We’ve shown you some of the best beer pairings before , but this handy guide explains the three foundational principles of pairing beer and food so you can come up with your own great combinations.
Mollusc is a completely new kind of tent that opens and shuts like the worlds biggest pram hood. If the weather is good, draw back the entire canopy and bask in the sun, then if the rain comes in pull the roof back over, clip it down and be ready for any storm. With the Mollusc you can turn an interior space into an exterior space (and vice versa) in 3 seconds. So now you can watch those shooting stars from your sleeping bag then close the tent when the show is over, or catch that dawn from within your tent with a cup of coffee in your hand and your head on the pillow. The Standard Mollusc is 3 meters high and 6 meters in diameter and the Nano Mollusc is 1.6 meters high and 3 meters in diameter. To compensate for the climatic and environmental footprint of making it, 100 trees are planted in Kenya for every tent made.
The article above was submitted to us by an Inhabitat reader. Want to see your story on Inhabitat? Send us a tip by following this link. Remember to follow our instructions carefully to boost your chances of being chosen for publishing!
Pull-ups are a great exercise for building upper body strength, but they’re also really hard to do if you’re not already used to doing them. If you’re not able to do more than one pull-up already, this video will show you how.
There’s little doubt that sharks are a force to be reckoned with, but it turns out that the natural world can provide something more baffling and fearsome that any made for TV movie: a phenomenon that can only reasonably be termed a “sharkcano.” A group of scientists surveying Kavachi, a very active volcano 60 feet below the ocean’s surface near the Solomon Islands, were stunned to discover that there are two species of shark living in the hot, highly acidic waters within the crater.
This is the Spaghetti Meatballwich available from The Carving Board in Los Angeles. It has meatballs, mozzarella and marinara packed between baked spaghetti buns. I'm gonna go try it, I'll report back shortly. Five minutes later: Okay, I thinks somebody stole my car. "No, you sold it for beer money two weeks ago." Ahahahahhaha, how do you know about that?! Admittedly, not the smartest decision I've ever made. The penis tattoo on my forearm either. Sure I won a bet with a friend ($200 -- he never paid), but now there's giant penis on my forearm. Sometimes I feel like I lack the ability to think about the future. I mean, except for jetpacks and flying cars, I can think about those all day.
Thanks to Dave L, who informed me lasagna is just spaghetti flavored cake.
craig and i watched a disney pixar movie on tuesday night. it was awesome. we decided to do it more often.
This is a chart containing 50 inspirational quotes from different children's entertainment characters. I read them all now I feel like I can conquer the world. Or at least a really big sandwich. One of those sandwiches that if you eat the whole thing in a certain amount of time the restaurant will take your picture and put it on the wall. I have never been able to do that. My brother has done it at several different places and he's only like 140 pounds soaking wet. I'm like 215 but eat like a bird (mostly pieces of worm and whatever else my mom spits in my mouth).
Thanks to Jacquelyn, who agrees we should all pick a different quote from the chart every day for the next 50 days and try to live by that quote for 24 hours. Awesome, I'm starting with, 'To Infinity and Beyond!' *blasts self into sun*
As part of the ongoing efforts of journalists and pollsters to think of a way — any way — that the 2016 Democratic presidential primary could wind up being competitive and exciting, Rasmussen just released a poll floating a new potential challenger to Hillary Clinton: Michelle Obama.
The poll finds that among likely Democratic voters, Clinton would beat Obama, 56 percent to 22 percent. While that's not exactly encouraging, it's a better performance than Elizabeth Warren, Joe Biden, or any of the actual likely candidates like Bernie Sanders or Martin O'Malley, who all trail Clinton by bigger margins in recent polling (albeit in polls of the full field, not the one-on-one matchup Rasmussen presented). Given that, Rasmussen's findings suggest Obama is the strongest challenger Clinton could theoretically face, at least among potential contenders who've been polled.
