Advanced Electron Beams, which uses electron beam technology to kick-start chemical reactions and break down chemical structures more efficiently than thermal and chemical methods. The Wilmington, Massachusetts-based startup says its electron beam emitter is smaller and less expensive than the traditional options and can help companies in the manufacturing and packaging industries cut energy consumption in some cases between 60 and 90 percent reducing emissions and lowering costs.
GE has already been testing the companys electron beam emitter (the AEB Emitter) in its research center and has drummed up at least nine possible applications, including sterilizing food and other goods for packaging, treating materials (like solar photovoltaics in manufacturing), curing substances for printing and coating, pollution abatement and hydrogen production. While the $4 million from GE will no doubt help the company prove its technology on a larger scale, access to GEs research will be crucial to move this technology into more manufacturing methods.
Advanced Electron Beams says it already has 40 customers using the tech, and GEs latest round adds on to the startups list of investors, which already includes the likes of Atlas Venture, General Catalyst and RockPort Capital. AEBs innovation of a smaller, simpler, and less expensive emitter was developed by company founder Tovi Avnery. The technology has the potential to help clean up factories and lower the cost of manufacturing in subtle but important ways, and we see this technology making it big when more carbon regulations set in. AEBs CEO Mitch Tyson says the companys vision is to provide the sustainable factory of the future.

Americano top 10 >>> Read more...

The recent war in Georgia has shocked and frightened all of Europe. Thankfully, it is coming to a halt, but whether that halt will prove temporary or permanent is beyond the judgement of this blog (and indeed any blog).

Some thoughts about what caused the war, though, are worth airing. The fighting started when the Georgian government attempted to reassert control over the breakaway province of South Ossetia, which required an attack on the Russian forces that were stationed there (nominally as peacekeepers, but in fact as the advance guard of an occupation). The Russians then responded with overwhelming force, not entirely unlike a full-scale military invasion.

The argument that Georgian membership of Nato would have prevented the war seems to me a little odd. Would the Russians have been dissuaded from their reaction if Georgia had been a member of Nato? I doubt it. Those Nato members that are most sympathetic to the Georgian case have no troops to send (or no troops to spare, as they are already in Afghanistan and Iraq), while those countries that do have soldiers available (because they’ve not been sent to Afghanistan) would be even less likely to want to the fight the Russians. On the other hand, a Georgian government that believed it had the military protection of America and Europe would have been no less likely to have embarked on its doomed military mission in the first place.

Nato members would then have been faced with a terrible dilemma. Either fight the Russians, or allow the mutual defence commitment that is central to the Nato alliance to evaporate into thin air. Anyone who says that Georgia should have been admitted to Nato membership at the summit in Bucharest in April 2008 has got to say which of those two they would prefer.

The fundamental problem is that Nato does not add to its mutual defence guarantee any meaningful way of making common policies. During the Cold War, this did not matter: the threat was obviously from the Soviet Union and America was obviously the leader of the free world. The United States could therefore make decisions on behalf of the entire alliance, although there was controversy even over some of those, such as the decision to deploy Tomahawk and Pershing missiles in the early 1980s.

Now that the threat and the leadership role are not quite so clear, what can be done? There would have been no question of a Nato member during the Cold War embarking on the kind of adventure that Georgia has just done: the Americans would not have allowed it. The assumption that Georgian membership of Nato would have led it to follow wider Nato policies is surely wrong. More likely, Nato membership would have emboldened Georgia to continue with its existing policy, in the belief that it had the support of the rest of the west. As the Georgians have found out to their cost, they don’t.

The European Union is more realistic that Nato in this regard, recognising that joint policy-making has got to accompany mutual obligations. Of course, joint policy-making is hard, which why the EU has a relatively limited competence in foreign affairs and security at present. But the EU is more likely to prove a useful vehicle for cooperation in these areas in future precisely because it has a better way of taking decisions.

News >>> Read more...

If I were the Chancellor looking at the latest property transaction figures I wouldn't be worried, I'd be very worried.
At 270,000 transactions for residential property in the second quarter, we are looking at a housing market about 38% less active than a year ago, when 432,000 transactions were undertaken in the same period .
A quick look at the seasonally adjusted figures points to the downswing continuing.
That means more estate agents closing (As it happens, I walked past an estate agent's office that I hadn't previously spotted was closed only this morning). That means less tax take from the companies and the employees.
It means more pain in the house building market. It means removal companies struggling. It means fewer white goods sold, less in the way of painting and decorating and so on and so on.
That would worry me if I were chancellor.
But what would start to worry me even would be the implications emerging from poring over the statistics on the tax take from stamp duty.

Best sites about >>> Read more...

More info about >>> Read more...

This is from a series of portraits I did in the Biloxi, Mississippi area for a very large credit union to use in brochures, ads, and TV spots. All the shots were done very quickly with available light in different locations which pertained to something that person did or visited a lot. 
This area was hit really hard by Hurricane Katrina and having never been there was surprised at how many Waffle Houses they had. This is one of the few buildings left standing near the water and this retired gentleman liked to hang out there and talk with other locals. 
Was no problem getting permission to shoot there but one stipulation was we could not use the Waffle House logo in the picture if it was for an ad. That wasnt much of a problem but you can still see the yellow and black tile pattern which is part of their decor.
I did have one embarrassing moment during the shoot which is kind of funny. There was another guy who is a regular there that was hanging out and talking quite a bit, almost to the point of putting me on edge while trying to concentrate on taking the picture. I had the camera set up on a tripod shooting and the guy insists that I come over and talk to him as he has something important to tell me. Was irritated that he just didnt spill the beans and save me the time but in the interests of keeping the peace I walked over and he whispered in my ear that my zipper was down. I had used the restroom just before we started shooting and had apparently forgot to zip up in my haste to get the job done. LOL
Used available light, a Nikon D2x and 17-55mm lens on a tripod for this shot. Besides the interior lights there was a giant window opposite him that gave a nice even illumination.

More info about >>> house