The next 11-year pattern when dark spots appear on the sun’s surface may be delayed, say astronomers The next solar cycle – the 11-year pattern when dark spots appear on the sun’s surface – may be delayed or even go into “hibernation” for a while, according to US scientists. But this does not mean a new ice age is coming, said astronomer Frank Hill of the US National Solar Observatory. “We have not predicted a ‘little ice age’,” Hill said, speaking from an astronomical meeting in New Mexico. “We have predicted something going on with the sun.” Hill and other scientists cited a missing jet stream, fading spots and slower activity near the sun’s poles as signs that our nearest star is heading into a rest period. “This is highly unusual and unexpected,” he said. “But the fact that three completely different views of the sun point in the same direction is a powerful indicator that the sunspot cycle may be going into hibernation.” That hibernation would not begin now, as the current sunspot cycle, the 24th, has recently passed its minimum. Hill and his colleagues pondered a slowdown in sunspot activity in the 25th cycle, expected sometime around 2019. They also wondered whether this possible slowdown, or even a long cessation of sunspot activity, indicates an upcoming return of the Maunder Minimum , a 70-year sunspot drought seen from 1645-1715. They had no evidence as to whether this might be true, and said nothing about whether the Maunder Minimum was related to a long cold period in Europe and other parts of the Northern Hemisphere known as the little ice age. How strong a connection is there between a little ice age and a Maunder Minimum? “Not as strong a connection as people would like to believe,” Hill said. “The little ice age actually lasted for hundreds of years, of which the Maunder Minimum was only a small segment. My opinion is that there is only an anecdotal connection without a whole lot of scientific background behind it.” Some commentators have argued that the potentially cooling influence of a lower level of sunspot activity could cancel out the warming caused by human activities that generate climate-warming greenhouse gases. Hill disputed this. “In my opinion, it is a huge leap to an abrupt global cooling, since the connections between solar activity and climate are still very poorly understood ,” he said. Across the sun’s 11-year solar cycle, the total solar energy reaching Earth varies by less than 0.1%, and even across the period since the little ice age chill, solar output climbed no more than about 0.12%, according to the 2007 IPCC report. Subsequent estimates by Judith Lean of the Naval Research Laboratory and others have pegged the solar contribution to 20th-century warming at 10% or less. Mike Lockwood, professor of space environment physics at the University of Reading, said: “Our research based on the behaviour of the sun over the past 9,000 years shows that there is indeed an 8% chance that we will return to Maunder Minimum conditions over the next 40 years. But there is no evidence at all that this will cause an ice age and, given the observed and predicted rise in greenhouse gases, we find it would do no more than slow global warming a little.” Prof Joanna Haigh, an atmospheric physicist at Imperial College London, said: “It would certainly be very risky to suggest that we rely on the sun’s activity to compensate for global warming. In a future Grand Minimum the sun might perhaps again cool the planet by up to 1C. Greenhouse gases, on the other hand, are expected to raise global temperatures by between 1.5 and 4.5C by 2100. “So even if the predictions are correct, the effect of climate change will outstrip the sun’s ability to cool even in the coldest scenario; and in any case, the cooling effect is only ever temporary. When the sun’s activity returns to normal, the greenhouse gases won’t have gone away.” The sun Astronomy Space Damian Carrington guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Neil Boortz went on a rant over crime in Atlanta and managed to completely lose his cookies. The end is particularly debased. BOORTZ: You know what? I, for one, am tired of putting up with this crap. And you want to know why I moved out of Atlanta and only spend a couple of weeks a year in this town? That’s one of the reasons. Carjackings, violence, people getting shot. It’s ridiculous. This city harbors an urban culture of violence. And I want you to look around. You drive into the city. The railroad overpass is on the downtown connector covered with graffiti. And that– That is just an advertisement for everybody coming into this town that we really don’t give a damn about those who would screw up our quality of life around here. We really just don’t care. We don’t care enough to paint over graffiti on the overpasses that come into our city, advertising welcome to Atlanta, here’s some of our finest graffiti, from some of our finest urban thugs and their little gang signs. And pick up the paper tomorrow morning. Read about all the carjackings. Read about the innocent people shot for the pure de-hell of it. This town is starting to look like a garbage heap. And we got too damn many urban thugs, yo, ruining the