But let's be real: Michelle Obama is not going to run for president. By most accounts, the Obamas are planning to move to New York City after leaving the White House, where the president will run a foundation, or maybe start teaching law again; Michelle was a top administrator at University of Chicago Hospitals before Barack became president, and while there's been less speculation about her post–White House career it seems probable she'd start back into the nonprofit or private sector, too. When Ellen DeGeneres asked Michelle if she or her daughters would ever enter politics, the First Lady replied forcefully, "No. Absolutely not."
And, of course, the poll suggests she wouldn't even win if she wanted the job. But there's a more viable option if she changes her mind about politics. Barack's old Illinois Senate seat is currently held by a Republican, Mark Kirk, who's up for reelection next year. Kirk has used the possibility of a Michelle run — which she's repeatedly ruled out — as a fundraising pitch. And he has reason to worry if she reverses course. A poll in December 2012 found Michelle beating Kirk by 11 points, and a more recent one from the conservative outlet Human Events last April found her ahead by 5.
Pantone Color Institute has announced it's first new color in three years, Minion Yellow, based off the pill-shaped Minions from 'Despicable Me'. Conveniently, the Minions spin off movie hits theaters July 10th. WHO GOT PAID, I WANT A CUT. A whole lot of words about yellow:
"Just as the sun's rays enliven us, PANTONE Minion Yellow is a color that heightens awareness and creates clarity, lighting the way to the intelligence, originality and the resourcefulness of an open mind - this is the color of hope, joy and optimism," said Leatrice Eiseman, Executive Director, Pantone Color Institute.
Wait -- why does the yellow not match the color of the actual Minions? Isn't that what Minion Yellow should be? That's like Kermit The Frog green being blue. But speaking of yellow: the darker your urine gets, the worse off you are, right? Because mine's kind of a burnt sienna right now.
Thanks to Shannon S, whose favorite color is the pink used in Geekologie links.
Fire, earthquakes and one of the worst droughts in recent history – these days California is not looking like the best place to settle down. In fact, things have gotten so bad that the state could run out of water in just two years. If things continue down this road, some experts think that the only solution will be to abandon the place.
But they didn't blur the giant ass in the middle? What do you have against tits and not butts? Or -- OR -- could you not tell that was a butt?
Fox 5 in New York decided the beautiful (albeit somewhat hard to recognize) titties in Pablo Picasso's Women of Algiers were a little too risque for the news when reporting on the record-breaking $179.4-million dollar sale of the painting, and decided to blur them out just in case they were to give people boners and/or turn them into sexual deviants. Women of Algiers is the most expensive painting ever sold at auction, and the fifth most expensive painting every sold at all. I wonder whose decision it was to make the blur. Because that is a little ridiculous. If I were the newscaster I would have bothered the weatherman's draw-on-screen capabilities to draw even bigger boobs on the painting. Will they have laser nips? PROBABLY. Oh -- and what's this? It's a giant penis in the sky! Man, I would make a great newscaster.
These car record players were produced by a number of companies: Consumer Reports provides an overview that includes units by Chrysler, Norelco, and RCA Victor. The Philips Auto-Mignon was another popular model. All of them reflected the scarce options for motorists looking to listen to their own music while on the road.
As unusual as they look, these players could work surprisingly well. Often purchased separately from the car itself, they plugged into an existing stereo system and used different techniques to keep the sound stable. Consumer Reports said the stylus that ran in the record's grooves had to press relatively hard, and that eventually wore down records. Another model suffered from speed issues, turning every record into a hyperspeed Alvin and the Chipmunks–styletune. In addition to the firm stylus, springs helped keep the music playing as well — this video shows a Philips Auto-Mignon at work, and thanks to its back springs, it's stable even after a good shake.
By the mid-'60s, the four-track and eight-track were starting to take over in the United States, and compact cassettes became ubiquitous after that. From there, CD players emerged in the '80s and '90s, followed by today's digital music revolution. Nobody knows what's next, but whatever it is will probably make our current technology look as awkward as a record player in a car.
"The obvious truth about global warming is this: barring miracles, humanity is in for some awful shit."
There has always been an odd tenor to discussions among climate scientists, policy wonks, and politicians, a passive-aggressive quality, and I think it can be traced to the fact that everyone involved has to dance around the obvious truth, at risk of losing their status and influence.
