All Things Environment

[lagerhead]

"Soylent Green"

"To Serve Man"

[DMac]

Too funny, cradle, just went to this place a couple of days ago, couldn't tell you how many raw clams (steamed too) or how much shrimp I ate. Suffice it to say, a whole lot. This is a pretty tough place to beat.
http://www.flaminggrillbuffetsyracuse.com/buffet.aspx

[HooDat]

"Soylent Green"

"To Serve Man"

[MDlaxfan76]

Got nothing against it, MD, wish you well and hope the profits are through the roof. Just never have been much for this kind of thing (remember when marjorine was better for you than butter...eggs were no good for you...coffee, etc?), I've always taken the other angle and exercised. Weighed close to 180 as an 18 year old, and maintained that to my early 60s (minus one short period when I put on 50 lbs...lost that in no time, too). That's what's always made me feel best, and I've never given a second's thought to what I eat (but I've never been much of a junk food eater). I'll stick with the real shrimp with shells (boil those babies for the shrimp broth for your rice...or whatever). If I die four years earlier than the guy eating seaweed burgers and primp, I really don't care.

Me too DMac, though I haven't been the weight of my 18 yr old 145 lb wrestler self ever after that as I grew a lot during college. By college graduation a lean 190. Haven't been there either! Got a buddy who struggles to keep enough weight on...not fair.

We have no particular interest in any of these products, we just make it easy for people to do whatever they decide they care about. Some folks have serious food allergies (shrimp can be a nasty one), some people actually need to reduce fast burning carbs and salt (eg diabetes, heart disease, metabolic disorder, etc), some people care about various cultural and ethical considerations. And families are made up of all sorts of folks and their challenges at the table.

However, pretty much everyone wants delicious meals that are easy to make and are affordable, whatever these issues might be. We make that easy to do. 92% of people say they want to 'eat healthier', we make it easy to plan ahead and shop ahead instead of resorting to last second impulses (which are often unhealthy versus our best intentions). So more meals made from healthy ingredients, less fast food and highly processed food. The idea is have folks not have to read labels, not have to think about it, just enjoy delicious, nutritionally dense food. Doesn't mean no Doritos or Big Macs, just less often.

So, I was just reporting that the trends are very real.
People are making these choices, no one's twisting their arms...and capital is flowing to meet their demands.

Re shrimp, I'm happy with the real thing, as long as pollutant levels are fine. Gotta be careful about this, especially with some of the unregulated farm raised shrimp. Wild caught tends to be a quite healthy, and excellent source of protein and key nutrients, but there are issues with labelling. Here's a rather interesting article that raises the sorts of issues leading to shrimp substitutes. https://draxe.com/nutrition/article/shrimp-nutrition/

I'm a big fan of seafood of all sorts, being a Baltimore native and having grown up fishing and crabbing the Bay. My wife's family goes back many, many generations as commercial fishermen off the Cape and Islands, and Nova Scotia. Her dad was a commercial fisherman. When I used to visit her family during college, they initially would cook a steak or roast beef, which they considered 'special'. I eventually got up the nerve to ask for seafood...and mounds of fried flounder, lobster salad, fried scallops, etc flowed from thereon...enjoyed with great gusto!

[DMac]

Yup, I get it, Md, and it is indeed a big and growing market. As I said, I've got no problem with any of it, if that's what people want to eat I'm glad it's available for them. I'm not eating Tofu rather than steak because someone says it's better for me though. Add the fact that too many don't do much cooking anymore and are looking for that quick and easy meal, and there's a huge market for that kind of thing. I like to cook and I use "real" food and make what I like. I loved it when the Food Channel first came around, you really could learn a lot from some pretty fine chefs and up your game quite a bit....good stuff (no pun intended).
Forgot about the shrimp allergy people, it is pretty serious. Dated a girl for awhile who was allergic to shrimp, kind of a shame too, could have poked a few holes in her bra and used it as a shrimp net and come up with a pretty good sized plate full with every catch. Oh well.
Used to do quite a bit of surf fishing in Va Beach, caught an awful lot of flounder, crabs too. Pretty top shelf stuff in my book. The crustaceans and mollusks that come from the ocean are just crazy good.