quality of life for everybody. And I’ll tell you what it’s gonna take. You people, you are – you need to have a gun. You need to have training. You need to know how to use that gun. You need to get a permit to carry that gun. And you do in fact need to carry that gun and we need to see some dead thugs littering the landscape in Atlanta. We need to see the next guy that tries to carjack you shot dead right where he stands. We need more dead thugs in this city. And let their — let their mommas — let their mommas say, “He was a good boy. He just fell in with the good crowd.” And then lock her ass up. It’s racist, and it’s a dog whistle for domestic terrorism. There’s no other way to call it. Now let’s talk about that crime in Atlanta thing. I went to the FBI crime statistics site and I downloaded data in Atlanta for 2007-2009 with regard to crime rates. In fact, crime has dropped substantially, while the population has increased. Click this image to see it larger. enlarge All crime rates, with the exception of forcible rape, have decreased drastically. Drastically, I might add, without any idiot radio host calling out to his idiot listeners to buy a gun, register the gun, carry the gun, and blow some thugs away. Here are the actual number of reported crimes: enlarge (Click for larger image) If the crime rate increases in Atlanta, it won’t be because thugs are on the streets carjacking. It’ll be the white thugs who took Boortz seriously raising it. [h/t Media Matters ] White supremacists everywhere are grinning at Boortz’ idiocy.
Continue reading …It depends who you are talking to what will be achieved by Privatizing Ryan’s Roadmap to Ruin budget plan should it be enacted. Most people either come down on the side of “it ends Medicare” or “it ends Medicare as we know it,” while the Randians like Ryan insist on pretending that it “saves Medicare (okay, something we will call Medicare) for future generations.” Those in the last group are engaging in that age-old-and-time-tested political tactic that we call “lying” when they make that claim. They may call whatever private-insurance apostasy that they want to foist on those of us under 55 “Medicare” but it will look as much like the Medicare our parents know and love as a McNugget looks like a chicken. Medicare has been wildly popular and extremely effective at delivering healthcare to America’s elderly and disabled people for nearly fifty years, and as a result of that, it has been in the crosshairs of republicans and other assorted miscreants and privatizers for it’s entire existence. It was Rahm Emanuel who said “never let a crisis go to waste” and immediately he got hammered by republicans and their mouthpieces, but they were only protesting because they wanted to deflect attention from their own pioneering work in that same field of endeavor. It was just short of brilliant the way they ran up the deficit and depleted the nation’s coffers when they were in power, making it possible for them now to scream, wail, gnash their teeth and rend the cloth from their breast as they decry the deficit and insist that “we’re broke!” and all the safety net programs have to be gutted, if not outright shut down, otherwise the republic is doomed. Credit where credit is due: When they get rolling, they can be far more melodramatic than any 8th-grade girl’s-school production of Romeo and Juliette , and just hope that no one fact-checks them. For a plan that they insist is necessary because the current system is headed for bankruptcy, it sure doesn’t save any money. In fact, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation, privatization would actually cost 11 percent more for the exact same services than leaving the current system in place — and that cost disparity would widen over time, not shrink. The CBO, the non-partisan research arm of Congress, estimates that by 2022, the year the Ryan plan would start screwing retirees, it would cost a whopping 34% more than simply maintaining the current system . The hard, cold truth is that those of us under 55 would pay more for less than our friends, siblings and spouses who are a little bit older. Our out-of-pocket expenses would skyrocket, amounting to about $6400 per year more than those born a year or two earlier. Pity the person in their late forties who finds him- or herself struggling in this economy, underemployed, and likely to stay that way. Those poor folks get screwed seven ways from Sunday if Ryan gets his way. They will get no respite at age 65. The formerly middle class middle manager who is stocking shelves at Wal-Mart and depleting their 401K to pay the mortgage on a house that has lost a third of it’s value is suddenly paying in a lot less in payroll taxes and this will affect the amount of benefit they are eligible for at retirement. Where they were on track to draw the maximum, they now stand to see their monthly benefit reduced by two or three hundred dollars, and they are depleting their savings now to save their house, so there may be nothing to supplement it. To add insult to injury, that thing they, in the spirit of George Orwell, want to call Medicare takes five hundred and change off the top of what they will get, eating up about