The obvious truth about global warming is this: barring miracles, humanity is in for some awful shit.
Here is a plotting of dozens of climate modeling scenarios out to 2100, from the IPCC:
The black line is carbon emissions to date. The red line is the status quo — a projection of where emissions will go if no new substantial policy is passed to restrain greenhouse gas emissions.
We recently passed 400 parts per million of CO2 in the atmosphere; the status quo will take us up to 1,000 ppm, raising global average temperature (from a pre-industrial baseline) between 3.2 and 5.4 degrees Celsius. That will mean, according to a 2012 World Bank report, "extreme heat-waves, declining global food stocks, loss of ecosystems and biodiversity, and life-threatening sea level rise," the effects of which will be "tilted against many of the world's poorest regions," stalling or reversing decades of development work. "A 4°C warmer world can, and must be, avoided," said the World Bank president.
But that's where we're headed. It will take enormous effort just to avoid that fate. Holding temperature down under 2°C — the widely agreed upon target — would require an utterly unprecedented level of global mobilization and coordination, sustained over decades. There's no sign of that happening, or reason to think it's plausible anytime soon. And so, awful shit it is.
Nobody wants to say that. Why not? It might seem obvious — no one wants to hear it! — but there's a bit more to it than that. We'll return to the question in a minute, but first let's look at how this unsatisfying debate plays out in public.
Are scientists keeping it real?
The latest contretemps was sparked by a comment in Nature by Oliver Geden, an analyst at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs. In it, he made a simple argument. Politicians, he says, want good news. They want to hear that it is still possible to limit temperature to 2°C. Even more, they want to hear that they can do so while avoiding aggressive emission cuts in the near-term — say, until they're out of office.
Climate scientists, Geden says, feel pressure to provide the good news. They're worried that if they don't, if they come off as "alarmist" or hectoring, they will simply be ignored, boxed out of the debate. And so they construct models showing that it is possible to hit the 2°C target. The message is always, "We're running out of time; we've only got five or 10 years to turn things around, but we can do it if we put our minds to it."
That was the message in 1990, in 2000, in 2010. How can we still have five or 10 years left? The answer, Geden says, is that scientists are baking increasingly unrealistic assumptions into their models.
Can we really suck a bunch of carbon out of the atmosphere?
Geden focuses on one such assumption: that substantial negative emissions will be possible in the latter half of the 21st century. We will be able to suck thousands of megatons of carbon out of the atmosphere, so humanity can go net negative by 2100, even if we emit a bunch more carbon in the short term.
The mechanism for negative emissions is supposed to be bioenergy — burning plant mass — coupled with carbon capture and sequestration. The combo is called BECCS, and in theory, it buries more CO2 than it emits.
(Sanchez et al., 2015)
If you work enough BECCS into your model, you can almost double humanity's "carbon budget" — the amount of carbon we can still pump in the atmosphere without passing 2°C. After all, if you can suck half the carbon out, you can afford to pump twice the carbon in.
But is large-scale BECCS plausible? There's the problem of finding a source of biomass that doesn't compete with food crops, the harvesting of which does not spur additional emissions, and which can be found in the enormous quantities required. The IPCC scenarios that come in below 2°C require BECCS to remove between 2 and 10 gigatons of CO2 a year from the atmosphere by 2050. By way of comparison, all the world's oceans combined absorb about 9 gigatons a year; all the world's terrestrial carbon sinks combined absorb about 10 gigatons a year. That's between 5 and 25 percent of total 2010 CO2 emissions.
These scenarios mean potentially doubling the capacity of terrestrial carbon sinks, capturing and burying — permanently, without leaks — gigatons of CO2 a year. How will it be monitored? What if it leaks or is breached?
There's no consensus on the viability of widespread BECCS, which, after all, doesn't exist yet. One 2014 commentary in the journal Nature Climate Change, co-bylined by 14 researchers, raised serious doubts about the feasibility of large-scale BECCS and the wisdom of betting the climate farm on it. They note that "deployment of large-scale bioenergy faces biophysical, technical and social challenges, and CCS is yet to be implemented widely," and that "widespread deployment [of BECCS] in climate stabilization scenarios might become a dangerous distraction."
