If Enough People Sign Up For A Free Zappa Tribute Webcast, Then It Will Happen

first_imgNext Wednesday, June 8th, a Frank Zappa-themed super group called Cosmik Playground will get together for a tribute show at St. Rocke in Hermosa Beach, CA. With Joel Cummins (Umphrey’s McGee), Kris Myers (Umphrey’s McGee), Arthur Barrow (Frank Zappa) and Marcus Rezak (Digital Tape Machine) holding it down, this show looks to be one of the most tight-knit tributes to the late Zappa around.For those of you who can’t make it to Hermosa for the webcast, there’s still hope. LiveList, a group that provides quality streaming services for various shows, has announced a promotion. If 500 people sign up to watch the webcast, then LiveList will provide a free stream! All you have to do is register here for the show, and of course you can browse their massive database of live streamed shows in the process.If you like what you see, then be sure to check out Cosmik Playground at the Putnam Den in Saratoga Springs, NY on July 3rd, as the band will be performing post-Phish at SPAC. While the July 3rd lineup will feature different players, it’s looking like a great time playing some of the best music around. For tickets and more details, you can head here.last_img read more

Read more

Pumping up sports spirits

first_imgIt would have been hard to miss Cheng Ho ’10 at Harvard’s athletic events. He’s usually the one mixed in with the crowds, displaying a boatload of Crimson spirit.A Harvard running back in the fall, a super fan in the winter, Ho has been revered by fans and coaches alike for his crowd-igniting antics as a fan as well as for his contributions as a member of the football team.As a fan, Ho was an integral part of a marketing campaign that boosted attendance at men’s basketball games this season. This culminated in an unprecedented sellout, bringing 2,195 to Lavietes Pavilion in a showdown match against Cornell. A month and a half later, Ho helped to draw a record 13,285 spectators to Harvard Stadium to watch the men’s lacrosse team take on Duke, just 437 fans shy of the NCAA regular-season record. Where the upbeat Ho went, the fans followed.And yet for Ho, Crimson football — and Harvard for that matter — almost never happened.Born and raised in Taiwan until age 13, Ho was thrust into maturity at a young age. His father lost an eight-year battle with liver cancer, and because his mother had her own struggle with schizophrenia, she was unable to care for Ho and his sister alone.Eventually, the siblings found themselves in the adoptive care of their aunt and uncle in Georgia, and that was the move that changed Ho’s life.“I’m very fortunate because I shouldn’t be alive right now, to be honest,” Ho said. “My sister and I probably would have been wandering the streets of Taipei if it wasn’t for my aunt and uncle.”Despite strong family support, initially the adjustment to a new culture was a challenge for Ho because of his limited knowledge of English.“English was very frustrating, because I consider myself pretty social. … The initial two months were the most frustrating,” he said. “I remember holding this electronic translator and trying to read just a paragraph of a science textbook, and it took me like two hours. … I would have to look up every single word.”Searching for something, anything, he could find to ease him through his transition, Ho found sports to be the perfect therapy.“Sports really opened up a new world for me, as far as being able to gain confidence and being able to socialize with people,” he said.Although Ho’s first love was basketball, living in the South meant being indoctrinated in football, something he didn’t comprehend when living in Taiwan. “The first time I watched a game of football was back in Taiwan. And I was just thinking: ‘Man, these people are crazy. This is such a stupid sport. I would never be able to, and want to, play this sport, ever.’ So I flipped the channel, and that was that,” Ho said.That changed, of course, because it wasn’t long before Ho’s athleticism on the basketball court prompted friends and coaches to persuade him to give the gridiron a shot.“Initially, it was really confusing because I didn’t know any of the rules, the shape of the football was really weird, and I couldn’t hold on to it,” he said. “I couldn’t really understand English, so I would run in the opposite direction. … It was complete chaos.”Eventually the chaos subsided, and over time, he began to excel on the field. Ho sent highlight tapes to several Division I football programs across the country, and teams began to show interest, including Harvard.After spending a postgraduate year in Connecticut to improve his English and prepare for the rigors of college, Ho was admitted to Harvard, and was ready to take Cambridge by storm in more ways than one.During his freshman year in 2006, he was behind future NFL running back Clifton Dawson ’07 on the depth chart, and then had a breakout season as a sophomore. In his first collegiate start at Holy Cross, he racked up 24 carries for 116 yards, including a 47-yard touchdown run. That season, Ho finished second in the Ivy League in rushing with 722 yards and eight touchdowns. His play helped the Crimson to an undefeated (7-0) Ivy League championship run and earned him a spot on the All Ivy second team.It was his best, and only full season at Harvard, as he spent the next two years hampered by injuries, and only played in eight games as an upperclassman. Although injuries shortened his career, Ho remained an integral part of the team, as well as a leader and an inspiration to the Harvard community.“He obviously took the long road to Harvard figuratively and literally. And because of that … he really has, as much as any kid we’ve had here, embraced everything that is Harvard, and has taken advantage of the education on the field, the education in the classroom, the education on campus,” said head football coach Tim Murphy.“He’ll be remembered for his love of life, his leadership by example, and his extreme pride in being a part of the Harvard community as a whole, not just a Harvard football player.”last_img read more