half of their future Social Security checks, transfering that money directly to insurance companies and removing it from the economy of the areas where the seniors reside and spend their Social Security checks on living expenses. The CBO also found that the greater cost-sensitivity could result less frequent use of newer and more expensive — but frequently beneficial — technologies and procedures than occur now under current law. In other words, the Ryan plan would kill that innovation that the republicans are forever insisting that free-market forces will certainly bring to bear if we just unfetter the market and let it work it’s magic on our healthcare system. There is one thing that republicans always say when healthcare is the topic that I can’t believe they get away with. They always, without fail, say that they don’t want a government bureaucrat between you and your doctor. This has to register a full five cow-pies on the BS-o-Meter. Let me provide a little anecdotal evidence and tell you about my experience with reimbursements and the filing thereof, since I did some of that in both of my two most recent jobs. I was the second shift supervisor of a hospital phlebotomy crew…this meant that we had a waiting room full of patients up until 4:30 or so, and then we saw any stragglers that came in. I did the paperwork and filed for payment for the stragglers. When I went to another hospital and worked third shift, part of that job was processing specimens that came in to the hospital lab from doctor’s offices and smaller hospitals either for in-house testing or as send-outs to Mayo, ARUP or Quest/Nichols. After I processed the specimens, I processed the “paperwork” for payment and filed the claims electronically. I can count on one hand the times I had a Medicare claim bounce back requiring more information or a call to their offices during business hours that I had to leave in the day shift’s inbox — and it was almost always a coding error that was quickly resolved. Private insurance was just the opposite. The technologists on day shift in that facility finally revolted at the revolving insurance-resolution job that no one wanted to do, and the lab director had to go to the budget committee and add a full-time employee to her staff, an associates-level technician who did nothing but resolve insurance claims five days a week, eight hours a day. The dirty little secret is this: There already is a bureaucrat standing between you and your doctor. But he or she doesn’t work for the government. They are bean counters for an insurance company, and their bonus depends on them denying you the care your doctor deems you need. If Ryan’s plan were to see the light of day, every claim for every procedure would get that sort of unreasonable scrutiny by a Utilization Management Panel. You are familiar with these — Sarah Palin called them “death panels” and they are the stock and trade of the private insurance / managed care / profit driven healthcare system she was desperately trying to preserve. I realize that Ryan tends toward Randianism, and Randians are, by definition, emotionally stunted, amoral and selfish. Indeed, selfishness is not merely a virtue, it is the highest, if not only, virtue to the true Randian. So I have to wonder, what’s in it for Ryan to put in place a policy that would transfer massive amounts of formerly middle-class wealth to private insurance companies? If he is really a Randian, he has an angle he is working. And if he doesn’t, he isn’t a Randian, he’s just a garden-variety sociopath.
Continue reading …You would think that in a tough economy with 9.1 percent of the population unemployed and most people seeing continued decreases in the value of their homes the revelation of a political leader experiencing a massive rise in her net worth would be newsworthy. Apparently not, for the following report about former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's (D-Calif.) stunning one year financial windfall published by the Hill at 12:46 PM Wednesday received almost no interest from so-called “news” outlets from coast to coast: House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) saw her net worth rise 62 percent last year, cementing her status as one of the wealthiest members of Congress. Pelosi was worth at least $35.2 million in the 2010 calendar year, according to a financial disclosure report released Wednesday. She reported a minimum of $43.4 million in assets and about $8.2 milion in liabilities. For 2009, Pelosi reported a minimum net worth of $21.7 million. In this kind of economy with so many people struggling to make ends meet, such a story should have garnered a great deal of attention. Yet, despite this being prominently featured at the top of the Drudge Report shortly after the Hill published it, America's media collectively yawned. On television, the only report on this subject according to LexisNexis was done by Fox News's Sean Hannity Wednesday evening with guest Michelle Malkin. The on air news divisions of ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, NBC, and PBS completely ignored this stunning revelation Wednesday. I could also identify not one wire service report on the subject