[LandM]

DMac,
That bra thing was too damn funny. You may appreciate this. Get to AFA weighing 190. Position coach says 210. We had our own tables called ramps. Great as a freshman as no eating at attention and no having to study knowledge book. Anyway it was a smorgasbord of steak, potatoes, SOS all that healthy stuff Then they gave you sack lunch to take back to dorm room to eat before 11pm taps. There were a few guys who jumped to 300. After bowl game seniors get called in - height/weight standard, rut row. We went from eating like kings to eating like peasants. Fortunately they came out with tape test. Fast forward, get recalled and the first thing they make you do is height weight. Yep still 210. Captain for height you are overweight. Just wanted smack the dude.

Like you I eat what I want and exercise daily. Lucky I am still 210.

[MDlaxfan76]

Yup, I get it, Md, and it is indeed a big and growing market. As I said, I've got no problem with any of it, if that's what people want to eat I'm glad it's available for them. I'm not eating Tofu rather than steak because someone says it's better for me though. Add the fact that too many don't do much cooking anymore and are looking for that quick and easy meal, and there's a huge market for that kind of thing. I like to cook and I use "real" food and make what I like. I loved it when the Food Channel first came around, you really could learn a lot from some pretty fine chefs and up your game quite a bit....good stuff (no pun intended).
Forgot about the shrimp allergy people, it is pretty serious. Dated a girl for awhile who was allergic to shrimp, kind of a shame too, could have poked a few holes in her bra and used it as a shrimp net and come up with a pretty good sized plate full with every catch. Oh well.
Used to do quite a bit of surf fishing in Va Beach, caught an awful lot of flounder, crabs too. Pretty top shelf stuff in my book. The crustaceans and mollusks that come from the ocean are just crazy good.

My point was just that there all sorts of reasons why folks make these choices. But if one doesn't have specific health concerns, and have good though aging metabolisms, a balanced diet of whole, real foods is great from a health perspective. It's what I mostly try to do, though I do try to stay away from fast burning carbs and added sugars as weight gain is my health and energy enemy as I've gotten older and the metabolism has slowed (as it naturally does). I'm doing less saturated fats as well (meats, etc) but that doesn't mean I can never enjoy a really good steak. Exercise for me is both a calorie burn and a huge positive on mood, so I tend to be a bit compulsive in my exercise. I prefer competitive sports with the ball moving rather than stationary, but have gotten into a good daily routine with Peloton given two replaced hips...

The ethical aspects are another factor for an increasing % of folks, as awareness of these issues has grown. I'm for as much transparency on this stuff as possible, letting the consumer choose how they want to weigh various factors.

What we do know from behavioral science, though, is that under impulse conditions we humans often succumb to the temptations of the here and now, not weighing future outcomes the way we would if our behavior had been pre-planned and executed. True of all sorts of decisions. In meal planning, this means we're far more likely to choose "sugar, fat, salt" laden choices, with excessive, high caloric large portions, if we're making a last second choice. We naturally 'crave what is scarce in nature' but now engineered to be plentiful and cheap. Quite different than when we plan ahead such choices.

Transparency is not enough without pre-planning. For instance, when restaurants label the handful of 'healthy' choices on their menus those items rise somewhat in sales but the biggest gains are seen in the least healthy items on the menu, as folks tell themselves they're treating themselves today and will do better 'tomorrow'. Very human to do this.

But everyone's different in all sorts of ways, so our emphasis is on personalizing the meal planning and shopping experience so that fits whatever lifestyle and health and budget etc needs of each family.

[youthathletics]

Yup, I get it, Md, and it is indeed a big and growing market. As I said, I've got no problem with any of it, if that's what people want to eat I'm glad it's available for them. I'm not eating Tofu rather than steak because someone says it's better for me though. Add the fact that too many don't do much cooking anymore and are looking for that quick and easy meal, and there's a huge market for that kind of thing. I like to cook and I use "real" food and make what I like. I loved it when the Food Channel first came around, you really could learn a lot from some pretty fine chefs and up your game quite a bit....good stuff (no pun intended).
Forgot about the shrimp allergy people, it is pretty serious. Dated a girl for awhile who was allergic to shrimp, kind of a shame too, could have poked a few holes in her bra and used it as a shrimp net and come up with a pretty good sized plate full with every catch. Oh well.
Used to do quite a bit of surf fishing in Va Beach, caught an awful lot of flounder, crabs too. Pretty top shelf stuff in my book. The crustaceans and mollusks that come from the ocean are just crazy good.