Read more

When students become entrepreneurs — for education

first_imgThe ropes proved to be a challenge. Last week, at the Harvard Innovation Lab (i-lab), Gerardo Ochoa wrapped short white ropes with loops at each end around the wrists of two people, handcuff style, and then looped the ropes so they crossed. The idea, said Songyu Zhu, was for the two people to work together to get themselves apart — an idea that involved twisting and turning and crouching to the ground, as the two people attempted (unsuccessfully) to step through the tangle.The challenge was an example of an exercise that Ochoa and Zhu plan on using with high school students as part of Prepped, a nonprofit they created this past semester in A132 with teammates Robert Lewis and Ed Magema, all students at the Harvard Graduate School of Education (HGSE). Taught by Professor Fernando Reimers, the educational entrepreneurship class allows students to identify a challenge in education and then design an innovative way to address it. Last week at the i-lab, the 24 student-created innovations were presented and then judged.Classes like these are critical, says Reimers. More than ever, students interested in making real change in education need to think outside the box, he says.“Educational improvement is typically understood as helping educational institutions become more effective at achieving their goals,” he says, “but the social and economic context is changing more rapidly than education institutions.” Read Full Storylast_img read more

Read more

B’way Grosses: School of Rock Enters Sophomore Year at the Top of the Class

first_imgAlex Brightman in ‘School of Rock'(Photo: Matthew Murphy) As School of Rock approaches its second year on Broadway—and prepares to welcome a new cast—Andrew Lloyd Webber’s latest rock musical has kept its numbers at the top of Mount Rock. After a September slump with kids returning to their classrooms, the musical has bounced back up to seven figures, having grossed over $1 million for the second consecutive week (where it sat comfortably during the summer months). We expect its advance to allow it to maintain this position for the coming months and into the holiday season. Lloyd Webber’s perennial favorites Cats and The Phantom of the Opera were not too far behind, with both less than $40,000 away from reaching the million-dollar mark. Meanwhile, five usual suspects held the top spots on the board this past week: Hamilton, The Lion King, Wicked, Aladdin and The Book of Mormon.Here’s a look at who was on top—and who was not—for the week ending October 16:FRONTRUNNERS (By Gross)1. Hamilton ($2,163,855)2. The Lion King ($1,962,745)3. Wicked ($1,653,148)4. Aladdin ($1,476,542)5. The Book of Mormon ($1,360,797)UNDERDOGS (By Gross)5. Falsettos ($457,577)*4. The Encounter ($331,497)3. The Cherry Orchard ($323,836)**2. Heisenberg ($297,088)***1. Black to the Future ($171,884)****FRONTRUNNERS (By Capacity)1. The Book of Mormon (102.46%)2. Hamilton (101.76%)3. The Front Page (100.97%)*4. Beautiful (100.65%)5. Black to the Future (100.00%)****UNDERDOGS (By Capacity)5. Kinky Boots (73.35%)4. Something Rotten! (72.50%)3. The Encounter (68.29%)2. On Your Feet! (67.96%)1. Fiddler on the Roof (59.06%)* Number based on eight preview performances** Number based on seven preview performances and one regular performance*** Number based on three preview performances and five regular performances****Number based on one regular performanceSource: The Broadway League View Commentslast_img read more

