No California Pipeline

No California Pipeline Website
RSS

Recent Posts

  • Is the South Beach Diet Effective?
  • Pipe Up to Oppose The California Pipeline! » 2008 » April » 24
  • Pipe Up to Oppose The California Pipeline! » 2008 » May
  • Pipe Up to Oppose The California Pipeline! » 2008 » February » 23
  • Pipe Up to Oppose The California Pipeline! » Public meetings on

Recent Comments

    Archives

    • February 2012
    • January 2012

    Categories

    • Uncategorized

    Meta

    • Log in
    • Entries RSS
    • Comments RSS
    • WordPress.org
    Feb05

    Is the South Beach Diet Effective?

    by Admin on February 5th, 2012 at 1:00 pm
    Posted In: Uncategorized

    One diet that has been touted as great and even gotten good reviews is the south beach diet. This is because it is a diet program that focuses on the reduction of weight, and it also takes a closer look at what a person does after the diet. Therefore, it ensures that people, who do actually loose weight, keep it off. The south beach diet is divided in to various phases and when followed well it works like clock work.

    The first phase for most people is usually the hardest since a person is supposed to cut off all sugars in their diet, this also means that a person is not supposed to eat desserts and certain veggies. A person is also supposed to stop eating saturated fats, due to high fat content. Thus, junk food in this phase usually becomes a no-no. Also, due to the lowered carb content in foods, people do get dizzy at times, and even feel hungry. This phase usually leads to drastic weight loss, and is the reason it is short. The second and third phase is usually meant to level off weight, and then maintain a healthy lifestyle afterwards. So, the south beach diet is effective. It works great, but only if well followed by a person.

     

    Jan19

    Pipe Up to Oppose The California Pipeline! » 2008 » April » 24

    by Admin on January 19th, 2012 at 5:52 am
    Posted In: Uncategorized

    In a suprising switch of occasions, Coos County's hearings officer advised that the land use software for the Jordan Cove LNG final be turned down. She previously advisable that a 2nd program for a unique element of the task be permitted. Picture of SitePicture of Web pageIn a suprising flip of events, Coos County's hearings officer encouraged that the land use application for the Jordan Cove LNG final be turned down. She formerly encouraged that a 2nd application for a unique element of the project be accredited. Community remark was skewed 10 to one in opposition to the challenge while in hearings in September in Coquille. Congratulations are in order to Jody McCaffree and so countless some others in Coos Bay and North Bend who have fought this proposal and its associated 223-mile pipeline (termed the Pacific Connector). A comparable suggestion was manufactured in opposition to the NorthernStar Bradwood proposal, but so significantly that county has failed to heed its possess employees, attorneys, and hired professionals. "There is proof that the loss of the eelgrass and the reduction of forty acres of shallow h2o will adversely have an effect on neighborhood fisheries."Briggs' conclusion about the impacts the LNG job on current commerce and other takes advantage of of Reduce Coos Bay was, "I are not able to say that the applicant has met its burden of demonstrating the Manifeste Trust Legal rights have not been unreasonably influenced."Also cited by Briggs as motives to deny the Port's allow software had been inadequate information and facts from the applicant about the opportunity impacts of growth on Henderson Marsh, and the impacts of redirecting storm water on Coos Bay..

    Jan19

    Pipe Up to Oppose The California Pipeline! » 2008 » May

    by Admin on January 19th, 2012 at 5:52 am
    Posted In: Uncategorized

    In a suprising switch of functions, Coos County's hearings officer endorsed that the land use program for the Jordan Cove LNG final be rejected. Her judgement could mark a turning of the tide in the battle towards LNG in Southern Oregon. General public comment was skewed ten to one in opposition to the challenge in the course of hearings in September in Coquille. On the other hand, neither the impacts nor the advantages to be derived from the proposed port slip have been independently quantified.""The fact that the proposed slip will deliver some generic economic features above an unspecified timeframe is not adequate to present that there is a desire for this terminal configuration," Briggs continued. Briggs went on to say she agreed with opponents that "the Port has not adequately justified the influence of the proposal on commerce, particularly industrial fishing inside of the bay, and recreation. "There is evidence that the reduction of the eelgrass and the loss of forty acres of shallow water will adversely impact local fisheries."Briggs' conclusion about the impacts the LNG task on existing commerce and other makes use of of Lower Coos Bay was, "I cannot say that the applicant has attained its burden of demonstrating the Community Trust Legal rights have not been unreasonably affected."Also cited by Briggs as causes to deny the Port's allow application had been inadequate specifics from the applicant about the opportunity impacts of advancement on Henderson Marsh, and the impacts of redirecting storm h2o on Coos Bay..