My point was just that there all sorts of reasons why folks make these choices. But if one doesn't have specific health concerns, and have good though aging metabolisms, a balanced diet of whole, real foods is great from a health perspective. It's what I mostly try to do, though I do try to stay away from fast burning carbs and added sugars as weight gain is my health and energy enemy as I've gotten older and the metabolism has slowed (as it naturally does). I'm doing less saturated fats as well (meats, etc) but that doesn't mean I can never enjoy a really good steak. Exercise for me is both a calorie burn and a huge positive on mood, so I tend to be a bit compulsive in my exercise. I prefer competitive sports with the ball moving rather than stationary, but have gotten into a good daily routine with Peloton given two replaced hips...

The ethical aspects are another factor for an increasing % of folks, as awareness of these issues has grown. I'm for as much transparency on this stuff as possible, letting the consumer choose how they want to weigh various factors.

What we do know from behavioral science, though, is that under impulse conditions we humans often succumb to the temptations of the here and now, not weighing future outcomes the way we would if our behavior had been pre-planned and executed. True of all sorts of decisions. In meal planning, this means we're far more likely to choose "sugar, fat, salt" laden choices, with excessive, high caloric large portions, if we're making a last second choice. We naturally 'crave what is scarce in nature' but now engineered to be plentiful and cheap. Quite different than when we plan ahead such choices.

Transparency is not enough without pre-planning. For instance, when restaurants label the handful of 'healthy' choices on their menus those items rise somewhat in sales but the biggest gains are seen in the least healthy items on the menu, as folks tell themselves they're treating themselves today and will do better 'tomorrow'. Very human to do this.

But everyone's different in all sorts of ways, so our emphasis is on personalizing the meal planning and shopping experience so that fits whatever lifestyle and health and budget etc needs of each family.

Worth a read from Mens Health on Fauxteins.

As this relates to Climate Change....not certain, but if fauxteins are truly going to take off, it must be a great positive for our farmers since much of these are soy and pea based. It may very well neutralize the trade issue if it really takes off. And hey, with some cynicism intended, the higher co2 and temps will yield more crops.

[CU88]

Why?

https://www.npr.org/2019/09/04/75762382 ... ight-bulbs

[youthathletics]

Why?

https://www.npr.org/2019/09/04/75762382 ... ight-bulbs

Looks like it is based on a technicality of defined terms for GSL (General Service lamp) and GSIL (General Service Incandescent lamp), that his a trigger in 2020 which could cause manufacturing concerns on 1-Jan-2020

See the summary below and section III B

SUMMARY: On February 11, 2019, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) published a notice
of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) proposing to withdraw the revised definitions of general service
lamp (GSL), general service incandescent lamp (GSIL) and other supplemental definitions, that
were to go into effect on January 1, 2020. DOE responds to comments received on the NOPR in
this final rule and maintains the existing regulatory definitions of GSL and GSIL, which are the
same as the statutory definitions of those terms.

[CU88]

Why?

https://www.npr.org/2019/09/04/75762382 ... ight-bulbs

Looks like it is based on a technicality of defined terms for GSL (General Service lamp) and GSIL (General Service Incandescent lamp), that his a trigger in 2020 which could cause manufacturing concerns on 1-Jan-2020

See the summary below and section III B

SUMMARY: On February 11, 2019, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) published a notice
of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) proposing to withdraw the revised definitions of general service
lamp (GSL), general service incandescent lamp (GSIL) and other supplemental definitions, that
were to go into effect on January 1, 2020. DOE responds to comments received on the NOPR in
this final rule and maintains the existing regulatory definitions of GSL and GSIL, which are the
same as the statutory definitions of those terms.

My intention was not to understand the "how" he could, but more the "why".

Trump on his decision to weaken energy efficiency rules for light bulbs: "I'm not a vain person...But I look better under an incandescent light than these crazy lights that are beaming down."

Sure looks like Trump is selling his decision to reverse an environmental regulation by telling his supporters they'll look better without it.

[youthathletics]

Why?

https://www.npr.org/2019/09/04/75762382 ... ight-bulbs

Looks like it is based on a technicality of defined terms for GSL (General Service lamp) and GSIL (General Service Incandescent lamp), that his a trigger in 2020 which could cause manufacturing concerns on 1-Jan-2020

See the summary below and section III B

SUMMARY: On February 11, 2019, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) published a notice
of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) proposing to withdraw the revised definitions of general service
lamp (GSL), general service incandescent lamp (GSIL) and other supplemental definitions, that
were to go into effect on January 1, 2020. DOE responds to comments received on the NOPR in
this final rule and maintains the existing regulatory definitions of GSL and GSIL, which are the
same as the statutory definitions of those terms.

