monitored and developments assessed after the life cycle of the cyclonic system over the Bay of Bengal, the IMD said. Meanwhile, cyclone Luban now lies over West-Central and adjoining South-West Arabian Sea, 990 km East-Southeast of Salalah (Oman), 880 km east of Socotra Island (Yemen) and 1,300 km West-North-West of Minicoy (Lakshadweep Islands). It is forecast to intensify further into a severe cyclonic storm by tomorrow and move west-northwestwards towards South Oman and Yemen coasts during the next five days. SHARE SHARE EMAIL October 08, 2018 The depression lies about 720 km South-South-East of Gopalpur (Odisha), 690 km South-East of Kalingapatinam (Andhra Pradesh) as of October 8, 2018, noon. COMMENT SHARE Monsooncenter_img COMMENTS weather 0 cyclones Published onlast_img read more

Close polluting units in 3 months NGT

first_imgNEW DELHI: The National Green Tribunal (NGT) has directed the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) to shut down polluting industries in “critically polluted” and “severely polluted” areas across the country within three months, saying that economic development cannot take place at the cost of public health. The directions, put up on the NGT website on Tuesday, were issued on July 10 on the basis of a study carried out jointly by the CPCB and state pollution control boards in 2009-10. A bench headed by the NGT chairperson, Justice Adarsh Kumar Goel, issued the directions asking the CPCB, in coordination with the state pollution control boards, to assess the quantum of compensation to be recovered from polluting units for the last five years taking into account the cost of restoration and cost of damage to public health and the environment, and the deterrence element. “The scale of deterrence may be related to the period and the frequency of defaults. Such other factors as may be found relevant may also be taken into account. No further industrial activities or expansion be allowed with regard to ‘red’ and ‘orange’ category units till the said areas are brought within the prescribed parameters or till the carrying capacity of the area is assessed and new units or expansion is found viable having regard to the carrying capacity of the area and environmental norms,” the bench said. It directed the CPCB to compile a report with regard to polluted industrial areas based on water and air pollution norms and notify such information in the public domain within three months. The tribunal also directed the ministry of environment and forests to take steps for the enforcement of an action plan to improve the situation. According to the study, 88 industrial clusters were notified as “polluted industrial areas (PIAs)” and were ranked as “critically polluted area (CPA)”, “severely polluted area (SPA)” and “other polluted areas (OPAs)”, depending upon Comprehensive Environmental Pollution Index (CEPI) scores. Where the CEPI score crosses 70 the areas are designated as CPAs; areas where the index is between 60 and 70 are designated as SPAs and those below 60 as OPAs. The NGT has, however, clarified that white and green or non-polluting industries which were not causing any pollution would not be affected by the order. “It is made clear that white and green or non-polluting industries which are not causing any pollution will not be affected by this order except that the parameters thereof may be monitored with a view to see that under the garb of a label of white/green or otherwise, polluting activity is not continued,” said the bench. Download The Times of India News App for Latest India News.XStart your day smart with stories curated specially for youlast_img read more

Does not compute Older Macs dont support latest Windows 10

first_img Tech News 15h ago Malicious apps infect 25 million Android devices with ‘Agent Smith’ malware If you have an Apple Mac from 2012 or earlier, beware: The latest version of Windows 10 might not be compatible with your machine. AdChoices广告Microsoft has blocked the installation of version 1903 of Windows 10 on certain machines because of compatibility problems with the drivers.As well as pre-2012 Macs, the software is also incompatible with some newer models with older Boot Camp software, which enables the installation of Windows alongside Apple’s MacOS operating system.Newer Mac users who receive the error message “MAC HAL Driver – machaldriver.sys” during installation should first try updating Boot Camp.The chances are good that this will enable you to install version 1903. If not, Windows is promising a fix by the end of July. – dpa Tech News 2h ago Route planning without data tracking: Qwant Maps Tech News 15h ago Huawei rolls out its Freelace Bluetooth earphones at RM369 Microsoft has run into problems with its latest version of Windows 10 on some Apple Mac machines. — dpacenter_img {{category}} {{time}} {{title}} Related News Related Newslast_img read more