although the Associated Press did publish the following : New House Speaker John Boehner doesn't have as many millions as his predecessor, Nancy Pelosi, but like many new committee chairmen and other leaders, he has holdings in companies that have major financial stakes in the actions of Congress. For Boehner, that includes a portfolio of stocks in oil companies, financial firms, communication companies and pharmaceuticals. Holdings among other lawmakers include farmland, real estate and investments in high tech companies. When the Pelosis' assets were revealed, the AP chose not to divulge how much they had increased by: Former Speaker Pelosi, D-Calif., now the House's minority leader, also makes the perennial lists of Congress's richest. Much of her family's wealth is listed to her husband, Paul, including a commercial property in San Francisco valued between $5 million and $25 million. She reports as assets joint ownership with her husband of a home and vineyard in St. Helena, Calif., valued at between $5 million and $25 million. She's also a limited partner in residential real estate in Sacramento in the $5 million-$25 million range. Her husband reported capital gains of $1 million to $5 million last year from a sale of stock in Apple Inc. As for print media, they too were curiously disinterested in Pelosi's windfall. Most of the major papers skipped this news with the Washington Post doing the same thing as AP. Despite divulging what Pelosi's assets were at the end of 2010, the Post chose not to inform readers how much of an increase this represented from 2009: As she wound down her final days as House speaker, the estate of Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and her husband in the Napa Valley bore financial fruit for the couple, literally. The estate, worth at least $5 million, provided the Pelosis at least $5,000 worth of grape sales from the vineyard, according to financial disclosure forms for 2010. Now House minority leader, Pelosi and her husband, Paul, a San Francisco real-estate magnate and financial investor, are worth a minimum of $42 million with holdings spread across property investments in northern California and a litany of Fortune 500 companies, particularly regionally-based high-tech companies such as Yahoo! and EBay. I guess the Post didn't feel it was important to inform readers this represented a staggering 62 percent increase in one year. From what I can tell, other than Fox, Drudge, the Hill, conservative talk radio hosts and bloggers, the only major news outlet that found Pelosi's windfall important was Politico : A broad look at congressional disclosures shows that lawmakers enjoyed major gains in the stock market, which posted sharp increases last year. Others enjoyed a bump in the value of their real estate holdings, especially on the two coasts, where housing prices generally were more stable than in other regions. Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), for example, saw her minimum net worth soar from $21 million to more than $35 million. As for the rest of the media, it appears that a Democrat Speaker of the House seeing her net worth increase by 62 percent in one year as the rest of the nation struggled to make ends meet is just not newsworthy. Somehow I doubt that would have been the case if she had an “R” next to her name. Readers are advised that Fox News and MSNBC don't provide transcripts for all their broadcasts making it possible that other reports were done on this issue.
Continue reading …Controversial leader to meet President Hu Jintao despite being subject of war crimes warrants The Sudanese president, Omar al-Bashir, will visit China this month despite facing two international arrest warrants for war crimes. A foreign ministry spokesman said the allies would discuss Darfur, next month’s secession of south Sudan, and an expansion in co-operation. The announcement comes a week after the chief prosecutor of the international criminal court, Luis Moreno Ocampo, told the UN security council that genocide and crimes against humanity continued unabated in Darfur because Bashir had learned to defy the council’s authority . Moreno Ocampo said the crimes included air attacks on civilians and the direct killing of members of the Fur, Massalit and Zaghawa ethnic groups. Bashir denies all the allegations and does not recognise the ICC’s authority. China is a permanent member of the security council, which urged its members to support the findings of the ICC when it referred Sudan to the court. However, China is not obliged to execute the ICC warrants because it has never signed up to the body. China has previously warned that the charges against Bashir could lead to greater instability in the region. Bashir visited Chad and Kenya last year without being arrested even though both countries recognise the ICC. The African Union had urged its members not to execute the warrants. Bashir will meet President Hu Jintao of China and other senior leaders during his 27-30 June visit. Foreign ministry spokesman Hong Lei said: “The two countries, accepting the new situation, will discuss how to advance and consolidate our traditional friendship, expand and deepen comprehensive co-operation