Greenwich, Connecticut real estate, politics, and more.
Greenwich, Connecticut real estate, politics, and more
35 Lauder Lane has sold for $2.3 million. Given its condition — updating urgently needed — but excellent location and property, that seems a reasonable price. But these owners paid $4 million for it in 2007, to sellers who had in turn paid $2 million for it in 2000. From $2 to $4 back to $2. There was some remodeling done between 2000 and 2007, but certainly not approaching any sum that would justify such a bump.
19 Hill Road (photoshopped grey; the current dark stain is, well, dark)
19 Hill Road, $1.8995 million. It came on in September, so that’s a pretty quick sale these days. Custom-built, I believe, for this owner is 1967, I really like this house. It’s bright, with clean lines, and Hill Road’s a fine mid-county location. The owners were fortunate to live in such a nice house for so long. Presumably, the new buyers will want to update it, but I wish them many happy years here as well.
I’d probably do some judicious pruning-back pf the plantings that have grown up over the past 56 years, but that’s a quibble.
Case in point, 175 Riverside Avenue, $1.749 million, which just went to contract after just 27 days on the market.
Built in 1965 as part of a 4-lot subdivision of the Meeker property, this was one of the original eponymous “Murphy Houses”, a title bestowed on all that builder’s homes because they were built cheaply, on slabs, and built quickly. On the other hand, I remember a sign advertising these homes back then, pricing them, at — and Cobra, Gideon, Anthony, correct me on this — $29,000; even then that was cheap.
Much has been done to improve this house since then, of course, so I’m not trashing the house but merely recounting its brief history as an example of how Riverside developed, literally, over the years.
When the plastic ban was first imposed in 2007, the SF Chronicle was ecstatic over the city’s pioneering action.
Fifty years ago, plastic bags -- starting first with the sandwich bag -- were seen in the United States as a more sanitary and environmentally friendly alternative to the deforesting paper bag. Now an estimated 180 million plastic bags are distributed to shoppers each year in San Francisco. Made of filmy plastic, they are hard to recycle and easily blow into trees and waterways, where they are blamed for killing marine life. They also occupy much-needed landfill space.
Mirkarimi's legislation is one in a string of environmentally sensitive measures -- such as outlawing Styrofoam food containers and encouraging clean-fuel construction vehicles at city job sites -- adopted by the city in recent months.
"It's really exciting," Jared Blumenfeld, director of the city's Department of the Environment, said after the vote on Tuesday. "We're thrilled. It's been a long time in the making."
Blumenfeld said it takes 430,000 gallons of oil to manufacture 100 million bags. Compostable bags can be recycled in the city's green garbage bins and will make it more convenient for residents to recycle food scraps, he said.
So much bullshit, so few compost piles. Leaving sanitation aside for the moment, here’s a neutral look at paper vs plastic
When you do get to choose between paper and plastic, don't let green guilt necessarily pull you toward paper. Consider that both materials have drawbacks for the environment.
Before you brown bag it, consider these environmental disadvantages of paper:
Causes pollution: Paper production emits air pollution, specifically 70 percent more pollution than the production of plastic bags [source: Thompson]. According to certain studies, manufacturing paper emits 80 percent more greenhouse gases [source: Lilienfield]. And, consider that making paper uses trees that, instead, could be absorbing carbon dioxide. The paper bag making process also results in 50 times more water pollutants than making plastic bags [source: Thompson].
Consumes energy: Even though petroleum goes into making plastic, it turns out that making a paper bag consumes four times as much energy as making a plastic bag, meaning making paper consumes a good deal of fuel [source: reusablebags.com].
Consumes water: The production of paper bags uses three times the amount of water it takes to make plastic bags [source: Lilienfield].
Inefficient recycling: The process of recycling paper can be inefficient -- often consuming more fuel than it would take to make a new bag [source: Milstein]. In addition, it takes about 91 percent more energy to recycle a pound of paper than a pound of plastic [source: reusablebags.com].
Produces waste: According to some measures, paper bags generate 80 percent more solid waste [source: Lilienfield].
Biodegrading difficulties: Surprisingly, the EPA has stated that in landfills, paper doesn't degrade all that much faster than plastics [source: Lilienfield].
Litter: Littered plastic bags are everywhere today -- blown around streets, stuck in fences and trees. And, aside from their use in the occasional art film (à la American Beauty) they can be an eyesore and a pain.
Danger to wildlife: Plastic waste is deceptive for birds and other wildlife, who mistake it for food. And you can imagine how eating plastic messes with an animal's intestine. As a result, animals can die of starvation [source: Spivey]. To prevent this, perhaps paper is the better choice, especially if you live on the coast, as your plastic waste is more likely to make its way to marine life and sea birds [source: Thompson].
Long-term degrading: Light breaks plastic down so it photodegrades rather than biodegrades. Estimates say that this process can take up to 500 or even 1000 years in landfills [source: Lapidos]. Unfortunately, we don't really know, as plastic is a relatively new invention.
Recycling difficulties: Although for the most part, plastic takes less energy to recycle than paper, plastic bags are a frustrating recycling dilemma. The curbside recycling in many communities is not meant for plastic bags because they can screw up the plant's machines [source: Milstein]. Instead, some stores offer bins in which to properly recycle plastic bags.
These factors have made the question of which is greener mind-boggling. The EPA has admitted that not only is the question unresolved, but it doesn't consider the use of plastic bags a major issue [source: Spivey]. Most environmental groups say that it's best to avoid the choice altogether -- instead we should diligently reuse bags.
Ah, but what about those “reuse bags”?
Here’s a liberal’s comparison of plastic vs reusable.
I felt really good about myself, until I saw a report published earlier this year by Denmark’s Ministry of Environment and Food that said that plastic bags are better for the environment than organic cotton tote bags. In fact, of all the shopping bags the study looked at — from paper to recycled plastic — cotton tote bags fared the worst: they need to be reused thousands of times to have the same environmental footprint as a lightweight plastic bag, according to the report. A study published in 2011 by the UK Environment Agency reached similar conclusions. So, was my decision to ditch plastic bags bad for the environment?
The answer is not that easy. First of all, these studies — called “life cycle assessments” — have to be taken with a grain of salt. The research looks at different types of shopping bags through all of their life cycles: from the extraction of the raw material needed to make the bag to the way the bags are used and then discarded. It then determines how “environmentally friendly” each bag is based on several impact categories, such as climate change, toxicity, and water use.
“Here’s the rub: it’s basically impossible for one bag to score better than all other bags in each impact category, says David Tyler, a professor in the Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry at the University of Oregon. “So you have to decide, when you talk about the impact on the environment, what environmental impacts am I most interested in mitigating?” Tyler says.
I decided to give up plastic bags because I wanted to do something about the scourge of plastic pollution in our oceans. Scientists estimate that around 8 million metric tons of plastic trash enters the oceans every year. That plastic doesn’t degrade, and it poses a threat to wildlife, including corals. Sea turtles that eat plastic bags thinking they’re food can choke. Just last month, a dead whale in Spain was found to have more than 60 pounds of plastic waste in its stomach, including bags. Several cities in the US, like Austin, Los Angeles, and Seattle, banned single-use plastic bags to address the litter problem. Last month, New York governor Andrew Cuomo proposed a bill to nix plastic bags in New York state for that same reason.
Still, in all these life cycles assessment studies, plastic bags do seem to be “more green” than cotton tote bags. That’s because cotton requires lots of land, water, and fertilizers to grow; then, it needs to be harvested, processed, and brought to market. “Cotton is a very thirsty crop,” Tyler says. One study done by the Australian government in 2007 found that plastic bags also have a lower carbon footprint than paper bags. Making paper from trees sends a lot of waste to the landfill, Tyler says. In comparison, “petroleum is generally considered so valuable that there’s very little waste,” he says. Plus, transporting 1,000 paper bags across the country with a truck consumes much more fuel than transporting 1,000 thin plastic bags, Wagner says. “A lot of the carbon production is the function of the weight of the bag,” he says. “That’s why it’s tricky when you start comparing them.”
At the end of the day, it’s all a matter of what you care about the most. If marine litter is your biggest concern, paper bags are better because paper degrades and doesn’t stick around for years. In New York City, the Department of Sanitation spends more than $12 million a year to dispose more than 10 billion single-use plastic bags, so that’s why the city has tried (unsuccessfully) to impose a 5-cent fee on them. In Africa, the concern is that discarded plastic bags also pool water that can breed disease-causing mosquitoes.
So, what should you do if you want to limit your environmental footprint? Many of the experts I talked to say that using reusable plastic bags — whether made of recycled plastic, nylon, or woven polypropylene — is best. “You can use them hundreds of times. The ones I’m using, they’re showing some wear and tear, but I’ve had them for a couple years, and they’re in good shape,” Tyler says. “When you can use a bag so many times, eventually you reach a break-even point.” These bags are durable and can easily be cleaned if, for example, meat juices spill out.
Turns out, there is no break-even point, because to be properly cleaned, reusable bags must be run through a washing machine, and they wear out in 6-8 cycles, not the “hundreds” needed to equal single-use bags. Conclusion: you want to (pretend to) save the whales, go cotton. If the safety of your family takes priority then I have one word for you, just one word: plastics.
UPDATE: From October 15, 2015, Reason, “Plastic Bags Are Good For You
Debunks each and every favorable claim made for reusables, including the purported litter, whale killing, energy-consuming, and landfill-filling arguments, using EPA’s own figures, Greenpeace “plastic bags aren’t killing whales, fishing nets are the problem”, and so on.
No soup spoons for you!
“Large Vermont retailers such as Target, Walmart and Costco are now required to limit the sales of non-essential items in order to mitigate the spread of COVID-19.
The directive was announced by the Agency of Commerce and Community Development on Tuesday. The agency hopes it will reduce the overall number of people going into stores to purchase items such as clothing, electronics and toys during the state’s “Stay Home, Stay Safe” executive order.
“Large ‘big box’ retailers generate significant shopping traffic by virtue of their size and the variety of goods offered in a single location,” said Lindsay Kurrle, secretary of the Agency of Commerce and Community Development in a news release.”
Want to know what the list is?
“Arts and crafts items.
Beauty supplies.
Carpet and flooring.
Clothes.
Consumer electronics.
Entertainment (books, music, movies).
Furniture.
Home and garden.
Jewelry.
Paint.
Photo services.
Sports equipment.
Toys.”
Prince Andrew has left the stage, but fear not!
Don’t worry, Sean, she’ll receive the world’s best medical care there — look how I fared!
“This is a center for infections, foreigners are constantly coming and going, there’s a plague of rats, this is a closed-down hotel,” complained the actress in a video posted on social media.
Cox, who was participating in a workshop at the San Antonio de los Baños International School of Film and Television (EICTV) was unable to return to Chile when the Panamanian airline Copa canceled all flights due to the spreading of the virus in that country, said the Chilean outlet El Periscopio.
“We’re trying to protect ourselves because if one of us gets coronavirus we’re not going to be able to return to our country,” she said.
“It’s super distressing being in a country where there’s shortages of soap, toilet paper, our accounts are blocked because of the blocks on Cuba, connecting to the internet is very difficult, our credit cards don’t work [,,,] There’s people who need medicine, among us are kids, elderly, families,” she explained.
Did someone just sneeze? Who sneezed?!
But it will be bi-partisan, just like the committee he was running while this was building.
“I’m working on a bill now”, he says, in an admission that he has nothing useful to contribute to the current disaster.
Samaritan’s Purse Health professional checking patient’s religious affiliation and sexual orientation before treatment
Samaritan’s Purse, the organization that’s built a 68-bed respiratory-treatment field hospital in Central Park is part of evangelist Franklin Graham’s organization and opposes gay marriage. Naturally, the left has gone ape shit.
Samaritan Purse is a Christian organization, founded on the belief that his followers should obey Jesus’s instruction in his parable of the Good Samaritan that they “go and do likewise”. It provides emergency response and rescue service around the world, including in Islamic countries like Syria. And just as that other company founded by a Christian, Chick-fil-A, cheerfully serves all customers, gay, straight or just confused, Samaritan’s Purse treats everyone equally. That’s not sufficient, for some:
[The] group is led by Franklin Graham, a notorious anti-LGBTQ and Islamophobic preacher with a track record of using humanitarian missions to proselytize an evangelical agenda.
Graham, the son of prominent minister Billy Graham, has specifically sought to recruit Christian medical staff to the Central Park facility. According to the group's website, all volunteers, including health care workers, should read and adhere to a statement of faith, in which marriage is defined as "exclusively the union of one genetic male and one genetic female" and the unrighteous are sentenced to "everlasting punishment in hell."
Asked whether the Mayor's Office considers this problematic, a City Hall spokesperson said the field hospital will operate as a Mount Sinai facility, and must adhere to the hospital's policy against discrimination. The spokesperson did not say whether the city was concerned that volunteers on the project are expected to agree with the group's anti-gay faith statement.
…. Some New Yorkers said they were leery of receiving care from a fundamentalist group whose own members believe their sexual orientation is sinful.
"I don't want to demonize people who are volunteering their time, but it is a concerning thing," said Amy Martin, a Brooklyn resident and former nursing assistant.
"…. [As] an LGBT New Yorker, I would be hesitant to make that my first choice of care. I'd much rather be seen anywhere else."
State Senator Brad Hoylman called on the preacher to publicly assure LGBTQ New Yorkers that they would receive the same treatment as all other patients.
“COVID-19 doesn’t discriminate, and neither should Franklin Graham," he said. "It’s unacceptable that a New Yorker infected with COVID-19 could be subjected to discriminatory treatment from an organization whose leader calls us ‘immoral’ and ‘detestable.’"
Mayor Bill De Blasio, who previously called for New Yorkers to boycott Chick-fil-A because of its “anti-gay” founder, will doubtless soon join all proper New Yorkers and shun the field hospital, too: “Just as no proper-thinking person, even if starving, would accept a juicy, tasty chicken sandwich from a bigoted Chick-fil-A volunteer,” he told FWIW, “he/she/it/whatever will choose to die, rather than patronize a hospital that doesn’t endorse gay marriage. We have our standards, and won’t lower them even to the bitter end. (cough)”
Notorious “Cascade Flasher” captured, bringing a premature ending to a three-decade career.
A Michigan man could face life in prison [no, he is not; reporters are so ignorant — ed] after admitting to cops that he’s the notorious “Cascade Flasher” — the serial perv who’s been turning stomachs in the western part of the state since the Clinton administration.
Kent County deputies spotted Steven Todd Pastoor Wednesday as he stood naked from the waist down outside an apartment building, and peeped in a window, police said in court records obtained by MLive.com.
Cops followed Pastoor, 54, of Grand Rapids, and arrested him at a nearby parking lot, where, still half-nude, he began strolling toward I-96, investigators said.
“He admitted to the repeated exposures dating back to the late 1990s,” Deputy Paul VanRhee wrote in a probable cause affidavit.
Be notified of new posts! Sign-up here:
Want to comment without registering?