Read more

Sheep solution

first_imgSheep are a cost-effective and ideal solution to clear the privet, Adams explained, because “unlike cattle, sheep avoid the water’s edge, leaving vulnerable embankments undisturbed. Unlike goats, they do not attempt to strip larger, desirable trees.” Sarah Workman, a natural resources scientist with the College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences Office of Global Programs, is conducting a controlled experiment and demonstration project showing the effectiveness of this natural method for invasive removal within riparian zones, or vegetated corridors along rivers. The grazing project will be featured as part of the 12th Annual North American Agroforestry Conference to be hosted by UGA June 4-9. Jennif Chandler, the enlisted local shepherd, has used her sheep to help clear the David Henry Hardigree Wildlife Sanctuary in Oconee County, as well as in managing her land in Madison County. “One of the best things about using sheep in woodland and riparian areas is that they do not disturb, erode or compact the soil,” said Chandler. “Neither do they damage existing trees. Roots of invasive vegetation will slowly die while roots of trees and other desirable plants move in.” During the last weekend in February, as new privet growth began to emerge, 30 sheep were dispatched to an area between the Oconee River and East Campus. Two donkeys accompanied them to ward off coyotes and other predators and clear higher vegetation. The grounds department plans to pull the sheep after a few weeks of grazing but will return them in the summer to combat resprouting. “The grazing site is currently choked with privet,” said Dexter Adams, director of the UGA Grounds Department. “In addition to forming a nearly impenetrable physical and visual barrier, this invasive plant displaces more diverse and controlled native species.” The project also will enhance visibility and accessibility to the North Oconee River, which is separated by manmade barriers or steep embankments in most other areas of campus. Master planners in the University Architects Office envision a park-like setting in the heart of East Campus where students and faculty can engage with the river for research and recreation. The University of Georgia Grounds Department, in collaboration with several UGA colleges and departments interested in the potential of a novel invasive plant management strategy, has enlisted the help of a shepherd and her small sheep herd to improve access to a major waterway that runs through the UGA campus in Athens. “This project represents an innovative best practice for invasive plant removal and will further the vision laid out by campus planners for ecological restoration and pedestrian improvements on UGA’s East Campus,” said Kevin Kirsche, UGA’s director of sustainability. Given the regenerative nature of privet, it could take several years before the unwanted vegetation is removed.last_img read more

Read more

Series of accounting for captives online courses in May

first_img Designation students- this course fulfills an elective course requirement. To register, contact me at [email protected](link sends e-mail).          ACI recipients- this course fulfills continuing education credits.For further information regarding ICCIE’s ACI Designation Program and further course information please visit our website at www.iccie.org(link is external).        Kate Boucher, ACI      Michael Burdick, ACI            Melissa Hancock            Dan Kusaila Instructors: Kate Boucher, Michael Burdick, Melissa Hancock and Daniel Kusaila  Webconference Dates: May dates, to be posted soon Webconference Time: 2:30- 3:45 p.m. EDT This course is geared toward captive owners, board members and audit committee members, as well as others who are looking for a deeper understanding of the underlying financial reporting components of captive insurance companies. Participants will examine:The accounting standardsImportant internal controlsFinancial statement assertions associated with the significant accounts on the balance sheet and income statement of a captive insurance companyInsurance company income tax issues and FIN 48 View Full Course Description Cost of Course $900 Register Herecenter_img The International Center for Captive Insurance Education has announced a new series of accounting for captives online courses in May called “Accounting for Captives: Interpretation & Management Perspectives.” http://img.constantcontact.com/letters/images/1101093164665/cards_profes(link is external)…); background-color: rgb(118, 172, 169); border-top-color: rgb(211, 211, 211); border-right-color: rgb(211, 211, 211); border-bottom-color: rgb(211, 211, 211); border-left-color: rgb(211, 211, 211); border-top-width: 1px; border-right-width: 1px; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-left-width: 1px; border-top-style: dotted; border-right-style: dotted; border-bottom-style: dotted; border-left-style: dotted; “> Newest in ICCIE’s Series of Accounting for Captives Courses: “Accounting for Captives: Interpretation & Management Perspectives” Accounting for Captives: Interpretation and Management Perspectives New Online ICCIE Elective  6 CPE credits available If you have questions, e-mail me at [email protected](link sends e-mail) or call me at 802-651-9053.  International Center for Captive Insurance Education (ICCIE)last_img read more