and exchange views on the north-south peace process and Darfur issue. “Bilateral trade is rising. Sudan has already become China’s third-largest trade partner in Africa with co-operation in each sphere consistently developing.” Sophie Richardson, Asia advocacy director of Human Rights Watch, said: “The Chinese government loves to claim it is a friend of the African people. If that is the case they have no business welcoming someone who has done tremendous harm to precisely those people. “The fact that at a time when some of the atrocities in Sudan were at their peak, it was not only the principal supplier of arms but the principal purchaser of Sudanese oil means it has questions to answer about its own complicity. It ought to be more concerned about pressing for justice than helping Bashir evade precisely that.” After coming under sustained pressure in the run up to the Beijing Olympics in 2008, China sent peacekeepers to Darfur and appointed a special representative to the region. The Khartoum government will lose about a third of the country’s territory and up to three quarters of its oil reserves when the south secedes on 9 July. A UN humanitarian report said on Thursday that fighting between the northern Sudanese army and armed groups aligned with south Sudan had led to dozens of deaths and opened up a new front. China has called for a peaceful resolution to the clashes along the internal border. In April Bashir told the Guardian that he accepted full personal responsibility for the conflict in Darfur but accused the ICC of “double standards” and conducting “a campaign of lies” . He said Britain and other western countries were pursuing a politically motivated vendetta against him with the aim of forcing regime change in Sudan. Sudan Africa China Omar al-Bashir Human rights International criminal court Tania Branigan guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Controversial leader to meet President Hu Jintao despite being subject of war crimes warrants The Sudanese president, Omar al-Bashir, will visit China this month despite facing two international arrest warrants for war crimes. A foreign ministry spokesman said the allies would discuss Darfur, next month’s secession of south Sudan, and an expansion in co-operation. The announcement comes a week after the chief prosecutor of the international criminal court, Luis Moreno Ocampo, told the UN security council that genocide and crimes against humanity continued unabated in Darfur because Bashir had learned to defy the council’s authority . Moreno Ocampo said the crimes included air attacks on civilians and the direct killing of members of the Fur, Massalit and Zaghawa ethnic groups. Bashir denies all the allegations and does not recognise the ICC’s authority. China is a permanent member of the security council, which urged its members to support the findings of the ICC when it referred Sudan to the court. However, China is not obliged to execute the ICC warrants because it has never signed up to the body. China has previously warned that the charges against Bashir could lead to greater instability in the region. Bashir visited Chad and Kenya last year without being arrested even though both countries recognise the ICC. The African Union had urged its members not to execute the warrants. Bashir will meet President Hu Jintao of China and other senior leaders during his 27-30 June visit. Foreign ministry spokesman Hong Lei said: “The two countries, accepting the new situation, will discuss how to advance and consolidate our traditional friendship, expand and deepen comprehensive co-operation and exchange views on the north-south peace process and Darfur issue. “Bilateral trade is rising. Sudan has already become China’s third-largest trade partner in Africa with co-operation in each sphere consistently developing.” Sophie Richardson, Asia advocacy director of Human Rights Watch, said: “The Chinese government loves to claim it is a friend of the African people. If that is the case they have no business welcoming someone who has done tremendous harm to precisely those people. “The fact that at a time when some of the atrocities in Sudan were at their peak, it was not only the principal supplier of arms but the principal purchaser of Sudanese oil means it has questions to answer about its own complicity. It ought to be more concerned about pressing for justice than helping Bashir evade precisely that.” After coming under sustained pressure in the run up to the Beijing Olympics in 2008, China sent peacekeepers to Darfur and appointed a special representative to the region. The Khartoum government will lose about a third of the country’s territory and up to three quarters of its oil reserves when the south secedes on 9 July. A UN humanitarian report said on Thursday that fighting between the northern Sudanese army and armed groups aligned with south Sudan had led to dozens of deaths and opened up a new front. China has called for a peaceful resolution to the clashes along the internal border. In April Bashir told the Guardian that he accepted full personal responsibility for the conflict in Darfur but accused the ICC of “double standards” and conducting “a campaign of