My intention was not to understand the "how" he could, but more the "why".

Trump on his decision to weaken energy efficiency rules for light bulbs: "I'm not a vain person...But I look better under an incandescent light than these crazy lights that are beaming down."

Sure looks like Trump is selling his decision to reverse an environmental regulation by telling his supporters they'll look better without it.

I honestly do not know. But It appears it is more about legal jargon, than what the article claims.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Why?

https://www.npr.org/2019/09/04/75762382 ... ight-bulbs

Looks like it is based on a technicality of defined terms for GSL (General Service lamp) and GSIL (General Service Incandescent lamp), that his a trigger in 2020 which could cause manufacturing concerns on 1-Jan-2020

See the summary below and section III B

SUMMARY: On February 11, 2019, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) published a notice
of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) proposing to withdraw the revised definitions of general service
lamp (GSL), general service incandescent lamp (GSIL) and other supplemental definitions, that
were to go into effect on January 1, 2020. DOE responds to comments received on the NOPR in
this final rule and maintains the existing regulatory definitions of GSL and GSIL, which are the
same as the statutory definitions of those terms.

My intention was not to understand the "how" he could, but more the "why".

Trump on his decision to weaken energy efficiency rules for light bulbs: "I'm not a vain person...But I look better under an incandescent light than these crazy lights that are beaming down."

Sure looks like Trump is selling his decision to reverse an environmental regulation by telling his supporters they'll look better without it.

Stunning. I had not watched more than 2 minutes of Trump in maybe the last 16 months. It was jarring to watch 5 to 10 minutes. He is old and his mind is feeble.

[ABV 8.3%]

Even burnt toast will be tRump. Write?

Could've gone in the Tulsi Gabbard thread (2020 re-election )

https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/me ... -deal-well


and the fact that now in Boston, the lobsters move to Maine, because it's too warm in the waters, and the food for them doesn't grow appropriately and so on. I talked to folks who fish commercially off our shores, down by New Bedford, up by Gloucester. You know what they tell me? No LIZ, what do they tell you?

“They keep pulling stuff that they don't know even what it is. So what do they do? I talked to one who said I called my brother-in-law who fishes commercially off the coast of Florida, because I send him pictures and he says we used to catch those down here, but now they’ve moved to Boston and to the waters around Massachusetts and New England. So here's what really scares me. This isn't slowing down. It's speeding up,” she said.

She is such a complete fool, liz is. Maine had a slow start because it was so COLD !

[MDlaxfan76]

Why?

https://www.npr.org/2019/09/04/75762382 ... ight-bulbs

Looks like it is based on a technicality of defined terms for GSL (General Service lamp) and GSIL (General Service Incandescent lamp), that his a trigger in 2020 which could cause manufacturing concerns on 1-Jan-2020

See the summary below and section III B

SUMMARY: On February 11, 2019, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) published a notice
of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) proposing to withdraw the revised definitions of general service
lamp (GSL), general service incandescent lamp (GSIL) and other supplemental definitions, that
were to go into effect on January 1, 2020. DOE responds to comments received on the NOPR in
this final rule and maintains the existing regulatory definitions of GSL and GSIL, which are the
same as the statutory definitions of those terms.

Are you saying they just flubbed this, didn't realize they were blowing up the regulation?
Just a technical oops, soon to be fixed?

Or is Trump correct that he ordered it...?

Looks to me like the technical aspects are just the mechanics of unwinding the rule and this was indeed a policy change.
Really dumb one.

[RedFromMI]

Why?

https://www.npr.org/2019/09/04/75762382 ... ight-bulbs

Looks like it is based on a technicality of defined terms for GSL (General Service lamp) and GSIL (General Service Incandescent lamp), that his a trigger in 2020 which could cause manufacturing concerns on 1-Jan-2020

See the summary below and section III B

SUMMARY: On February 11, 2019, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) published a notice
of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) proposing to withdraw the revised definitions of general service
lamp (GSL), general service incandescent lamp (GSIL) and other supplemental definitions, that
were to go into effect on January 1, 2020. DOE responds to comments received on the NOPR in
this final rule and maintains the existing regulatory definitions of GSL and GSIL, which are the
same as the statutory definitions of those terms.