    Jan19

    Pipe Up to Oppose The California Pipeline! » 2008 » February » 23

    by Admin on January 19th, 2012 at 5:52 am
    Posted In: Uncategorized

    She formerly advised that a 2nd software for a unique piece of the undertaking be accredited. Image of Web sitePhotograph of WebsiteIn a suprising turn of celebrations, Coos County's hearings officer endorsed that the land use app for the Jordan Cove LNG terminal be turned down. She previously suggested that a second program for a several element of the task be authorized. Her judgement could mark a turning of the tide in the battle against LNG in Southern Oregon. A related advice was designed in opposition to the NorthernStar Bradwood proposal, but so far that county has failed to heed its individual team, attorneys, and employed authorities. Right here is a press launch from nocaliforniapipeline.com:HEARINGS OFFICER Recommends COOS COUNTY COMMISSION DENIES PORT Allow FOR LNG SLIPIn a just launched letter to the Coos County Commission, Hearings Officer Anne Corcoran Briggs has recommended that the Commission deny the Worldwide Port of Coos Bay's application for a conditional use allow to dredge out a forty five acre slip in the North Spit of Coos Bay for docking 900-foot very long tanker ships at a considerable liquefied natural gas final. Briggs, who was employed by Coos County to consider the permit software submitted by the Port, wrote that her denial advice was dependent on the applicant "not demonstrating that all applicable approval expectations have been satisfied."In particular, Briggs wrote she "agreed with opponents that the applicant has not satisfactorily quantified the gains to the general public that justify the development of the maritime final as proposed.""The applicant relies on economic studies that exhibit the proposal, when mixed with the LNG facilities, will deliver an economic gain to the county.

    Jan19

    Pipe Up to Oppose The California Pipeline! » Public meetings on

    by Admin on January 19th, 2012 at 5:52 am
    Posted In: Uncategorized

    She formerly advised that a second application for a several element of the undertaking be accepted. Photograph of WebsiteImage of WebpageIn a suprising switch of activities, Coos County's hearings officer proposed that the land use application for the Jordan Cove LNG terminal be turned down. Deliberations for the Clatsop County Commission's final selection commences on December 13th. Qualified workers in equally counties have proposed Towards the terminals. It really is now up to the County Commissions to do the correct factor and listen to the tips of its hired team and the general public. On the other hand, neither the impacts nor the advantages to be derived from the proposed port slip have been independently quantified.""The point that the proposed slip will bring in some generic economic positive aspects over an unspecified timeframe is not more than enough to demonstrate that there is a want for this terminal configuration," Briggs continued. Briggs went on to say she agreed with opponents that "the Port has not adequately justified the effect of the proposal on commerce, particularly industrial fishing inside of the bay, and recreation. "There is proof that the loss of the eelgrass and the loss of forty acres of shallow drinking water will adversely have an impact on community fisheries."Briggs' summary about the impacts the LNG job on current commerce and other takes advantage of of Decreased Coos Bay was, "I cannot say that the applicant has met its stress of demonstrating the Public Rely on Legal rights have not been unreasonably afflicted."Also cited by Briggs as factors to deny the Port's permit software have been insufficient data from the applicant about the probable impacts of advancement on Henderson Marsh, and the impacts of redirecting storm water on Coos Bay..

    • Page 1 of 23
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
    • »
    • Last »
    There are currently no widgets assigned to the right-sidebar, place some!

    Once you add widgets to this sidebar, this default information will go away.

    This theme also uses the WordPress 3.0 Menu system. You probably see the default stuff you have in the menubar. Go to Appearance -> Menu in the wp-admin (dashboard) and create a new menu.

    Recommended Plugins

    1. Viper's Video Quicktags
    2. Audio Player
    3. Theme Companion

    ©2012 No California Pipeline | Powered by WordPress with Easel | Subscribe: RSS | Back to Top ↑