lies” . He said Britain and other western countries were pursuing a politically motivated vendetta against him with the aim of forcing regime change in Sudan. Sudan Africa China Omar al-Bashir Human rights International criminal court Tania Branigan guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …From March 2009, Laura Flanders interviews Juan Cole, who is about as supportive of Pres. Obama’s foreign policy as he was of Pres. Bush. Hope the CIA is not still on the case. Some times it’s not paranoia… they are genuinely after you : C.I.A. official says that officials in the Bush White House sought damaging personal information on a prominent American critic of the Iraq war in order to discredit him. Glenn L. Carle, a former Central Intelligence Agency officer who was a top counterterrorism official during the administration of President George W. Bush, said the White House at least twice asked intelligence officials to gather sensitive information on Juan Cole, a University of Michigan professor who writes an influential blog that criticized the war. In an interview, Mr. Carle said his supervisor at the National Intelligence Council told him in 2005 that White House officials wanted “to get” Professor Cole, and made clear that he wanted Mr. Carle to collect information about him, an effort Mr. Carle rebuffed. Months later, Mr. Carle said, he confronted a C.I.A. official after learning of another attempt to collect information about Professor Cole. Mr. Carle said he contended at the time that such actions would have been unlawful. I don’t think this surprises anyone if they remember a systematic campaign of attack the Bush administration applied to anyone who criticized them: Joe Wilson, Scott Ritter, Don Siegelman, the list is long and distinguished. Though to use the CIA in this kind of personal, petty vendetta is a new twist and shows that there is no law, no ethic, no constitutional limitation of power they weren’t willing to violate to pursue their agenda.
Continue reading …From March 2009, Laura Flanders interviews Juan Cole, who is about as supportive of Pres. Obama’s foreign policy as he was of Pres. Bush. Hope the CIA is not still on the case. Some times it’s not paranoia… they are genuinely after you : C.I.A. official says that officials in the Bush White House sought damaging personal information on a prominent American critic of the Iraq war in order to discredit him. Glenn L. Carle, a former Central Intelligence Agency officer who was a top counterterrorism official during the administration of President George W. Bush, said the White House at least twice asked intelligence officials to gather sensitive information on Juan Cole, a University of Michigan professor who writes an influential blog that criticized the war. In an interview, Mr. Carle said his supervisor at the National Intelligence Council told him in 2005 that White House officials wanted “to get” Professor Cole, and made clear that he wanted Mr. Carle to collect information about him, an effort Mr. Carle rebuffed. Months later, Mr. Carle said, he confronted a C.I.A. official after learning of another attempt to collect information about Professor Cole. Mr. Carle said he contended at the time that such actions would have been unlawful. I don’t think this surprises anyone if they remember a systematic campaign of attack the Bush administration applied to anyone who criticized them: Joe Wilson, Scott Ritter, Don Siegelman, the list is long and distinguished. Though to use the CIA in this kind of personal, petty vendetta is a new twist and shows that there is no law, no ethic, no constitutional limitation of power they weren’t willing to violate to pursue their agenda.
Continue reading …Europe has ranked every bathing place, beach and swimming area across the EU. How do the UK’s beaches and lakes compare? Find which are great – and which are banned • Get the data • Get the map Do you like swimming outside? But how clean is your beach? Since 1990, the European Union has been monitoring over 21,000 beaches, lakes and rivers across Europe – anywhere where swimmers go al fresco, in fact. So that huge dataset covers Brighton Beach, the Hamsptead swimming ponds and the classic Mediterranean beaches of the South of France, Spain and Greece. So, what does the data, out today from the European Environment Agency , show for the UK? The overall figures are good – 96.8% of our swimming areas meet the legal standards, if not the full guidelines. This is down slightly on last year – but more swimming areas are now being surveyed. But three beaches had to be closed because standards were not high enough, including Blackpool North, Newhaven in Sussex and Tywyn in Wales. The rankings only include outside swimming places – not man-made lidos or pools. This is how the data looks on a Google Fusion map : Most British bathing areas do comply – but a significant number only meet the mandatory rules, not the wider-ranging guidelines. What is happening across Europe? According to the report: In 2010, 92.1% of Europe’s coastal bathing waters and 90.2% of inland bathing waters met the minimum quality standards. Only 1.2% of coastal bathing water and 2.8% of inland sites were non-compliant. The