Are you saying they just flubbed this, didn't realize they were blowing up the regulation?
Just a technical oops, soon to be fixed?

Or is Trump correct that he ordered it...?

Looks to me like the technical aspects are just the mechanics of unwinding the rule and this was indeed a policy change.
Really dumb one.

The higher energy efficiency was accomplished by redefinition so the Trump administration is unwinding it by reverting the definition. The basic idea is the manufacturers don’t make as much money if you rarely replace bulbs so if they dump the efficiency standards they can keep making more money as well as wasting energy.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Roll back fuel efficiency requirements so oil companies can sell more gas.

[youthathletics]

Why?

https://www.npr.org/2019/09/04/75762382 ... ight-bulbs

Looks like it is based on a technicality of defined terms for GSL (General Service lamp) and GSIL (General Service Incandescent lamp), that his a trigger in 2020 which could cause manufacturing concerns on 1-Jan-2020

See the summary below and section III B

SUMMARY: On February 11, 2019, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) published a notice
of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) proposing to withdraw the revised definitions of general service
lamp (GSL), general service incandescent lamp (GSIL) and other supplemental definitions, that
were to go into effect on January 1, 2020. DOE responds to comments received on the NOPR in
this final rule and maintains the existing regulatory definitions of GSL and GSIL, which are the
same as the statutory definitions of those terms.

Are you saying they just flubbed this, didn't realize they were blowing up the regulation?
Just a technical oops, soon to be fixed?

Or is Trump correct that he ordered it...?

Looks to me like the technical aspects are just the mechanics of unwinding the rule and this was indeed a policy change.
Really dumb one.

The higher energy efficiency was accomplished by redefinition so the Trump administration is unwinding it by reverting the definition. The basic idea is the manufacturers don’t make as much money if you rarely replace bulbs so if they dump the efficiency standards they can keep making more money as well as wasting energy.

...and then some more from DOE.
Page 47 of the Link:

In the February 2019 NOPR, DOE said that the agency would attempt to quantify the
uncertainty created by its prior rulemakings in the proceeding. In particular, DOE noted that it
had created substantial uncertainty by making apparently conflicting statements about the
applicability of the backstop requirement. DOE anticipates that having clarified that the
backstop does not apply has and will result in measurable effects on the markets for certain
incandescent lamps, including rough-service, vibration service, 3-way, shatter resistant, highlumen, candelabra, halogen, and globe lamps. Further, significant uncertainty existed in the
retail market regarding the scope of lamps that may be available for sale, which DOE had failed
to clarify in previous statements or rulemakings. As a result of this uncertainty, retail outlets had
not been able to plan adequately for a potential change in stock, or lack thereof. This uncertainty
creates cost for retailers, and this clarification is expected to reduce those uncertainty costs.

[MDlaxfan76]

Why?

https://www.npr.org/2019/09/04/75762382 ... ight-bulbs

Looks like it is based on a technicality of defined terms for GSL (General Service lamp) and GSIL (General Service Incandescent lamp), that his a trigger in 2020 which could cause manufacturing concerns on 1-Jan-2020

See the summary below and section III B

SUMMARY: On February 11, 2019, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) published a notice
of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) proposing to withdraw the revised definitions of general service
lamp (GSL), general service incandescent lamp (GSIL) and other supplemental definitions, that
were to go into effect on January 1, 2020. DOE responds to comments received on the NOPR in
this final rule and maintains the existing regulatory definitions of GSL and GSIL, which are the
same as the statutory definitions of those terms.

Are you saying they just flubbed this, didn't realize they were blowing up the regulation?
Just a technical oops, soon to be fixed?

Or is Trump correct that he ordered it...?

Looks to me like the technical aspects are just the mechanics of unwinding the rule and this was indeed a policy change.
Really dumb one.

The higher energy efficiency was accomplished by redefinition so the Trump administration is unwinding it by reverting the definition. The basic idea is the manufacturers don’t make as much money if you rarely replace bulbs so if they dump the efficiency standards they can keep making more money as well as wasting energy.

That's what I figured.

Youth, you agree?

[ABV 8.3%]

Lite bulbs. Where are they made? ALL overseas? EPA is beeching about kW's when the polluting factories the LED bulbs are made in , overseas to suicidal slave children, pollute ten times the amount of heavy metals than coal plants. Huh? This is a WORLD WIDE climate change issue, is it not?

THESE people are such a joke..............