When You Are Selecting Solar Panels Three Items Of Information Will Aid

When You Are Selecting Solar Panels Three Items Of Information Will Aid

by

fwbgonnxn

The expansion of solar power possibilities has been in the works for a number of years. When first brought into play, solar power was produced to generate steam in order to power machinery. The alteration of sunlight, or the \”photovoltaic effect\”, was first uncovered by Henri Becquerel, hence solar energy was conceived. In 1893, founded on Becquerel\’s information, Charles Fritts designed the original solar cell, which was made by adding a film of gold over sheets of selenium.

This plain creation launched the career of our solar panels. Solar panels are energized by pure sustainable sun power and converted into electricity, which will then be used by the consumer. An individual solar panel will not likely have enough storage to facilitate an overabundance of usage. So, in this case, several panels should be utilized. If you are planning to buy solar panels, you can get the best value of your money as well get the most benefit from it if you know the following tips:

Solar Panel Maintenance: Whether the solar panels are for heat or electricity, they must be used in a safe and efficient manner. Any solar panel setup that is well designed will be relatively easy to use, and also durable. Most of the concern about your system should be with the pump, since only it has moving parts. The modern solar panels manufactured are now stronger than the earlier versions, as these are made of tough long-lasting materials, which can mean the solar panel itself requires less maintenance to continue functioning. The solar panel system is remarkably safe, since nothing can be broken with the exception of the glass covering.

YouTube Preview Image

Strength and Warranty: As with anything of value, the strength and durability of a solar panel is of primary importance. Let\’s say that you purchased a solar panel system with a 10 year warranty; once it is fully hooked up to the grid, it should be able to generate enough electricity to sell back to the electric company to pay for itself in about 10 years. Installing solar panels that are sub par or inferior to what should be hooked up to the grid would be a waste of money, something that you would notice during a critical system incident. As a general rule, premium solar panels have 25 year warranties. One important point to keep in mind about warranty, though, is that it is in effect only while the company is still under operation. Always look for companies that have a proven track record, and have been around for several years before spending your money. Due to the fact that most people cannot purchase factory direct solar panels, find a retailer that you trust. When choosing a retail company to do business with, make sure that the person that installs the solar panels has a direct relationship with the manufacturer to make it easier to replace them later on.

DIY Solar Panel: Contrary to what most people think, do-it-yourself or DIY solar panels are a fairly easy project. Actually, you only need to do some investigating into the construction of your own individual solar panel. The internet is a valuable source of information that can give you the information you need to walk you through the process of set up. Once you have your course of action on building solar panels, you will then find a retailer that will carry the necessary stuff for your project. Like any do-it-yourself ventures, DIY solar panels can be a fun, creative and money saving enterprise.

If you are concerned about our environment, you will absolutely love solar panels because they help the environment at the same time that they save you money. Through proper maintenance and care, your solar electric system will benefit you by providing electricity and saving you money.

These days lots of folks who choose to build up their own solar power panels prefer to perform it with a step by step guidebook that gives them all the stuff they require in order to do it the right way.

In case you also prefer to make your very own solar panels on your own, then have a look at the links below.

Do you want to figure out how to build your very own solar panels on your own?Take a look at the following web page on

Green DIY Energy

and find out how to build up your very own solar panel system in the simplest possible way.If you are searching for more eco-friendly methods to cut your power bill and also to save the environment at the same time then I will also recommend checking this

Magnawork

review.

Article Source:

ArticleRich.com

 

Five South Korean workers kidnapped from Nigerian natural gas facility

Thursday, June 8, 2006

Five South Korean workers have been kidnapped from a natural gas facility operated by Shell Petroleum Development Company in the Nigerian Delta.

A group called the Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta is claiming responsibility for the attack and kidnappings and says that one kidnapper and at least six Nigerian soldiers were killed on a Nigerian military boat, when gunmen entered the facility. The group’s main demand is the release of a jailed militia leader, Mujahid Dokubo-Asari.

“[The Korean workers] are in good health and have been returned to one of our bases. As long as the units holding these individuals do not come under attack, no harm will come to the prisoners. We do not kill those fortunate to be captured by our fighters,” said the group.

The group also says that they “plan more attacks” on facilities and oil rigs in the near future.