Tips and tricks for producing optimistic model conclusions
But BECCS isn't the only way to make models produce happier results. The scenarios that show a high likelihood of avoiding 2°C also presume policy regimes that are positively utopian: a rising price on carbon, harmonized across every country in the world; the availability, maturation, and rapid deployment of every known low-carbon technology; all bets paying off, for 50 years straight. It would be quite a run of luck.
Is it possible in models? Yes. Is it possible IRL? Climate modeler Glen Peters doesn't think so:
There are other ways to shape model outcomes. Peters draws attention to this chart, from the IPCC AR5 report:
Row four is the total carbon budget available to humanity this century, in gigatons. As you can see, if you move right or left on the chart, relatively small changes substantially alter the carbon budget. If you tweak the scenario from having a 66 percent chance of staying under 2°C to a 33 percent chance, the carbon budget goes from 1,000 gigatons to 1,500 — 50 percent more breathing room.
If you decide 2°C is too difficult, and maybe 3°C is okay, your carbon budget goes from 1,000 gigatons to 2,400, more than doubling. That sure looks a lot easier. (Though, important note: even hitting that easier target would require substantial BECCS!)
Kevin Anderson, of the UK's Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, is another frequent critic of these model assumptions. He says that models have often included unrealistically low estimates of current and future emissions growth, unrealistically early peaks in global emissions, and unequitable estimates of emission curves in developing countries (implicitly assuming stunted development).
Add to all these considerations the high rate of decline in emissions necessary after global emissions peak. It used to be that 2 percent annual global emission reductions was considered the maximum feasible (without serious economic contraction). Now models routinely show 4 or even 6 percent annual reductions, a rate of emissions decline that has never been achieved by anyone, anywhere, ever, much less consistently over 50 years.
Peters also shares this figure, from researcher Robbie Andrew:
In these scenarios, emissions never go net negative, though BECCS can get used. As you can see, for each year that emissions continue rising, the rate of decline afterward has to be steeper to stay within the budget.
Now policymakers are being told that emissions can peak in 2030 and still keep temperature rise under 2°C. To get that result in a modeling scenario, emissions have to fall 6 percent a year, even with large amounts of BECCS thrown in. To find that plausible, one has to imagine all of human society turning on a dime, beginning in 2030, deploying massive amounts of nuclear, bioenergy, wind, and solar, and doing so every year for decades.
It's "possible," yes, but at a certain point that term loses much meaning. Something that would require human beings to quickly and fundamentally change their collective behavior may not violate the laws of physics, but it is unlikely, given what we know about human beings, path dependence, and political dysfunction. This is what I once called the "brutal logic of climate change."
Are scientists to blame?
The question is, who is responsible for publicizing the truth about the assumptions behind these scenarios? Is it scientists? Niklas Höhne, director of the New Climate Institute, offered a reasonable response to Geden:
"The IPCC has never advocated for any target and has not commented on the feasibility, nor has the UNEP gap report [which shows the gap between current emission commitments and what's necessary for 2°C]. Both have shown the scenarios and the related assumptions, such as the need for net negative global emissions in some cases," he said.
"Both reports do not make a judgement on the feasibility. They leave that to the policy makers."
I think there's a good bit of truth in this. The integrated assessment models (IAMs) used to produce these scenarios are not meant to yield predictions, or even plausible alternatives. They show what outcomes result from a particular set of inputs; they reflect their assumptions. Theoretically policymakers ought to know this, but political misuse of modeling is as old as modeling.
Nonetheless, the heated reactions elicited by Geden's piece do show that he's on to something. You can see some of those reactions on BuzzFeed, ClimateWire, and Responding to Climate Change (RTCC). A few are just crazy and knee-jerk, like Bill Hare of Climate Analytics, who "lumped [Geden] in with climate skeptics and other naysayers 'who systematically downplay the risks of climate change and argue against action to reduce emissions on spurious and ill-founded grounds.'" That is roughly the opposite of what Geden does.
Others respond by, in my view, missing the point. Stefan Rahmstorf and Michael Mann both insist that Geden is wrong, that 2°C is still physically possible.
I don't take that as the main thrust of Geden's argument, though. Lots of things are physically possible that nonetheless require heroic assumptions about collective human behavior (like, say, aggressive mitigation policy, in the face of powerful vested interests, harmonized across the globe, sustained for decades ... and also many gigatons worth of BECCS). The question is not whether 2°C scenarios violates laws of physical science, but whether they are reasonable given what we know about human beings.
That's not really a scientific judgment, though, is it? Geden makes the same mistake when he writes, "the climate policy mantra — that time is running out for 2°C but we can still make it if we act now — is a scientific nonsense." No. It may be a nonsense, but it's not a scientific nonsense. No branch of science, certainly not climatology, can tell us what the humans of 2050 are capable of. We are all, on that score, making educated guesses, and a knowledge of history, politics, and economics will be just as important to that judgment as any knowledge of the physical sciences.
(Shutterstock)
Who owns the nonsense?
I imagine the scientists want to blame the policy advisors and the politicians — after all, they didn't hide the unrealistic assumptions, they are right there in Appendix 17 for anyone interested.
And yes, theoretically, the policy advisers surrounding politicians should make clear to them exactly the assumptions required to produce the 2°C outcome. And politicians should be straight with their constituents about those assumptions.
However, as the kids say these days, politicians gonna politic. They all have enormous incentive to try to thread the needle, to accept the 2°C target on one hand while maintaining that current policy commitments are adequate, or might some day be adequate, on the other. To do that, they need evidence that success is still within reach.
There is not a politician on earth wants to tell his or her constituents, "We've probably already blown our chance to avoid substantial suffering, but if we work really hard and devote our lives to the cause, we can somewhat reduce the even worse suffering that awaits our grandchildren." [crowd roars]
And Geden is right that scientists have very little incentive to tell the unpleasant truths either. They can stick to physical science and the "possibility" of 2°C for quite a bit longer, I would imagine. Geden fears that the next big thing, the next deus ex machina to save the 2°C target, is going to be solar radiation managements (aka geoengineering). If they're told to model it, what can scientists do? They'll model it.
The sad fact is that no one has much incentive to break the bad news (except, ahem, my colleague Brad Plumer). Humans are subject to intense status quo bias. Especially on the conservative end of the psychological spectrum — which is the direction all humans move when they feel frightened or under threat — there is a powerful craving for the message that things are, basically, okay, that the system is working like it's supposed to, that the current state of affairs is the best available, or close enough.
To be the one insisting that, no, things are not okay, things are heading toward disaster, is uncomfortable in any social milieu — especially since, in most people's experience, those wailing about the end of the world are always wrong and frequently crazy.
(Shutterstock)
Phoenix, 2060.
Who wants to put on the posterboards, go out to the street corner, and rant?
Yet here we are. The fact is, on our current trajectory, in the absence of substantial new climate policy, we are heading for up to 4°C and maybe higher by the end of the century. That will be, on any clear reading of the available evidence, catastrophic. We are headed for disaster — slowly, yes, but surely.
Even as many climate experts are now arguing that 2°C is an inadequate target, that it already represents unacceptable harms, we are facing a situation in which limiting temperature even to 3°C requires heroic policy and technology changes.
And yet ... the world doesn't appear to be ending; there's no big, visible threat. Climate change moves so slowly that its pace is evident primarily through graphs and statistics. It rarely rises above the background noise.
So people want to hear that there's hope of 2°C. Politicians want to say that there's hope of 2°C. When asked, modelers are still able to produce scenarios that show 2°C. And nobody wants to be the one to pee in the punch bowl.
This is a video of traceur (that's a person who performs parkour) and all around fearless human being Oleg Cricket (nice name for a parkour lover) jumping from little triangular platform to little triangular platform along a highrise (maybe not a million stories up like I said in the title, but the fall would definitely still hurt). How did he get up there? How did he get back in? Is he still alive? I couldn't watch it without my hands getting all clammy. Does that make me less of a man? I don't care if it makes me a gerbil's penis, I am not into this. I jumped off a park bench once and rolled both my ankles. I've been on crutches for the past six years. "You know you probably don't need those anymore." THEY ARE A PART OF ME NOW.
Keep going for the short video.
Have you ever wanted to play loud music in your house, but were annoyed by the fact that the sound’s intensity gets lower when your ‘voguing’ gets you too far away from the speakers? With Sony‘s new release, an energy-efficient LED bulb that doubles as a Bluetooth speaker, the sound comes from above and creates a simple-to-install surround-sound experience anywhere you have a light fixture.
Last Thursday, Shell brought its enormous Polar Pioneer drilling rig into Seattle. On Saturday, about 500 kayaking, paddleboarding, canoeing and even solar-powered party rigging protesters surrounded the rig, shouting “Shell No!” or #sHellno. Shell Oil plans to use Seattle as its staging area for drilling operations off the coast of Alaska this summer. Hopefully, Shell can avoid spilling massive amounts of the oil into the Chukchi Sea, but if its drilling attempts of 2012 are any indication, according to Grist.org, we can likely expect a “big, fat mess.”
New York studio Diller Scofidio + Renfro has revealed their concept for the United States Olympic Museum, scheduled to open in downtown Colorado Springs, CO before the 2018 Olympic Winter Games. The renderings for the 60,000 square foot space show sweeping curved lines, elevated walkways and an extensive outdoor public plaza with views of Colorado’s Pikes Peak. The building’s spiraling shape reflects was inspired by the fluid movement of Olympic athletes and it will act as a brilliant commemoration of the Olympic games.
Photographer Thomas Lohr is known mostly for his high-profile fashion shoots for clients like Vogue, Le Monde d’Hermès, and i-D, but somewhere in his grueling shooting schedule he still finds time for personal projects, the most recent of which is a collection of bird plumage photos gathered into a limited edition book titled Birds. Lohr wanted to take a slightly different approach with the project and instead of capturing the animals in their entirety, he decided to focus on what intrigued him the most: the color, texture, and form of their feathers.
The abstract photos of wings, bellies, and other near unrecognizable parts of each bird are accompanied by each species scientific name like “Anodorhynchus Hyacinthinus” or “Geronticus Eremita,” creating yet another unfamiliar layer of abstraction. You can take a peek inside the book on Lohr’s website, and read an interview over on AnOther. (via AnOther, This Isn’t Happiness)
96 yr old: You know how your parents probably say things like, "you were BORN with the internet, you don't know what it's like to live without!"
Me: yeah
96 yr old: Well, my parents said that to me about electricity.
Good Morning America called this an "exclusive" interview featuring Bill Cosby's response to the more than two dozen allegations of sexual assault and misconduct against him. But that's a little misleading. While Cosby did say words in response to Linsey Davis's questions in this segment that aired Friday, he didn't answer them — at all.
Davis asked the 77-year-old how he'd respond if a young person asked him, "Are you guilty? Are the allegations true?"
His response:
I'm not sure that they will come like that. I think that many of them say, ‘Well, you're a hypocrite. You say one thing, you say the other. My point is okay, listen to me carefully. I'm telling you where the road is out. Now you want to go here, or you want to be concerned about who's giving you the message?
On whether his philanthropic work with a charity that aims to improve schools around Selma, Alabama, could be overshadowed by the allegations:
I have been in this business 52 years and — I will — I've never seen anything like this. Reality is the situation, and I can't speak.
On supporters' concerns about the allegations' impact on his legacy:
I have a ton of ideas to put on television about people and their love for each other.
Cosby's accusers include actors, models, and women who considered him a mentor, and their allegations span five decades. While one civil suit against him has been public knowledge since 2005, it was largely ignored by fans and journalists. That changed when comedian Hannibal Buress referenced it in an October 2014 routine, and the video went viral.
Then, one after another, women from Cosby's past made public proclamations that he'd drugged and/or sexually assaulted them, or attempted to do so. Cosby and his attorneys have adamantly denied all of the allegations, and, as today's interview response about "tons of ideas" suggests, he's determined to continue the comedic career that made him famous.
-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
VANCOUVER - Oil pipeline opponents have developed computer-animated models illustrating how rapidly Vancouver's inlets and beaches could become coated in crude under a worst-case oil tanker spill scenario.
The analysis, which claims between 50 per cent and 90 per cent of spilled oil could spread to shorelines within 24 hours, will be submitted in a bid to block the expansion of Kinder Morgan's Trans Mountain pipeline.
The City of Vancouver, City of Burnaby and Tsleil-Waututh Nation commissioned the analysis based on their view that the pipeline infrastructure firm has failed to adequately study potential consequences of a spill.
The National Energy Board will consider evidence that will determine the project's future.
"We hope that (the models) will help both the NEB and all the residents of the region better understand the risks of oil spills,'' said John Konovsky, a technical advisor with the Tsleil-Waututh Nation. "Our position is that we oppose the expansion.''
One animation, posted online, shows a cluster of black dots spewing out from a theoretical ground zero, surging into open water and then dispersing into flecks that settle into dark outlines along the land.
The ebb and flow projected by the 72-hour time-lapse, driven mainly by tidal currents and winds, looks like a swarm of blackflies spreading across Vancouver's English Bay and harbour.
That model puts the spill epicentre below the Lions Gate Bridge, at the First Narrows in Burrard Inlet, considered one of the most difficult and dangerous regions for outgoing ships to navigate.
"Watching it, it's hard not to feel concerned,'' said Vancouver City Councillor Andrea Reimer, who drew a link between the animation to a much smaller spill in Vancouver's harbour.
The MV Marathassa leaked about 2,700 litres of bunker fuel into the waters of the city last month. The coast guard has estimated at least 90 per cent of the spill was recovered.
The city has said a clean up response by federal agencies was insufficient.
"When you look at the time delay (in this model), this oil, up to 90 per cent could be on shorelines within hours? The response wasn't even in place within hours,'' Reimer said.
It took more than four hours for an emergency response team, directed by the Canadian Coast Guard, to arrive after the fuel leak was first reported on the evening of April 8. A boom fully encircled the vessel by 6 a.m. the next day.
Beaches were closed for ten days, while two in Vancouver and several in West Vancouver remained under health advisories.
A single black dot in the animation represents slightly less than the volume of fuel spilled by the Marathassa. The model, conducted by Genwest Systems, predicts a worst-case spill of 16 million litres, which is about one-fifth the quantity of oil on an average tanker.
The oil movement in the animation does not factor in the impact of cleanup.
A proposed expansion of Kinder Morgan's Trans Mountain oil pipeline would triple the output currently leaving the harbour and is projected to increase tanker traffic in Burrard Inlet to 34 vessels each month.
Ali Hounsell, spokeswoman for the expansion project, said the firm has in fact submitted detailed risk assessments of potential spills to the NEB.
She wonders if the new modelling accounts for the fact that other vessels' movements are restricted when an oil tanker passes and that ships would be escorted by tugs.
Hounsell also notes the model doesn't factor in clean up response.
"If we can learn something from each other's studies, then we would certainly look at how we can incorporate that into our project to make it better.''
-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
Starting May 20th, you'll be able to order your 'Easy Order' (a custom order you've pre-saved on the Domino's website, along with your address and billing info) simply by tweeting the pizza emoji to @dominos. After tweeting, you'll receive a verification text, and your pizza will be on its way. I will only do it once, for the novelty, then go back to ordering Papa John's because Papa John's is the tits. Complimentary pepperoncini and garlic sauce for the win heartburn and diarrhea.
Once a customer has registered their Twitter handle on their Domino's Pizza Profile, they will then be able to simply tweet #EasyOrder or just the pizza emoji to the Domino's Twitter handle. Domino's will then send the customer a direct message to confirm the order and the Easy Order saved in a customer's profile will be automatically sent to their home.
I mean, it's cool it's so simple, but I rarely want to order the same thing every time. I like to SPICE IT UP. Sometimes I want ham and pineapple, and other times I want sausage and mushrooms. Just kidding, I never want ham and pineapple. You know what happened the last time I had a slice of ham and pineapple pizza? I got OUT OF CONTROL. "Yeah, that was probably the twelve cocktails you had before." IT WAS THE PIZZA. I know my body.
This is the Spaghetti Meatballwich available from The Carving Board in Los Angeles. It has meatballs, mozzarella and marinara packed between baked spaghetti buns. I'm gonna go try it, I'll report back shortly. Five minutes later: Okay, I thinks somebody stole my car. "No, you sold it for beer money two weeks ago." Ahahahahhaha, how do you know about that?! Admittedly, not the smartest decision I've ever made. The penis tattoo on my forearm either. Sure I won a bet with a friend ($200 -- he never paid), but now there's giant penis on my forearm. Sometimes I feel like I lack the ability to think about the future. I mean, except for jetpacks and flying cars, I can think about those all day.
Thanks to Dave L, who informed me lasagna is just spaghetti flavored cake.
This is a chart containing 50 inspirational quotes from different children's entertainment characters. I read them all now I feel like I can conquer the world. Or at least a really big sandwich. One of those sandwiches that if you eat the whole thing in a certain amount of time the restaurant will take your picture and put it on the wall. I have never been able to do that. My brother has done it at several different places and he's only like 140 pounds soaking wet. I'm like 215 but eat like a bird (mostly pieces of worm and whatever else my mom spits in my mouth).
Thanks to Jacquelyn, who agrees we should all pick a different quote from the chart every day for the next 50 days and try to live by that quote for 24 hours. Awesome, I'm starting with, 'To Infinity and Beyond!' *blasts self into sun*
Pantone Color Institute has announced it's first new color in three years, Minion Yellow, based off the pill-shaped Minions from 'Despicable Me'. Conveniently, the Minions spin off movie hits theaters July 10th. WHO GOT PAID, I WANT A CUT. A whole lot of words about yellow:
But they didn't blur the giant ass in the middle? What do you have against tits and not butts? Or -- OR -- could you not tell that was a butt?
Fox 5 in New York decided the beautiful (albeit somewhat hard to recognize) titties in Pablo Picasso's Women of Algiers were a little too risque for the news when reporting on the record-breaking $179.4-million dollar sale of the painting, and decided to blur them out just in case they were to give people boners and/or turn them into sexual deviants. Women of Algiers is the most expensive painting ever sold at auction, and the fifth most expensive painting every sold at all. I wonder whose decision it was to make the blur. Because that is a little ridiculous. If I were the newscaster I would have bothered the weatherman's draw-on-screen capabilities to draw even bigger boobs on the painting. Will they have laser nips? PROBABLY. Oh -- and what's this? It's a giant penis in the sky! Man, I would make a great newscaster.
/cdn0.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/3697158/2661310.jpg)
/cdn0.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/3698752/ar5-scenarios.png)
/cdn0.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/3492986/Nature_BECCS.0.jpg)
/cdn0.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/3698282/ipcc-ar5-carbon-budget.png)
/cdn0.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/3698308/mitigation-pathways.png)
/cdn0.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/3698884/shutterstock_230202550.jpg)
/cdn0.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/3698888/shutterstock_160036448.jpg)
This is a video of traceur (that's a person who performs parkour) and all around fearless human being Oleg Cricket (nice name for a parkour lover) jumping from little triangular platform to little triangular platform along a highrise (maybe not a million stories up like I said in the title, but the fall would definitely still hurt). How did he get up there? How did he get back in? Is he still alive? I couldn't watch it without my hands getting all clammy. Does that make me less of a man? I don't care if it makes me a gerbil's penis, I am not into this. I jumped off a park bench once and rolled both my ankles. I've been on crutches for the past six years. "You know you probably don't need those anymore." THEY ARE A PART OF ME NOW.
Keep going for the short video.
Like Us On Facebook 
Follow Us On Twitter 
Starting May 20th, you'll be able to order your 'Easy Order' (a custom order you've pre-saved on the Domino's website, along with your address and billing info) simply by tweeting the pizza emoji to @dominos. After tweeting, you'll receive a verification text, and your pizza will be on its way. I will only do it once, for the novelty, then go back to ordering Papa John's because Papa John's is the tits. Complimentary pepperoncini and garlic sauce for the 