Read more

Vermont’s unemployment rate drops again to 5.3 percent

first_imgVermont’s unemployment rate for November fell three-tenths of a point to 5.3 percent, as both the labor force and total employment grew over both the October levels and over November 2010. This is the lowest rate since April, before the first of two floods hit the state. It’s also the fewest number of unemployed since November 2008, just as the national recession was beginning.Vermont Labor Force StatisticsSeasonally Adjusted Table B.  States with statistically significant unemployment rate changesfrom October 2011 to November 2011, seasonally adjusted————————————————————————-                                |          Rate         |                                               |———–|———–| Over-the-month             State              |  October  |  November | rate change(p)                                |    2011   |  2011(p)  |               ————————————————————————-Alabama ……………………|     9.3   |     8.7   |      -0.6     Arkansas …………………..|     8.2   |     8.0   |       -.2     California …………………|    11.7   |    11.3   |       -.4     Connecticut ………………..|     8.7   |     8.4   |       -.3     Delaware …………………..|     7.9   |     7.6   |       -.3     District of Columbia ………..|    11.0   |    10.6   |       -.4     Florida ……………………|    10.4   |    10.0   |       -.4     Georgia ……………………|    10.2   |     9.9   |       -.3     Idaho ……………………..|     8.8   |     8.5   |       -.3     Iowa ………………………|     6.0   |     5.7   |       -.3                                     |           |           |               Kansas …………………….|     6.7   |     6.5   |       -.2     Maine ……………………..|     7.3   |     7.0   |       -.3     Maryland …………………..|     7.2   |     6.9   |       -.3     Massachusetts ………………|     7.3   |     7.0   |       -.3     Michigan …………………..|    10.6   |     9.8   |       -.8     Minnesota ………………….|     6.5   |     5.9   |       -.6     Missouri …………………..|     8.5   |     8.2   |       -.3     Montana ……………………|     7.6   |     7.1   |       -.5     North Carolina ……………..|    10.4   |    10.0   |       -.4     Ohio ………………………|     9.0   |     8.5   |       -.5                                     |           |           |               Oregon …………………….|     9.5   |     9.1   |       -.4     Pennsylvania ……………….|     8.1   |     7.9   |       -.2     South Carolina ……………..|    10.5   |     9.9   |       -.6     South Dakota ……………….|     4.5   |     4.3   |       -.2     Tennessee ………………….|     9.5   |     9.1   |       -.4     Texas ……………………..|     8.4   |     8.1   |       -.3     Utah ………………………|     7.0   |     6.4   |       -.6     Vermont ……………………|     5.6   |     5.3   |       -.3     Virginia …………………..|     6.4   |     6.2   |       -.2     Washington …………………|     9.1   |     8.7   |       -.4     Wisconsin ………………….|     7.7   |     7.3   |       -.4     ————————————————————————-   p = preliminary.  Table C.  States with statistically significant unemployment rate changesfrom November 2010 to November 2011, seasonally adjusted————————————————————————-                                |          Rate         |                                               |———–|———–| Over-the-year              State              |  November |  November | rate change(p)                                |    2010   |  2011(p)  |               ————————————————————————-California …………………|    12.5   |    11.3   |      -1.2     Colorado …………………..|     8.9   |     8.0   |       -.9     Delaware …………………..|     8.4   |     7.6   |       -.8     Florida ……………………|    11.9   |    10.0   |      -1.9     Idaho ……………………..|     9.6   |     8.5   |      -1.1     Massachusetts ………………|     8.3   |     7.0   |      -1.3     Michigan …………………..|    11.4   |     9.8   |      -1.6     Minnesota ………………….|     7.0   |     5.9   |      -1.1     Missouri …………………..|     9.6   |     8.2   |      -1.4     New Mexico …………………|     8.6   |     6.5   |      -2.1                                     |           |           |               Ohio ………………………|     9.6   |     8.5   |      -1.1     Oregon …………………….|    10.6   |     9.1   |      -1.5     Utah ………………………|     7.5   |     6.4   |      -1.1     West Virginia ………………|     9.6   |     7.9   |      -1.7     ————————————————————————-   p = preliminary.  Table D.  States with statistically significant employment changes fromOctober 2011 to November 2011, seasonally adjusted————————————————————————–                              |   October   |   November  | Over-the-month           State              |     2011    |     2011(p) |    change(p) ————————————————————————–Alaska……………………|     331,200 |     328,600 |      -2,600  Arkansas………………….|   1,170,600 |   1,177,700 |       7,100  Delaware………………….|     412,700 |     410,000 |      -2,700  Georgia…………………..|   3,797,600 |   3,810,600 |      13,000  Minnesota…………………|   2,673,100 |   2,659,400 |     -13,700  Montana…………………..|     434,800 |     432,200 |      -2,600  Nebraska………………….|     962,500 |     958,500 |      -4,000  New Hampshire……………..|     631,900 |     635,100 |       3,200  New York………………….|   8,634,400 |   8,663,900 |      29,500  South Carolina…………….|   1,822,800 |   1,839,400 |      16,600                                |             |             |              Tennessee…………………|   2,646,500 |   2,656,100 |       9,600  Washington………………..|   2,827,300 |   2,836,400 |       9,100  Wisconsin…………………|   2,754,800 |   2,740,200 |     -14,600  ————————————————————————–   p = preliminary.    Compared to a year ago, the rate is lower by five-tenths of a percentage point. The current comparable national rate is 8.6 percent which reflects a decrease of four-tenths of a percent from the previous month. Over the past three months, Vermont’s seasonally-adjusted statewide unemployment rate has declined by six-tenths of a percent. ‘This is obviously good news for Vermont as one measure of our economic health. This is the 3rd consecutive month reporting a decline in the unemployment rate’, said Labor Commissioner Annie Noonan. ‘We may, however, see an increase in unemployment claims during the upcoming winter months from seasonal layoffs. There has also been some delayed hiring in the ski industry due to the warm weather this season.’‘Vermont businesses in many industries are hiring, particularly in manufacturing, computer and web design, health care, engineering, retail, food services and hospitality. Vermonters who are unemployed or looking to change jobs should come into a Department of Labor regional office and work with our staff for employment assistance. We can connect job seekers to employment opportunities; provide information about training, internship and apprenticeship programs, and services for youth, low income adults, dislocated workers, mature workers, and Vermont veterans. In order to put this State on the best path to prosperity, we need to be able to match Vermonters to jobs in our state; and to do that we need Vermont businesses to list their job openings with the Department of Labor, and then be committed to hiring a well-qualified Vermonter for the job. Our goal at the Department of Labor is to find a job for every unemployed and under-employed Vermonter,’ said Noonan.State of Vermont OverviewThe Vermont seasonally adjusted unemployment rate decreased by three-tenths of a percent in November to 5.3 percent. The comparable rate over the same time period for the United States was 8.6 percent reflecting a decrease of four-tenths of a percent. The seasonally-adjusted Vermont data show the total Vermont labor force grew by 400. Total employment increased by 1,700 while total unemployment declined by 1,200. The over the month changes to the total employment and total unemployment were statistically significant. Aside from the four month span between March and June of 2011, this is the first time since November 2008 that Vermont total unemployment has been below 20,000.November unemployment rates for Vermont’s 17 labor market areas ranged from 3.4 percent in Hartford to 7.0 percent in Newport (note: local labor market area unemployment rates are not seasonally adjusted). For comparison, the November unadjusted unemployment rate for Vermont was 4.7 percent which reflects an increase of one-tenth of a percent from the October level and a decline of one percent from a year ago.Analysis of Job Changes by IndustryThe preliminary ‘not seasonally adjusted’ jobs numbers for November show a decrease of 2,300 jobs when compared to the revised October numbers. The October estimates did not change between preliminary and final estimation process. As detailed in the preliminary ‘not seasonally adjusted’ November data, the overall over the month change was concentrated in Total Private (down 2,300 jobs) as Government reported no over the month change. Leisure and Hospitality (-2,150 jobs) and Construction (-850 jobs) were the two private sectors with the largest decreases. The two largest gaining private sectors were Trade, Transportation and Utilities (400 jobs) and Education and Health Services (250 jobs). Local Government Education also showed a relatively large gain of 350 jobs from the prior month levels.The seasonally adjusted data for November reports a decrease of 600 jobs from the revised October data. This reported over the month change does not include the 400 job increase between the preliminary and the revised October estimates due to the inclusion of more data. A review of the seasonally adjusted November numbers reflects that Vermont’s Private Industries reported a decrease of 400 jobs while Total Government reported a decrease of 200 jobs. Construction was the sector of note, reporting a decline of 500 jobs. Professional & Business Services reported an increase of 200 jobs as did Other Services (+200 jobs). All other over the month changes to sector employment were consistent with seasonal trends and did not register greater than plus or minus 100 jobs in the seasonally adjusted series. Meanwhile, Regional and state unemployment rates across the United States were generally lower in November. Forty-threestates and the District of Columbia recorded unemployment rate decreases, threestates posted rate increases, and four states had no rate change, the U.S. Bureauof Labor Statistics reported today. Forty-five states registered unemployment ratedecreases from a year earlier, while five states and the District of Columbiaexperienced increases. The national jobless rate fell by 0.4 percentage pointbetween October and November to 8.6 percent, down from 9.8 percent in November 2010. In November, nonfarm payroll employment increased in 29 states and the District ofColumbia, decreased in 19 states, and was unchanged in 2 states. The largestover-the-month increases in employment occurred in New York (+29,500) and Texas(+20,800). The largest over-the-month decrease in employment occurred in Wisconsin(-14,600), followed by Minnesota (-13,700) and Colorado (-4,500). South Carolinaexperienced the largest over-the-month percentage increase in employment (+0.9percent), followed by Arkansas and Wyoming (+0.6 percent each). Alaska experiencedthe largest over-the-month percentage decline in employment (-0.8 percent), followedby Delaware (-0.7 percent) and Montana (-0.6 percent). Over the year, nonfarmemployment increased in 45 states and the District of Columbia and decreased in5 states. The largest over-the-year percentage increase occurred in North Dakota(+4.5 percent), followed by Wyoming (+3.0 percent) and Oklahoma (+2.8 percent).The largest over-the-year percentage decreases in employment occurred in Delaware(-0.8 percent) and Georgia (-0.5 percent).Regional Unemployment (Seasonally Adjusted)The West continued to record the highest regional unemployment rate in November, 9.9percent, while the Northeast again reported the lowest rate, 7.9 percent. Three regionsexperienced statistically significant over-the-month unemployment rate changes: theWest (-0.4 percentage point) and the Midwest and South (-0.3 point each). Over the year,all four regions registered significant rate decreases, the largest of which was in theWest (-1.1 percentage points). (See table 1.)Among the nine geographic divisions, the Pacific continued to report the highest joblessrate, 10.6 percent in November. The West North Central again registered the lowest rate,6.3 percent. Eight divisions experienced statistically significant unemployment ratechanges over the month, all decreases. The largest of these occurred in the East SouthCentral and South Atlantic (-0.4 percentage point each). Five divisions recorded significantrate declines from a year earlier, the largest of which were in the Mountain and Pacific(-1.1 percentage points each). No division reported an unemployment rate increase fromNovember 2010.State Unemployment (Seasonally Adjusted)Nevada continued to record the highest unemployment rate among the states, 13.0 percentin November. California posted the next highest rate, 11.3 percent. North Dakota againregistered the lowest jobless rate, 3.4 percent, followed by Nebraska, 4.1 percent, andSouth Dakota, 4.3 percent. In total, 25 states reported jobless rates significantly lowerthan the U.S. figure of 8.6 percent, 10 states and the District of Columbia had measurablyhigher rates, and 15 states had rates that were not appreciably different from that of thenation. (See tables A and 3.)Thirty states and the District of Columbia experienced statistically significant over-the-monthunemployment rate declines in November. The largest of these was in Michigan (-0.8 percentagepoint), followed by Alabama, Minnesota, South Carolina, and Utah (-0.6 point each). Theremaining 20 states recorded jobless rates that were not measurably different from those of amonth earlier, though some had changes that were at least as large numerically as the significantchanges. (See table B.)New Mexico registered the largest jobless rate decrease from November 2010 (-2.1 percentage points).Thirteen additional states reported smaller but also statistically significant decreases over the year.The remaining 36 states and the District of Columbia recorded unemployment rates that were notappreciably different from those of a year earlier. (See table C.)Nonfarm Payroll Employment (Seasonally Adjusted)In November, 13 states recorded statistically significant changes in employment, 7 of which wereincreases. The largest over-the-month statistically significant job gains occurred in New York(+29,500), South Carolina (+16,600), Georgia (+13,000), and Tennessee (+9,600). The largestover-the-month statistically significant declines in employment occurred in Wisconsin (-14,600)and Minnesota (-13,700). (See tables D and 5.)Over the year, 25 states experienced statistically significant changes in employment, all of whichwere increases. The largest increase occurred in California (+233,100), followed by Texas (+226,000) and Florida (+98,100). (See table E.)____________The Metropolitan Area Employment and Unemployment news release for November 2011 is scheduled to bereleased on Wednesday, January 4, 2012, at 10:00 a.m. (EST). The Regional and State Employment andUnemployment news release for December 2011 is scheduled to be released on Tuesday, January 24, 2012,at 10:00 a.m. (EST). Table A.  States with unemployment rates significantly differ-ent from that of the U.S., November 2011, seasonally adjusted————————————————————–                State                |          Rate(p)      ————————————————————–United States (1) ……………….|           8.6                                              |                       Alaska …………………………|           7.3         California ……………………..|          11.3         Delaware ……………………….|           7.6         District of Columbia …………….|          10.6         Florida ………………………..|          10.0         Georgia ………………………..|           9.9         Hawaii …………………………|           6.5         Illinois ……………………….|          10.0         Iowa …………………………..|           5.7         Kansas …………………………|           6.5                                              |                       Louisiana ………………………|           6.9         Maine ………………………….|           7.0         Maryland ……………………….|           6.9         Massachusetts …………………..|           7.0         Michigan ……………………….|           9.8         Minnesota ………………………|           5.9         Mississippi …………………….|          10.5         Montana ………………………..|           7.1         Nebraska ……………………….|           4.1         Nevada …………………………|          13.0                                              |                       New Hampshire …………………..|           5.2         New Mexico ……………………..|           6.5         New York ……………………….|           8.0         North Carolina ………………….|          10.0         North Dakota ……………………|           3.4         Oklahoma ……………………….|           6.1         Pennsylvania ……………………|           7.9         Rhode Island ……………………|          10.5         South Carolina ………………….|           9.9         South Dakota ……………………|           4.3                                              |                       Texas ………………………….|           8.1         Utah …………………………..|           6.4         Vermont ………………………..|           5.3         Virginia ……………………….|           6.2         Wisconsin ………………………|           7.3         Wyoming ………………………..|           5.8         ————————————————————–   1 Data are not preliminary.   p = preliminary.   November  2011 October  2011 November  2010 October  2011 November  2010  Change to         November 2011 from    Total Labor Force363,200362,800360,8004002,400  Employment344,100342,400339,8001,7004,300  Unemployment19,10020,30021,000-1,200-1,900  Rate5.3%5.6%5.8%-0.3-0.5 Table E.  States with statistically significant employment changes fromNovember 2010 to November 2011, seasonally adjusted————————————————————————–                              |   November  |   November  | Over-the-year           State              |     2010    |     2011(p) |    change(p) ————————————————————————–Arizona…………………..|   2,374,400 |   2,419,800 |      45,400  California………………..|  13,937,000 |  14,170,100 |     233,100  Colorado………………….|   2,222,100 |   2,247,600 |      25,500  Florida…………………..|   7,183,600 |   7,281,700 |      98,100  Illinois………………….|   5,629,000 |   5,686,100 |      57,100  Kentucky………………….|   1,781,500 |   1,802,100 |      20,600  Louisiana…………………|   1,890,100 |   1,936,800 |      46,700  Massachusetts……………..|   3,189,800 |   3,245,400 |      55,600  Michigan………………….|   3,870,800 |   3,930,200 |      59,400  Nebraska………………….|     943,800 |     958,500 |      14,700                                |             |             |              New Hampshire……………..|     625,800 |     635,100 |       9,300  New Jersey………………..|   3,851,900 |   3,881,000 |      29,100  New York………………….|   8,580,300 |   8,663,900 |      83,600  North Dakota………………|     381,900 |     399,200 |      17,300  Ohio……………………..|   5,037,900 |   5,113,500 |      75,600  Oklahoma………………….|   1,526,600 |   1,569,600 |      43,000  Oregon……………………|   1,604,500 |   1,623,400 |      18,900  Pennsylvania………………|   5,644,800 |   5,695,800 |      51,000  South Carolina…………….|   1,806,700 |   1,839,400 |      32,700  Tennessee…………………|   2,623,700 |   2,656,100 |      32,400                                |             |             |              Texas…………………….|  10,403,300 |  10,629,300 |     226,000  Utah……………………..|   1,184,500 |   1,214,700 |      30,200  Vermont…………………..|     298,500 |     303,300 |       4,800  Washington………………..|   2,776,700 |   2,836,400 |      59,700  Wyoming…………………..|     282,900 |     291,300 |       8,400  ————————————————————————–p = preliminary.US Bureau of Labor Statistics, Vermont Department of Labor, 12.20.2011last_img read more

Read more

Wood Mackenzie: Renewables, green hydrogen to limit growth of global LNG market

first_img FacebookTwitterLinkedInEmailPrint分享Natural Gas Intelligence:More than 75% of new liquefied natural gas (LNG) global supply could be at risk because of quickly expanding renewable energy resources, according to an analysis by Wood Mackenzie.In a forecast issued [last] Wednesday, the consultancy said its scenario for worldwide gas demand is going to come under pressure as power sector investments increase in renewables and energy storage. More gas consumption also would be sapped by efficiency improvements and as new technologies are adopted beyond the power sector. The scenario laid out by the Wood Mackenzie team is tied to greenhouse gas reduction goals set by the United Nations, which have been adopted by most developed nations. The basic goal is to keep global temperatures from rising above 2 degrees C to reduce the impacts from climate change.Among the alternative options, look for hydrogen to play a bigger role in the world’s energy mix, which also would pressure gas demand. Green hydrogen could become a “gamechanger in the long term, emerging as a key competitor to gas consumption toward the end of 2040 and achieving a 10% share in the total primary energy demand by 2050,” researchers said.“With weaker global gas demand, the space for new developments will be limited,” said Wood Mackenzie principal analyst Kateryna Filippenko. “This is a significant challenge” as companies consider final investment decisions (FID) for potential projects.Using the 2 degree scenario, “only about 145 billion cubic meters/annum (bcma) of additional LNG supply is needed in 2040 compared to 450 bcma in our base-case outlook,” Filippenko said. “And if we consider imminent FID for Qatar North Field East expansion, the space for new projects shrinks to 104 bcma, down 77% from our base case.” [Carolyn Davis]More: Global LNG prospects seen dwindling as renewables, efficiencies expand Wood Mackenzie: Renewables, green hydrogen to limit growth of global LNG marketlast_img read more

Read more

Lloyd Neck Estate House Currently Top Billing on Long Island

first_imgSign up for our COVID-19 newsletter to stay up-to-date on the latest coronavirus news throughout New York Selling for a stunning $55.5 million, Sassafras, an estate house on 47 acres in Lloyd Neck, is currently the priciest and largest private property for sale on Long Island’s leading real estate website, Multiple Listing Service.The property may sound familiar since it’s been reported that Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie rented the home for their family in 2009 when Jolie was filming the movie Salt on LI, according to the New York Post. But sources say those reports are unsubstantiated. Nevertheless, for those interested in a peek, the 20,000-square-foot dwelling that is secluded and sheltered in a private cove offers all the amenities fit for a king and his queen.The luxury home that can truly take one’s breath away boasts 25 rooms, eight fireplaces, a grand entry with 48-foot cathedral ceilings leading to a great hall, study, and formal dining room complemented by a wrap-around outdoor terrace with commanding water views and a Baronial-style living room with an ornate fireplace.Eight bedrooms, eight full and four half baths, an enclosed dining veranda and a master suite offering 120-degree views of Long Island Sound and Connecticut occupy the massive compound. If that wasn’t enough house, on the grounds sit two guest houses, approximately 5,500 square feet each, a log cabin “tea house” with sea views, a tennis court and a beach cabana with full kitchen and deck.Lush gardens, an exercise path and private beach are all part of the landscape, including a pier that can accommodate three jet skis, an 80-foot motor yacht, 24-foot sailboat, 30-foot speedboat and two maintenance/chase boats with three additional moorings. For outdoor entertaining a 30-foot by 60-foot pool is there to enjoy, along with a gazebo with bar, bathroom, outdoor shower and hot tub. The exterior also has an eight-car detached garage.For the finale, the basement holds a barbershop, a spa, hot tub, cold plunge and even a fallout shelter. Looks like they thought of everything.According to property records, the estate is owned by the limited liability company Laval Properties Corporation N.V., registered to a Manhattan address. Listing records show that the property last changed hands in 2002 for $765,500. In 2006, the property was up for sale for $60 million and was taken off the market two years later, accordingto Mansion Global, a digital destination platform connecting the world’s affluent real estate buyers with prestige properties across the globe. The annual property taxes to date are $293,765.Sassafras, located in the Cold Spring Harbor School District, is a few miles away from downtown Huntington, the Cold Spring Harbor Long Island Rail Road station, Target Rock National Wildlife Refuge, Huntington Harbor Nature Conservancy, Lloyd Neck Beach and the 2,000-acre Caumsett State Park.Another selling point is the 50-mile drive to and from Manhattan or 15-minute helicopter ride accessible by two helipads located on the estate.The listing agents are Phillip C. Laffey, Principal Broker/Owner Laffey Real Estate [email protected] mobile 516-359-1489, and Sami Hassoumi, Licensed Associate Real Estate Broker Brown Harris Stevens [email protected] 212-906-9267.last_img read more

Read more