“In the next few weeks our attacks will increase with the destruction of several facilities of crucial importance to the oil industry,” said the group.

One of the kidnapped victims is identified as Park Chang-am.

“I want Dad to come back so we can go fishing,” said the son of Chang-am, Park Myong-il.

 This story has updates See Five kidnapped South Korean natural gas plant workers released, June 8, 2006 
 

News briefs:May 21, 2006

The time is 17:00 (UTC) on May 21st, 2006, and this is Audio Wikinews News Briefs.

Contents

  • 1 Headlines
    • 1.1 Violence escalates in Afghanistan
    • 1.2 Iran stands defiant on Uranium enrichment
    • 1.3 Militants target rally in Srinagar
    • 1.4 Professionals and students continue strike in New Dehli
    • 1.5 300 Vietnamese fishermen rescued after record China typhoon
    • 1.6 Pair extradited and charged over Granville, Sydney shootings
    • 1.7 Ray Nagin re-elected New Orleans mayor
    • 1.8 Snowy Hydro Scheme to go public
    • 1.9 Missing BC girl found safe
    • 1.10 ‘Naked Guy’ Andrew Martinez dies
    • 1.11 Finnish metal band win 51st Eurovision Song Contest
  • 2 Closing statements
 

Two nuclear submarines collide in the Atlantic Ocean

Wednesday, February 18, 2009

The Nuclear ballistic missile submarines Triomphant, from France, and HMS Vanguard, of the British Royal Navy, collided deep under the middle of the Atlantic Ocean in the middle of the night between February 3 and 4, despite both vessels being equipped with sonar. The collision caused damage to both vessels but it did not release any radioactive material, a Ministry of Defence (MOD) official confirmed Monday.

A Ministry of Defence spokesman said nuclear security had not been breached. “It is MOD policy not to comment on submarine operational matters, but we can confirm that the U.K.’s deterrent capability was unaffected at all times and there has been no compromise to nuclear safety. Triomphant had struck ‘a submerged object (probably a container)’ during a return from a patrol, damaging the sonar dome on the front of the submarine,” he said.

A French navy spokesman said that “the collision did not result in injuries among the crew and did not jeopardise nuclear security at any moment.” Lack of communication between France and other members of NATO over the location of their SLBM deterrents is believed to be another reason for the crash.

According to Daily Mail, the vessels collided 1,000ft underwater in the Bay of Biscay (Golfe de Gascogne; Golfo de Vizcaya and Mar Cantábrico), a gulf of the North Atlantic Ocean. It lies along the western coast of France from Brest south to the Spanish border, and the northern coast of Spain west to Punta de Estaca de Bares, and is named for the Spanish province of Biscay, with average depth of 5,723 feet (1,744 m) and maximum depth is 9,151 feet (2,789 m).

Each submarine is laden with missiles powerful enough for 1,248 Hiroshima bombings, The Independent said.

It is unlikely either vessel was operating its active sonar at the time of the collision, because the submarines are designed to “hide” while on patrol and the use of active sonar would immediately reveal the boat’s location. Both submarines’ hulls are covered with anechoic tile to reduce detection by sonar, so the boats’ navigational passive sonar would not have detected the presence of the other.

Lee Willett of London’s Royal United Services Institute said “the NATO allies would be very reluctant to share information on nuclear submarines. These are the strategic crown jewels of the nation. The whole purpose of a sea-based nuclear deterrent is to hide somewhere far out of sight. They are the ultimate tools of national survival in the event of war. Therefore, it’s the very last thing you would share with anybody.”

First Sea Lord Admiral Sir Jonathon Band GCB, ADC of the United Kingdom, the most senior serving officer in the Royal Navy, said that “…the submarines came into contact at very low speed. Both submarines remained safe. No injuries occurred. We can confirm the capability remains unaffected and there was no compromise to nuclear safety.”

“Both navies want quiet areas, deep areas, roughly the same distance from their home ports. So you find these station grounds have got quite a few submarines, not only French and Royal Navy but also from Russia and the United States. Navies often used the same nesting grounds,” said John H. Large, an independent nuclear engineer and analyst primarily known for his work in assessing and reporting upon nuclear safety and nuclear related accidents and incidents.

President of the Royal Naval Association John McAnally said that the incident was a “one in a million chance”. “It would be very unusual on deterrent patrol to use active sonar because that would expose the submarine to detection. They are, of course, designed to be very difficult to detect and one of the priorities for both the captain and the deterrent patrol is to avoid detection by anything,” he said.

The development of stealth technology, making the submarines less visible to other vessels has properly explained that a submarine does not seem to have been able to pick out another submarine nearly the length of two football pitches and the height of a three-story building.

“The modus operandi of most submarines, particularly ballistic-missile submarines, is to operate stealthily and to proceed undetected. This means operating passively, by not transmitting on sonar, and making as little noise as possible. A great deal of technical effort has gone into making submarines quiet by reduction of machinery noise. And much effort has gone into improving the capability of sonars to detect other submarines; detection was clearly made too late or not at all in this case,” explained Stephen Saunders, the editor of Jane’s Fighting Ships, an annual reference book (also published online, on CD and microfiche) of information on all the world’s warships arranged by nation, including information on ship’s names, dimensions, armaments, silhouettes and photographs, etc.

According to Bob Ayres, a former CIA and US army officer, and former associate fellow at Chatham House, the Royal Institute of International Affairs, however, the submarines were not undetectable, despite their “stealth” technology. “When such submarines came across similar vessels from other navies, they sought to get as close as possible without being detected, as part of routine training. They were playing games with each other – stalking each other under the sea. They were practising being able to kill the other guy’s submarine before he could launch a missile.Because of the sound of their nuclear reactors’ water pumps, they were still noisier than old diesel-electric craft, which ran on batteries while submerged. The greatest danger in a collision was the hull being punctured and the vessel sinking, rather than a nuclear explosion,” Ayres explained.

Submarine collisions are uncommon, but not unheard of: in 1992, the USS Baton Rouge, a submarine belonging to the United States, under command of Gordon Kremer, collided with the Russian Sierra-class attack submarine K-276 that was surfacing in the Barents Sea.

In 2001, the US submarine USS Greeneville surfaced and collided with Japanese fishing training ship Ehime Maru (????), off the coast of Hawaii. The Navy determined the commanding officer of Greeneville to be in “dereliction of duty.”

The tenth HMS Vanguard (S28) of the British Royal Navy is the lead boat of her class of Trident ballistic missile-capable submarines and is based at HMNB Clyde, Faslane. The 150m long, V-class submarine under the Trident programme, has a crew of 135, weighs nearly 16,000 tonnes and is armed with 16 Trident 2 D5 ballistic missiles carrying three warheads each.

It is now believed to have been towed Monday to its naval base Faslane in the Firth of Clyde, with dents and scrapes to its hull. Faslane lies on the eastern shore of Gare Loch in Argyll and Bute, Scotland, to the north of the Firth of Clyde and 25 miles west of the city of Glasgow.

Vanguard is one of the deadliest vessels on the planet. It was built at Barrow-in-Furness by Vickers Shipbuilding and Engineering Ltd (now BAE Systems Submarine Solutions), was launched on 4 March, 1992, and commissioned on 14 August, 1993. The submarine’s first captain was Captain David Russell. In February 2002, Vanguard began a two-year refit at HMNB Devonport. The refit was completed in June 2004 and in October 2005 Vanguard completed her return to service trials (Demonstration and Shakedown Operations) with the firing of an unarmed Trident missile.

“The Vanguard has two periscopes, a CK51 search model and a CH91 attack model, both of which have a TV camera and thermal imager as well as conventional optics,” said John E. Pike, director and a national security analyst for http://www.globalsecurity.org/, an easily accessible pundit, and active in opposing the SDI, and ITAR, and consulting on NEO’s.File:Triomphant img 0394.jpg

“But the periscopes are useless at that depth. It’s pitch black after a couple of hundred feet. In the movies like ‘Hunt for Red October,’ you can see the subs in the water, but in reality it’s blindman’s bluff down there. The crash could have been a coincidence — some people win the lottery — but it’s much more possible that one vessel was chasing the other, trying to figure out what it was,” Pike explained.

Captain of HMS Vanguard, Commander Richard Lindsey said his men would not be there if they couldn’t go through with it. “I’m sure that if somebody was on board who did not want to be here, they would have followed a process of leaving the submarine service or finding something else to do in the Navy,” he noted.

The Triomphant is a strategic nuclear submarine, lead ship of her class (SNLE-NG). It was laid down on June 9, 1989, launched on March 26, 1994 and commissioned on March 21, 1997 with homeport at Île Longue. Equipped with 16 M45 ballistic missiles with six warheads each, it has 130 crew on board. It was completing a 70-day tour of duty at the time of the underwater crash. Its fibreglass sonar dome was damaged requiring three or four months in Drydock repair. “It has returned to its base on L’Ile Longue in Brittany on Saturday under its own power, escorted as usual by a frigate,” the ministry said.

A Ballistic missile submarine is a submarine equipped to launch ballistic missiles (SLBMs). Ballistic missile submarines are larger than any other type of submarine, in order to accommodate SLBMs such as the Russian R-29 or the American Trident.

The Triomphant class of strategic missile submarines of the French Navy are currently being introduced into service to provide the sea based component (the Force Océanique Stratégique) of the French nuclear deterrent or Force de frappe, with the M45 SLBM. They are replacing the Redoutable-class boats. In French, they are called Sous-Marin Nucléaire Lanceur d’Engins de Nouvelle Génération (“SNLE-NG, literally “Device-launching nuclear submarine of the new generation”).

They are roughly one thousand times quieter than the Redoutable-class vessels, and ten times more sensitive in detecting other submarines [1]. They are designed to carry the M51 nuclear missile, which should enter active service around 2010.

Repairs for both heavily scraped and dented, missile-laden vessels were “conservatively” estimated to cost as much as €55m, with intricate missile guidance systems and navigation controls having to be replaced, and would be met by the French and British taxpayer, the Irish Independent reported.

Many observers are shocked by the deep sea disaster, as well as the amount of time it took for the news to reach the public. ”Two US and five Soviet submarine accidents in the past prove that the reactor protection system makes an explosion avoidable. But if the collision had been more powerful the submarines could have sunk very quickly and the fate of the 250 crew members would have been very serious indeed,” said Andrey Frolov, from Moscow’s Centre for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies.

“I think this accident will force countries that possess nuclear submarines to sit down at the negotiating table and devise safety precautions that might avert such accidents in the future… But because submarines must be concealed and invisible, safety and navigation laws are hard to define,” Frolov said, noting further that there are no safety standards for submarines.

The unthinkable disaster – in the Atlantic’s 41 million square miles – has raised concern among nuclear activists. “This is a nuclear nightmare of the highest order. The collision of two submarines, both with nuclear reactors and nuclear weapons onboard, could have released vast amounts of radiation and scattered scores of nuclear warheads across the seabed,” said Kate Hudson, chair of Britain’s Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament.

“This is the most severe incident involving a nuclear submarine since the Russian submarine RFS Kursk K-141 explosion and sinking in 2000 and the first time since the Cold War that two nuclear-armed subs are known to have collided. Gordon Brown should seize this opportunity to end continuous patrols,” Hudson added. Despite a rescue attempt by British and Norwegian teams, all 118 sailors and officers aboard Kursk died.

“This reminds us that we could have a new catastrophe with a nuclear submarine at any moment. It is a risk that exists during missions but also in port. These are mobile nuclear reactors,” said Stephane Lhomme, a spokesman for the French anti-nuclear group Sortir du Nucleaire.

Nicholas Barton “Nick” Harvey, British Liberal Democrat Member of Parliament for North Devon has called for an immediate internal probe. “While the British nuclear fleet has a good safety record, if there were ever to be a bang it would be a mighty big one. Now that this incident is public knowledge, the people of Britain, France and the rest of the world need to be reassured this can never happen again and that lessons are being learned,” he said.

SNP Westminster leader Angus Robertson MP for Moray has demanded for a government statement. “The Ministry of Defence needs to explain how it is possible for a submarine carrying weapons of mass destruction to collide with another submarine carrying weapons of mass destruction in the middle of the world’s second-largest ocean,” he said.

Michael Thomas Hancock, CBE, a Liberal Democrat Member of Parliament for Portsmouth South and a City councillor for Fratton ward, and who sits on the Commons defence committee, has called on the Ministry of Defence Secretary of State John Hutton to make a statement when parliament sits next week.

“While I appreciate there are sensitive issues involved here, it is important that this is subject to parliamentary scrutiny. It’s fairly unbelievable that this has happened in the first place but we now need to know that lessons have been learnt. We need to know for everyone’s sakes that everything possible is now done to ensure that there is not a repeat of the incident. There are serious issues as to how some of the most sophisticated naval vessels in the seas today can collide in this way,” Mr. Hancock said.

Tory defence spokesman Liam Fox, a British Conservative politician, currently Shadow Defence Secretary and Member of Parliament for Woodspring, said: “For two submarines to collide while apparently unaware of each other’s presence is extremely worrying.”

Meanwhile, Hervé Morin, the French Minister of Defence, has denied allegations the nuclear submarines, which are hard to detect, had been shadowing each other deliberately when they collided, saying their mission was to sit at the bottom of the sea and act as a nuclear deterrent.

“There’s no story to this — the British aren’t hunting French submarines, and the French submarines don’t hunt British submarines. We face an extremely simple technological problem, which is that these submarines are not detectable. They make less noise than a shrimp. Between France and Britain, there are things we can do together….one of the solutions would be to think about the patrol zones,” Morin noted, and further denying any attempt at a cover-up.

France’s Atlantic coast is known as a submarine graveyard because of the number of German U-boats and underwater craft sunk there during the Second World War.

 

Gay Talese on the state of journalism, Iraq and his life

Saturday, October 27, 2007

Gay Talese wants to go to Iraq. “It so happens there is someone that’s working on such a thing right now for me,” the 75-year-old legendary journalist and author told David Shankbone. “Even if I was on Al-Jazeera with a gun to my head, I wouldn’t be pleading with those bastards! I’d say, ‘Go ahead. Make my day.'”

Few reporters will ever reach the stature of Talese. His 1966 profile of Frank Sinatra, Frank Sinatra Has a Cold, was not only cited by The Economist as the greatest profile of Sinatra ever written, but is considered the greatest of any celebrity profile ever written. In the 70th anniversary issue of Esquire in October 2003, the editors declared the piece the “Best Story Esquire Ever Published.”

Talese helped create and define a new style of literary reporting called New Journalism. Talese himself told National Public Radio he rejects this label (“The term new journalism became very fashionable on college campuses in the 1970s and some of its practitioners tended to be a little loose with the facts. And that’s where I wanted to part company.”)

He is not bothered by the Bancrofts selling The Wall Street Journal—”It’s not like we should lament the passing of some noble dynasty!”—to Rupert Murdoch, but he is bothered by how the press supported and sold the Iraq War to the American people. “The press in Washington got us into this war as much as the people that are controlling it,” said Talese. “They took information that was second-hand information, and they went along with it.” He wants to see the Washington press corp disbanded and sent around the country to get back in touch with the people it covers; that the press should not be so focused on–and in bed with–the federal government.

Augusten Burroughs once said that writers are experience junkies, and Talese fits the bill. Talese–who has been married to Nan Talese (she edited James Frey‘s Million Little Piece) for fifty years–can be found at baseball games in Cuba or the gay bars of Beijing, wanting to see humanity in all its experience.

Below is Wikinews reporter David Shankbone’s interview with Gay Talese.

Contents

  • 1 On Gay Talese
  • 2 On a higher power and how he’d like to die
  • 3 On the media and Iraq
  • 4 On the Iraq War
  • 5 State of Journalism
  • 6 On travel to Cuba
  • 7 On Chinese gay bars
  • 8 On the literary canon
  • 9 Sources
 

Canada tests cow for mad cow disease

Friday, April 14, 2006

Initial tests done on a six-year-old dairy cow in Fraser Valley, a farming community near Vancouver, British Columbia in Canada, are inconclusive for bovine spongiform encephalopathy, or “mad cow disease,” said Canada’s Food Inspection Agency.

Further tests are being conducted at Winnipeg’s National Centre for Foreign Animal Disease and results are expected on Sunday. Officials also say the cow did not enter the human food chain.

“Canada has a suite of internationally recognized safeguards that work together to provide high levels of human and animal health protection,” officials for the agency said in a statement.

If the results are positive, this will be Canada’s fifth case of the disease since 2003.

 

Court rules Massey can appeal US restrictions in mine disaster investigation

Monday, June 13, 2011

In a unanimous decision, a US federal appeals court issued a ruling Friday against the federal government, in favor of Massey Energy Co, owner of the Upper Branch Mine in West Virginia, the location of last year’s mine disaster that killed 29 workers. The court ruled the company may appeal the restrictions placed on it by a government order hindering the company’s ability to conduct its own internal investigation of the disaster.

The order controlling Massey’s investigations into the disaster was placed on Massey immediately after the incident by the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) when it seized control of the coal mine six hours after the blast on April 5.

MSHA’s controls prohibited Massey from “taking or retaining photographs, collecting and preserving mine dust samples, employing mine mapping technology, and participating in or objecting to any destructive testing of materials gathered underground.” Massey said MSHA’s restrictions prevented the company from evaluating the accident site before it was altered by investigators, and denied Massey the chance to gather evidence to use in the company’s defense.

The story of Upper Big Branch is a cautionary tale of hubris. A company that was a towering presence in the Appalachian coal fields operated its mines in a profoundly reckless manner, and 29 coal miners paid with their lives for the corporate risk taking.

Massey’s appeal to the Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission (the commission that decides disputes over mining regulations) to void the order by MSHA was denied by the commission. It based its decision on its interpretation of the Mine Act that it had no authority to consider Massey’s appeal. The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit set aside this decision, finding the commission’s interpretation of the act was “simply untenable” and the government’s actions had denied Massey the opportunity to gather “potentially important exculpatory evidence”.

The court rejected the commission’s position that the Mine Act’s language was ambiguous, allowing the government flexibility in its implementation. Rather, the court said, “No matter how you parse it, [the act] is a model of near-perfect clarity. Indeed, it is hard to imagine a clearer expression of congressional language.” It also rejected the commission’s position that the case was moot: “This case is not moot. Indeed, even the [Labor] Secretary’s counsel recognized the near-frivolity of this argument, and made only a half-hearted attempt to persuade us.”

This case is not moot. Indeed, even the Secretary’s counsel recognized the near-frivolity of this argument, and made only a half-hearted attempt to persuade us.

The court’s ruling comes after a state government-comissioned report issued on May 19 by investigators found Massey Energy responsible for the deaths of the 29 workers. The workers were killed in an explosion that could have been avoided, the report said, if Massey had put in place standard safety procedures.

“The story of Upper Big Branch is a cautionary tale of hubris. A company that was a towering presence in the Appalachian coal fields operated its mines in a profoundly reckless manner, and 29 coal miners paid with their lives for the corporate risk taking,” the report read. “The company’s ventilation system did not adequately ventilate the mine. As a result, explosive gases were allowed to build up.” The report detailed claims Massey threatened miners with termination if they stopped work in areas that lacked adequate oxygen levels and listed numerous other state and federal safety standards that Massey failed to follow. Also blamed in the report was MSHA for failing to enforce federal regulations.

The report was considered by the those in the mining industry as especially direct and “hard hitting”. It firmly rejected conclusions reached by Massey officials that the incident was caused by an unexpected, massive, and uncontrollable methane bubble eruption, an occurrence that Massey said it could neither predict nor manage.

The company immediately challenged the report and issued its own report on June 3, blaming the blast on an act of nature and denying the company’s safety culture was at fault. MSHA also have an as-yet unreleased report in the works.

 

Rower Tuijn halfway across Pacific in record attempt

Monday, July 9, 2007

Dutch adventurer Ralph Tuijn has reached the halfway point of his attempt to be the first person to row across the Pacific Ocean unaided.

The 16,000 kilometre journey from the coast of Peru to the seaside city of Brisbane, Australia, the widest section of the Pacific, has never been crossed absolutely unaided by a rower, and Tuijn says just nine people have rowed it even with assistance.

Tuijn reached the central point of his crossing, an insignificant point of water in the ocean, 111 days after setting off from Peru in March. He has been making good progress, and has since cut his estimated time of arrival in Brisbane by a month.

The Dutchman, who now expects to reach his destination on October 20, has kept in touch with those tracking his movements through daily internet postings from his laptop computer, including his wife Winnie. His boat, the Zeeman Challenger, is a seven-metre custom plywood vessel.

Tuijn has overcome a variety of obstacles to reach the halfway point. He is suffering from the constant attention of sharks, who often bump his boat and disrupt his attempts at sleep. One particular shark, dubbed ‘Gomulka’ by Tuijn, has been trailing the adventurer’s boat for extended periods.

He has also accidentally burnt himself when he spilled hot water on his foot whilst trying to make coffee, apparently also from a shark ‘bump’. He is also forced to manually pump water for cooking and drinking after his automatic water pump broke down not long into his journey.

“Physically everything feels great and I can’t help feeling that I could do this for 500 days, but mentally it’s still hard to be on your own for such a long time”

His vessel has no motors or sails, but relies on his physical rowing power to move. The boat does have a solar power system to provide energy for his laptop, a telephone and a global positioning system.

Tujin, who is raising money for a children’s home in Mumbai, India, is rowing at an average speed of 58 kilometres each day. His diet consists of freeze-dried foods and fish, which are keeping him physically well-conditioned despite tiring mentally.

Tuijn is a serial adventurer and experienced rower. He has rowed across the Atlantic Ocean and the North Sea, as well as cycled across Russia and the icy terrain of Greenland.

 

Contact Area Experts For Damaged Roof Repair In Sugar Land

byadmin

Although modern roofing products will last for many years, there are times when damage will occur and repairs will be needed to prevent or repair water leaks. damaged roof repair in Sugar Land is most often needed after severe storms, but age and other occurrences can lead to the need for roof repairs or replacements. There are three reasons to keep a roofing expert on speed dial.

Prevention is Easier than Repairing a Roof

The age-old adage that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure certainly applies to roofs. Routine maintenance eliminates many roofing problems before leaking occurs. Taking care of worn or damaged shingles, aging flashing, and even cleaning the surface goes a long way toward preventing roofing issues. If your roof hasn’t been evaluated in the past few years, now is the time to schedule an inspection to make sure a roof isn’t developing problems.

Better Late than Never

Sometimes, things get out of hand without anyone being aware a problem exists. Roofs may actually appear to be in relatively good condition from the ground and still need repairs. Many homeowners are not aware a problem is developing until water stains appear on ceilings. If any signs of leaks appear, it’s vitally important to contact an expert for damaged roof repair in Sugar Land immediately. Neglecting to take care of an active leak quickly leads to a variety of issues that are far more costly to repair than a roof leak.

Dealing With Storm Damage

Sugar Land area homeowners are routinely confronted with severe weather events that have the potential to cause serious damage. High winds, hail, and driving rains all cause damage to area roofs. After any type of severe weather, it’s important to look carefully at a roof for any signs of damage. If any shingle damage is noted, it’s time to contact a roofing contractor to evaluate the roof and come up with a strategy to deal with the damage.

If the damage is severe, immediate steps may be required. Ask about tarping to minimize the potential for additional water damage until actual repairs can be provided. Make sure the contractor is in contact with the insurance adjuster to expedite the repairs.

Sugar Land roofing experts will be glad to provide any type of roof service you need. Contact us if you’ve got any questions or need to schedule an evaluation.

 

Filmmaker releases trailer for open source feature film

Wednesday, May 3, 2006

New filmmaker Solomon Rothman has released a trailer for his upcoming full length open source film called ‘Boy Who Never Slept.’ Both the movie and the trailer are offered under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.5 license. The movie is set to be released at the end of May.

The film centers on the life of an insomniac writer who meets a teenage girl online, and a friendship that grows into an unlikely love story wrapped in harsh reality. The movie deals with various issues, including the romanticization of love, age-related issues in relationships, like statuatory rape (he’s 23, and she’s 16), and the idea of love in the online realm.

Rothman, a writer, amateur filmmaker and web designer, lives in the Los Angeles Area. He wrote, directed and produced the movie with Aurora Mae, his girlfriend and partner. Producing the movie for $200 while they were in college, they used friends as actors and later sold the camera on eBay to recoup the expense.

Rothman has spoken about the power of the internet as a distribution source for movies and has said “I believe it’s possible that this movie I shot with no budget and released online for free could potentially reach as many viewers as a major theatrical release.”

Rothman and Mae started out with the idea of creating a full-length movie that could be shared totally for free online. The film includes a custom soundtrack and script, both of which will be released open source as well.

The trailer is available on the official movie website[1] and can also be found on Google video, YouTube.com, Ifilm.com, AddictedClips.com, and the Internet Movie Archives.