remainder are unclassified due to insufficient data. In general, coastal bathing water quality deteriorated between 2009 and 2010 – the number of bathing water bodies meeting the mandatory values fell by 3.5%, while those meeting guide values fell by 9.5%. Inland water quality has also dropped. The number of rivers and lakes achieving the guide values fell by 10.2%, although compliance with the mandatory values was almost stationary. Rivers were particularly problematic, with only 25% of river bathing waters achieving guide values. If you want to, you can find out what variables from the Directive they use to rank each beach here . The EEA use six, slightly confusing, categories. In plain language they mean: • CG – The best beaches, complying with the law and the guidelines • CI – complies with the mandatory requirements – but not the guidelines • B – banned or closed (temporarily or throughout the season) • NF – insufficiently sampled • NC – Does not comply with the legal requirements • NS – not sampled Eventually we will try to map all of Europe’s 21,000 beaches – and you can download every country’s data here . The full UK data is below . What can you do with it? Data summary Download the data • DATA: download the full spreadsheet More open data Data journalism and data visualisations from the Guardian World government data • Search the world’s government data with our gateway Development and aid data • Search the world’s global development data with our gateway Can you do something with this data? • Flickr Please post your visualisations and mash-ups on our Flickr group • Contact us at data@guardian.co.uk • Get the A-Z of data • More at the Datastore directory • Follow us on Twitter • Like us on Facebook Pollution Swimming holidays Swimming Beach holidays Simon Rogers guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …The slump in retail sales in May does not bode well for GDP growth in the second quarter Retail sales dived by twice the expected rate in May as consumers cut their spending on clothes and other non-food items to pay for higher petrol prices. Retailers said the difficult economic outlook had depressed consumer confidence and encouraged shoppers to stay away from the high street. Sales volumes dropped 1.4%, more than reversing the 1.1% increase in April that was mainly attributed to the royal wedding and unseasonally warm weather. Vicky Redwood, senior UK economist at Capital Economics said the figures showed that April was a temporary blip to a long-term downward trend. “The underlying trend in sales over the past several months still looks broadly flat at best. What’s more, we expect this trend to worsen as households respond to the intensifying squeeze on their real pay. We continue to think that overall household spending will drop by about 1% this year,” she said. Redwood pointed out that recent swings in spending have been primarily driven by consumers cutting food bills, but non-food sales also fell, reversing April’s gain. Clothing, household goods and department store sales all dropped to leave sales over the year since last April virtually flat at 0.2% up. The slump in retail sales in May does not bode well for GDP growth in the second quarter and further increases the chances that the Bank of England will delay raising interest rates until 2012. Economist Howard Archer of IHS Global Insight said the figures would be seen by the Bank of England as justifying a low interest rate policy and maintenance of quantitative easing. But hints that rates would rise towards the end of the year in line with market expectations were likely to discourage consumers from spending. “Many consumers are likely to be worried that the Bank of England could start to raise interest rates before the end of the year. Even if the Bank of England only edges interest rates up, it will affect consumer psychology as people are bound to see the move as the first in a series of hikes,” he said. He said the implications for GDP growth in the second quarter were also likely to concern the Bank of England. “This is particularly worrying for second-quarter GDP growth prospects, given that consumer spending accounts for 65% of GDP,” he said. Consumer price inflation remained at 4.5% in May, which was substantially above average annual earnings growth of around 2% in April. Archer added: “Consumer spending fell by 0.6% quarter-on-quarter in real terms in the first quarter of 2011, and the likelihood is that it will stay very weak for some time to come as household purchasing power remains under severe pressure from high inflation, low wage growth and tighter fiscal policy. Furthermore, soaring utility bills will shortly add to the squeeze on consumers. In addition, unemployment is still high and debt levels are elevated. “Meanwhile, the weak housing market has adverse repercussions for consumer spending. A healthy housing market activity boosts demand for carpets, fittings and furnishings as well as major household appliances while rising house prices can have a significant wealth effect.” Retail industry Economic growth (GDP) Economics Bank of England Interest rates Phillip Inman guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …