Youtube daily report Mar 27 2017

So what I'd like to do is talk about an area that I work in.

And when I'm asked what I do, the two-word answer

is, I'm a water engineer.

And what does that mean?

It means that I work on water.

Is there enough of it?

And is it safe to drink?

So that's what I work on.

I also am the director of the National Science Foundation

Engineering Research Center for Re-inventing the Nation's Urban

Water Infrastructure.

And we're in our sixth year now.

We call ourselves the ReNEWIt.

It's a collaboration between Stanford, Berkeley,

Colorado School of Mines, and New Mexico State.

So what I'll be talking about here

is reinventing water supply for dry cities.

Let's use example of California.

And I'll be drawing also from some work

that we're doing in our engineering research center

as well.

So my take home message is today that when

we talk about water and water problems,

all of our solutions and the problems are local.

And what I mean by that is that the Bay Area has its water

challenges that are quite different than say Southern

California, that are different than San Diego, that are

different than the front range.

And the reason for this is because of climate conditions

and also because of existing infrastructure and politics

and policies.

I'd like to use examples though from California

to show how we can have a better water supply future by reducing

dependence on imported water.

You may know that the water that comes to the Stanford campus

is imported from Yosemite National Park

through an aqueduct system.

And that the way we can reduce dependency on imported water

is to have a portfolio of options for our water supply

in the future.

Or another way of saying that, there isn't just one thing we

can do, or should do.

There's several things we ought to pay attention to.

There isn't one specific thing that we

can do that will solve our water problems.

And in looking to the future, we need partnerships to evaluate

ideas at a believable scale.

And we call that a testbed or pilot plant.

And we also need decision support tools.

In other words, to ask the question,

well, if we are successful with a new technology

or new approach, how does that build out?

How does that technology diffuse?

So that's-- these are the main messages today.

But I thought I would start with the slide that says where do we

get our water in California?

This is what happens in a wet year.

We can say that this is our like currently.

Our water comes from three sources.

One of them is snow pack, snow melt.

And this year we have a generous snow pack.

We also get water from the ground and from reservoirs.

So when you think of reservoirs as just like rain

that's collected.

And in a normal year, these contribute about equally

to our water supply in California.

And I show the snow pack, the cloud, the reservoirs,

and the ground water is pretty high.

But, well you know, we've just experienced

five years of drought.

And what happens here then is this picture changes.

There's now snow pack.

There's not much rain.

The reservoirs are empty.

And we rely on groundwater to make up the deficits.

And the ground water, the water table as we call it, drops.

So that's what happens in a dry year.

Now in the 20th century, I would say

that we sort of limped around.

When we got into a drought, you hoped that well,

if we can get by for a few years, that will solve--

our problems will be solved when it starts raining again.

But in the 21st century, we realize

we're really at the edge, at the limit of what the existing

infrastructure can provide in terms of our water.

And often times when we think about water and solutions

for the future, it might be tempting to say,

our water problems would be solved if--

and then you would point to somebody or some place.

You know, if they would change their behavior then

we wouldn't have our problem.

And since I'm pointing south, I could

say, you know, the problem are those homes in Beverly

Hills with those big-- you know, if they

didn't wash their cars every day, everything would be fine.

Well, another-- the reality is we're all part of the problems

and we're all part of the solution.

We're all part of the problem.

We're all part of the solution.

And Governor Brown has emphasized this.

This is in 2015.

Now this was when the drought emergency was declared.

"The metaphor is Spaceship Earth," Brown said.

"In Spaceship Earth you reduce everything."

And he's basically saying we all have to work together

to solve the problem.

And he uses this analogy of Spaceship Earth.

Now I was just finishing graduate school

when Governor Brown was running for presidency.

This is-- you have to go back a few years now.

But he used that expression "Spaceship Earth,"

and he got the moniker Governor Moonbeam.

Now back then if you said weird things,

it really did kick you out of the election.

You were-- [LAUGHS] and so he got Governor Moonbeam.

And I think his candidacy lasted two months.

But the way I look at this then is from '76

to '17, look at all those years that have intervened.

Now no one's laughing.

We actually see that there is a--

we understand, at least in terms of water,

that we do have to think collectively and work

collectively on our problems.

So this is a schematic that shows how we designed our water

systems in the 20th century.

Basically it's taking water from say a reservoir,

or river, or ground water, treating it,

using it in the city.

The city will have runoff and waste water.

Treat that, and then it's discharge.

So it's kind of like a one pass of water.

Now in the 20th century--

or excuse me, the 21st century--

we have a different look at this.

We think about recycling water, collecting stormwater,

and so this drawing gets a little more complicated now.

Where the wastewater can be treated to a high degree,

it could be reused for potable or maybe

a potable or non-potable uses.

It could go in the ground and then

that way find its back into our water supply.

We can take runoff, which is storm water, which

we have a lot of.

We've had a lot of this winter.

Think about ways of collecting that, treating it, and making

that be part of our water supply.

And that's a source of water we haven't used before,

particularly in California, where the focus on storm water

has been on flood control management.

In other words, getting it to the ocean or bay as quick

as you could.

So the 21st century then is this one of closing the loops.

Now how do we actually implement this?

And where does the vision come for any particular city?

And I am going to use the example from California

that, to me, illustrates the power of local governance

and that, if we look at some mayors in our state,

they're actually forward-looking and are thinking,

we have to solve our problems.

Here you can look at Mayor Faulconer in San Diego.

And this is not the desal plant in Carlsbad.

But this is a water recycling facility

that they're testing now to take wastewater then

put it into a reservoir.

And from a reservoir, it would then

become part of the water supply.

Or Mayor Garcetti in Los Angeles--

Los Angeles has the objective of reducing their need

for imported water by half.

And what Mayor Garcetti-- a previous mayor set that goal,

and what Mayor Garcetti did was advance the time

for that by 10 years.

So Los Angeles is dependent for a large part of its water

coming from Northern California or from the Colorado River.

And so what Mayor Garcetti is saying,

in the future we want to reduce our dependence

on those sources, reduce dependency by half.

And that has to be made up by water recycling

and by storm water capture.

Or Mayor Sam Liccardo here in San Jose now--

this is where I'm taking my class this afternoon

for a tour of the Silicon Valley Advanced Water Purification

Facility.

That's a lot of words strung together.

But what is being done here is wastewater

from the big San Jose-Santa Clara treatment

plant is being processed through a series of steps

to produce water that's essentially

drinking water quality.

And I guess Mayor Sam here is getting

ready to show that you can actually drink that.

But the point is that this is where I think the action is

and where cities and counties see

the need to be aggressive in terms

of how they think about the future of their water supplies

and say we have to move on our own accord, of course,

being very thoughtful.

Now to put this in context, in the year and the era in which I

was a graduate student and had just became a professor,

the federal government took had a big role,

through the Clean Water Act and the Safe Drinking Water Act,

in building infrastructure for water treatment and wastewater

treatment.

Those days are over.

We're just not going to see them again.

In fact, I guess we could say, from Washington we just

haven't had a lot of guidance.

And so here is the cities taking the action themselves,

or the governor.

You can look at Governor Brown studying this drought

declaration and asking everyone to cut back

on their use of water.

So when we think about the future of the water supply,

an example I'll use here is the idea

of four faucet taps, where you could think water coming

from storm water harvesting.

This would be the water that you would see on your city streets

and concrete channels going to the ocean or the Bay;

water reuse, and being much more aggressive

about that; water use efficiency;

and then desalination.

Now desalination means getting the salt out of water.

It doesn't have to be sea water.

It could be water that's just a little too

salty for potable use.

So let's take a look at one of these.

This is the water use efficiency.

When I give talks to the general public about the water

futures for California, something

that always comes up first is, well what if we just

use a little less water?

Can we conserve our way out of the problem?

And then Governor Brown asked all the urban areas

to reduce their water use by 25% in 2015 to 2016.

And so this is a report from the state water resources control

board that shows that essentially for each month--

the average over all those months

is we really did achieve this 25% statewide reduction

in urban use of water.

And that comes from conservation.

It comes from paying attention to how we use water

for landscaping-- that's a major thing in our area--

and then not being wasteful.

There are other programs like installing

low-flow or low-flush toilets and that sort of thing.

But the main place where we could make a difference here

is being thoughtful about repairing leaks, not taking

long showers, and thinking about the outdoor use of water.

So that's the good news.

Well, I live on the Stanford campus.

I live about a half a mile that way.

And then I got this interesting letter this summer.

And this letter is from Joe Stagner.

And he says, "dear Dick, you've done

such a great job of conserving water by 25%,

I'm going to have to raise your rates by 29%."

So there it is.

This is to the campus users, "residential lease holders

may increase 29%.

The rate increase is due to the decrease in water use."

And so as my neighbor professor [INAUDIBLE] says,

is there anything that we use less of and we pay more for?

Well, you know, I think the analogy

is we're all used to the gas pump at the gas station.

If you get a more fuel efficient car,

you don't pay as much for your gas.

But what happens with the water is

it's not priced appropriately.

Our water charges are on dollars per 1,000 gallons.

So even if I use no water, we still

have to pay for the pipes and pumps that

are in the street and the staff to keep all of that going.

On the Stanford campus--

and I wrote a-- by the way, if you

want to read an editorial about this, you can do that.

On the Stanford campus, about one third of our water bill

is for the water.

The other 2/3 is for all the infrastructure.

So this is an issue here that comes up,

that if we use less water, we're going

to have to change the way in which we price water so that we

pay for the commodity part of it,

and we pay for the fixed costs part of it.

But you know, intellectually we kind of know this.

But it's another thing to get a letter like that in the mail.

And you say, yes, it hits home.

So let's take a look at stormwater harvesting.

Now I mentioned stormwater harvesting

means collecting the runoff from the urban area,

and capturing it, and treating it, and using it

in a way that can contribute to our water supply.

We don't really do that in Northern California.

In Southern California there's some spreading basins

like this.

This Is the Rio Hondo spreading basin.

It's near the San Gabriel River.

There are a series of spreading basins

right near the base of the San Gabriel Mountains.

So for reference, it would be like

if you were in downtown LA, not look towards the ocean,

but look back towards the mountains,

and those spreading basins are inland about 20 miles

from the ocean, roughly.

And these were built some years ago

to capture water behind dams and then release this

into places where the geology is right to help replenish

the aquifers that supply the water for Los Angeles.

But the distance from here to the ocean-- in other words,

that sort of top part of the picture-- that distances

is about 20 miles.

And that's where the--

that stormwater is not captured.

That's the water that falls on the urban hardscape, the roofs,

the driveways, industrial property, freeways,

and the like.

And that water is not captured.

And that's an opportunity for us in the future.

So this is a plot that shows, for the city of Los Angeles,

where they are today with the capture of water

in spreading basins and incidental recharge.

Now you don't have to pay so much attention to the units

here.

It's in thousands of acre feet.

But this shows where the city could

be with a sort of a conservative approach

to additional stormwater capture or a more aggressive approach

to stormwater capture.

The point is is that if you're sort

of aggressive on the stormwater capture side,

you could provide maybe a quarter

or so of the water for the city of Los Angeles.

And that's water that's currently not being used.

So when Mayor Garcetti says we'd like

to cut our requirement for imported water by half,

a majority of that could come just from capturing stormwater

that's not being caught today.

Now there's several problems with capture of stormwater.

One of them has to do with scale and costs.

Some of you may be familiar with rain barrels.

Rain barrels and small cisterns actually

don't work in our climate, in a Mediterranean climate.

The reason is is because they will fill up like recently

with the rains.

But you need that water later.

You need it like six or eight months later.

So you need a storage device.

So if you look at the cost here.

And this is a scale of cost per acre foot

against acre feet captured.

These larger systems, like I just showed,

are very cost efficient.

Smaller systems at the scale of a home, or street,

or neighborhood are attractive for public support

and engagement.

And also not every system in the city can be big like that.

The land doesn't exist really to do those great big ones

anymore.

But you get the idea here that, if I

want to make a difference in the amount of water that I catch,

I need sort of neighborhood and bigger scale systems.

But to gain public support for this,

you also need to do things at the scale

of a street with curbs, and plantings,

and that sort of thing.

There's another issue here, and that's the one of storage.

Now here I'm showing a picture of a cistern that

was built for an environmental group in Los Angeles.

The environmental group is called TreePeople.

It's kind of a funny name, but they're very influential.

They used to have a long name, which I don't even remember.

But when they would tell people what they did,

they said, oh, you're the people that plant the trees.

And so they changed their name to TreePeople,

That's what they did.

But anyway, with assistance from LA Department

of Water and Power, they built this stormwater collection

basin here at their visitor's center.

So this is like an educational facility.

And it shows what can happen if you can capture the stormwater.

And they can use that captured stormwater

then for irrigation of the trees around their property.

The problem is, it's just too much--

it's too expensive to do that.

Another one is there's a question of contaminants

here, where we have--

in urban runoff, we have a whole series

of chemicals that come from automobile

tires, and industrial facilities, and the like.

So an approach then for the future

would be to think about a system that

would comprise a capture, a treat, and a recharge.

And I show this in an engineering sense here.

But what might this look like?

This is a site we're working in Los Angeles, where

we are working with the city and the Bureau of Sanitation,

the flood control district, to convert a large former rock

quarry into a stormwater capture treatment system.

And you can see that when this is built out,

it looks very park-like.

You have a reservoir there, are wetlands, and play fields,

and the like.

And what we're looking at is how we could treat that runoff so

that when it goes in the ground it's

not going to cause a groundwater contamination problem.

And we're doing work in the field here.

That's a picture of us with our LA partners, taken in August,

and then a picture of now setting up

this trailer in the field, where we're

looking at different combinations of media to help

filter that water.

And the idea then is to see how we can collect and cleanse

the stormwater.

On the water reuse side, we do have systems in place

where the main wastewater treatment plants will produce

water for non-potable use.

That goes into a distinctive colored

pipe called the purple pipe.

And right here for the San Jose Municipal--

San Jose-Santa Clara wastewater treatment plant,

there is this purple pipe system that takes that water back

to different parts of San Jose.

The problem here is that building

that reverse infrastructure is very expensive.

And I'd say we've kind of explored

about the limit of this.

That it's a system that's probably just too

expensive to expand this out anymore than what

we've already done.

The other problems is is that the water is salty

and that you pump that water back uphill.

This is an example of a facility near the Los Angeles airport

that produces recycled water for use by local industry.

And I just wanted to point out that they produce

five flavors of water, not just one kind of water,

but water to make low and high pressure

steam, cooling towers, groundwater recharge,

and for irrigation.

The future here of a lot of this water recycling

is going to be what we would call full advance treatment.

And that's what my class will see this afternoon when

we visit the Silicon Valley Advanced Water Purification

Facility.

But it's taking waste water that's been treated and then

run it through microfiltration and two other steps

of reverse osmosis and UV light.

And that can produce water that's now very high quality.

So this is essentially drinking water quality.

It may not be--

that doesn't mean it will go right into your drinking water

supply.

But it could go into a reservoir or into the ground

and then find its way back to our taps

in sort of an indirect way.

Now the problem with this is that the water

that we have currently available is

from these large main wastewater treatment plants.

And for example, in Los Angeles here, we

have this plant that treats the water for the city

and then this big plant over here

that takes and treats the water for the county itself.

So if you want to do a water reclamation

and put that water around the county,

and if your idea is that well, we're

going to reclaim our water here at the main plant,

then you're left with a picture that looks like this.

And this is what's been proposed by the Metropolitan Water

District.

You would have one great big water recycling plant and then

pumping this water many miles all over the county

and also far uphill and the like.

Well, will this actually happen?

I'm not sure, but that's--

I kind of doubt it.

But there's a different approach rather

than having the one big plant.

You say, well what about decentralized water

reclamation, where you could imagine neighborhood scale

water reclamation facilities.

And a neighborhood might be something that is big--

I should say more like a little village--

big enough that you could capture the water and use it,

and that there would be--

treat it-- and that you could have staff around

to run the facility.

So this is a picture of what we might

do at Stanford, for example.

And we are testing out this idea of decentralized facility,

or decentralized water reclamation

with a facility that's been built over by Serra Street.

Now what this does, it allows us to produce water

for non-potable uses--

irrigation say, flushing, and that kind of thing.

But it saves having to build a five to six

mile pipeline from our water quality control plant.

Also, you don't have to pump water back uphill.

And the water is less salty.

And when we think about water reuse,

the main problem we have really is salts--

salts and viruses.

But salts is a big thing.

And the water down at the main water quality control plant

is too salty for long-term irrigation.

We've built a facility over on Serra Street

to look at new technologies that use advanced

biological and membrane processes to treat

the wastewater in a very compact facility,

capturing their organics as methane that could be

used to help power the plant.

And this is an example of the future

of water reclamation, new technologies, decentralized

systems.

But in order to gain acceptance of this,

we have to test things at scale.

And that's what's being tested over there on Serra Street.

And then lastly about desalination,

if we look at wastewater desalination,

a large plant has just come online in Carlsbad, California.

It's the largest desal plant in the western hemisphere.

But what you're doing here is you're taking seawater, running

it through reverse osmosis--

it takes a lot of energy--

and producing clean water.

But we also do desalination over here

at the Silicon Valley Advanced Water Purification Facility.

There is a desalination step involved

when you treat that water and bring it up to potable levels.

So if you look at the energy intensity

here of what it takes, including the wastewater treatment,

it's about one third of that for the seawater.

So there are good reasons to think about wastewater

reclamation, using new technologies,

and producing a very high quality water.

And that can all be done at a fraction of the energy

costs for desalination.

And then lastly, in order to advance these ideas,

we need to be able to do things at scale.

We need partnerships with utilities who will step out

and say, I will try this, like the Stanford campus saying

we will invest, with an alumni gift develop

a facility to look at how we might

reclaim our wastewater here.

So again, just to summarize then,

what is it that's important here is the decision-making

for new water futures.

We can think about combined water recycling and stormwater

capture, for example.

Storm water use can contribute to our water supplies

but need to be done in a way that will protect groundwater.

Recycling and then energy recovery, we can do it,

but we have to be able to demonstrate things at scale.

And that means we need support for testbeds.

And university alone can't pay for those facilities.

We have to have partnerships.

But it gives us a stepwise approach to change.

Once you can go from a sort of a pilot plant

to the first demonstration plant,

then an idea can take off from there

because it's been derisked.

So that's the message I wanted to get today.

And I thank you for your attention.

[APPLAUSE]

For more infomation >> Richard Luthy: Reinventing the water supply for dry cities - Duration: 29:21.

-------------------------------------------

Đại Gia Chi 26 Tỷ, Mua Cây gỗ Sưa 200 Tuổi ở Bắc Ninh là ai | Tổng Hợp News | Tin Tức | Tin Mới Nhất - Duration: 10:57.

For more infomation >> Đại Gia Chi 26 Tỷ, Mua Cây gỗ Sưa 200 Tuổi ở Bắc Ninh là ai | Tổng Hợp News | Tin Tức | Tin Mới Nhất - Duration: 10:57.

-------------------------------------------

Going In Style Movie

For more infomation >> Going In Style Movie

-------------------------------------------

Opel Mokka 1.6 COSMO / NAVI / CAMERA / PDC / H-LEER !! - Duration: 1:01.

For more infomation >> Opel Mokka 1.6 COSMO / NAVI / CAMERA / PDC / H-LEER !! - Duration: 1:01.

-------------------------------------------

The Reviewer's Plague: The Curse of Content Creation - Duration: 6:12.

When Breath of the Wild came out the first things I did were turn off the map, master

dodging, crafting, and didn't do any climbing.

Those weren't arbitrary choices mind you, but rather a playstyle I'd grown accustomed

to after dozens of action games like Devil May Cry.

But 50 hours later climbing became my main method of travel, horses were obsolete, and

by pure chance I started parrying and while that vastly improved my experience, I noticed

friends ignoring parrying while powering through every sidequest they'd come across resulting

in diminished satisfaction from a self-described magical first-3 days and that itself raised

a huge problem, especially for content creation and reviews in a highly competitive environment

such as YouTube where content need to be pushed out the gate as quickly as possible for the

largest returns possible, making the environment not too unlike that of MGSV's review bootcamp

where outlets were pressured for time and essentially forced into a specific playstyle

that resulted in exceedingly high scores because truth be told, diving into the side-quests

and experiencing all the game had to offer paints a substantially lower-quality game

than the one received by rushing the main quest with the bare essentials.

But consumer time is unlimited and styles of play are far more diverse than the probable

50-100 outlets scoring games, so aggregate websites like GameRankings or Metacritic become

a key source of determining a product's true value, but people don't operate on

averages, they operate on biases and habits.

So while your average player may have all the time in the world, they'll never do

more than what they deem as being necessary before moving on to the next hot product or

starting over from scratch.

But put that with YouTube Content Creation and it's a different ball game.

Depending on what your shtick is you're bound to play accordingly, so creative playstyles

leave better impressions for more humorous content than those with more grounded experiences

for producing standardized reviews or just shooting for 100% completion.

That's not practical, heck it's not even relatable to the average consumer with a less

diverse portfolio, and outright insane for games as large as Zelda, but what it does

is highlight how poorly designed and stretched thin certain game design concepts are.

They're fine in small quantities where they don't have time to fester, but after the

5th Trial of Strength they stop becoming interesting ideas and start to degrade the experience.

And that's only worsened by item farming for upgrades, prevalent glitches, and a lack

of new concepts to keep things fresh and exciting.

It's optional, something a lot of people won't experience, but that doesn't change

the fact that what was experienced was poorly managed.

Truth be told, playing games for fun and review is tackling two different beasts entirely,

especially as the incentive for content creators to consume more of the media with longer playtimes

is ever growing.

So things quickly devolve into an ever repeating process of consuming homogenized games that

blur together to the point where even the smallest of slices of originality are going

to feel more pronounced than they would to average consumers, especially in previously

unfamiliar genres like Dragon Quest Builders, but in turn those heavy moments of repetition

are going to build a deeper trench to slog through, and the longer that experience lasts

the more apparent those issues become, making future returns less appealing and longer playtimes

less exciting.

In fact, it's almost a shame reviewers and creators are so pressured to push material

out the gate, the less time to review, the less time to think, analyze, or test extra

material less you miss the game's highest point of traffic.

You can only trust your gut as your brain remembers those more standout moments over

the more varied and often mundane in-between ones.

Even if it is unintentional, it's dishonest as hell.

But the most detrimental place for creators is a nigh-unavoidable headspace entered the

minute you start thinking of potential video ideas or review material.

There's a shift in mentality to where even the most minute details like load times, enemy

formations, and spawn rates become exceedingly apparent, meaning there's less time to think

about what you want to do with countless hours of free time and suddenly those silent moments

inbetween action meant to relax the player aren't working as intended, which makes

it difficult to let go and allow for yourself to become re-immersed in the experience.

You're no longer passively consuming content and instead you're analyzing anything you

come across and that's beyond damaging.

In fact, those first few days either pre or post release are probably the most damaging

to any experience Get a game at release and you've likely

already seen reviews and articles on websites affirming reasons to be excited or avoid the

end product, and those notions alone are enough to instill negative or positive biases in

the player that inadvertently shape their experience.

That's only made worse in higher-end products where players often rush through games to

their conclusion in efforts to avoid social media in fear of spoilers, and that severely

hampers playing habits by pushing players away from a stable mindset or alternatives,

good or bad and easily shows in produced materials.

Oddly enough it's pre-release review copies where you're free to experience true gaming

bliss, free from having to worry about spoilers on social media or personal ratings compared

to points brought up by other outlets or creators, but the special treatment and "hype" that

comes with free early access compounded with pressure to release content as early as possible

create the perfect storm for clouding judgement, no matter how capable the user is at managing

their emotional state.

For an early creator, there is no such thing as a safe environment for content creation.

Regardless of how practical or relatable it is to consumers or the public at large, it's

not until months later when the honeymoon phase has truly worn off and hype has died

that you can objectively judge a game's worth.

Even if it means investing dozens of hours deep into content that lessens the game's

overall value, regardless of if it's optional or not since it's part of the game, and

every bit worth examining in full, because like it or not, this is your job, your joy

be damned.

Hey, thanks for watching, I have more videos for viewing alongside subscription and notification

buttons too, give'em a gander and tell me what you think of the video and maybe check

out the Patreon too.

Much love!

For more infomation >> The Reviewer's Plague: The Curse of Content Creation - Duration: 6:12.

-------------------------------------------

Crash that killed a child in Bullitt County is under investigation - Duration: 1:17.

AND THE

DRIVER LOST CONTROL BEFORE

EVENTUALLY CRASHING INTO THE

TREE BEHIND ME.

>> IT REALLY SCARED ME AND MY

KIDS.

MORGAN THE FLASHING LIGHTS AND

: EMERGENCY VEHICLES ARE GONE

BUT REMNANTS OF THE CRASH THAT

KILLED A CHILD ARE NOT.

>> IT WAS JUST NERVE-RACKING

BECAUSE I LIVE RIGHT THERE.

MORGAN LAURA BURGE WALKED ALONG

: ZONETON ROAD WITH HER OWN

CHILDREN SUNDAY NIGHT.

SHE SAYS THEY WERE CURIOUS TO

KNOW WHAT HAD HAPPENED SO CLOSE

TO HOME.

SHE SOON LEARNED A CAR WITH A

MAN AND 3 KIDS INSIDE HAD

CRASHED INTO A TREE.

>> I DON'T KNOW THEM, I DON'T

NEED TO KNOW THEM, BUT THEY ARE

KIDS.

>> IT'S HEARTBREAKING.

FOR ANYBODY TO LOSE A LIFE IN A

COLLISION, IT REALLY HITS HARD

WITH A CHILD.

MORGAN: MIKE COOK IS WITH THE

BULLITT COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE.

HE SAYS INVESTIGATORS WILL TALK

TO THE DRIVER TO FIGURE OUT WHAT

HAPPENED.

THAT MAN AND THE TWO OTHER

CHILDREN ARE EXPECTED TO

RECOVER.

>> AT THIS POINT IT JUST APPEARS

FOR WHATEVER REASON, IT LOOKS

LIKE THE OPERATOR JUST LOST

CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE AND LEFT

THE ROADWAY AND STRUCK A TREE.

MORGAN: BURGE SAYS WHATEVER THE

REASON THE OUTCOME IS

HEARTBREAKING.

For more infomation >> Crash that killed a child in Bullitt County is under investigation - Duration: 1:17.

-------------------------------------------

Art in Action Promo 2017 | Eastfield College - Duration: 1:01.

Join The Arts Collective on Saturday, April 1 for ARTS IN ACTION!

An outdoor arts festival featuring family-friendly activities such as, an outdoor ballet barre,

a pop-up art shop, the opening of Will Heron's exhibition "Entendre," in the H Gallery,

a collaborative mural, mask-making stations, karaoke, and performances by our music students.

Come check out the arts at Eastfield College, meet a new friend, and enjoy some delicious

food generously donated by Nova, a favorite local Dallas restaurant.

And the event is FREE!

And who doesn't like free things?

For more infomation >> Art in Action Promo 2017 | Eastfield College - Duration: 1:01.

-------------------------------------------

Video: People honor late William Cardinal Keeler - Duration: 1:46.

FLOW OF PEOPLE STOPPING AT THE

BASILICA COME TO PAY THEIR

WILLIAM CARDINAL KEELER ARRIVED

HERE AT 1 THIS AFTERNOON FOR A

PUBLIC VIEWING.

HE IS CLASPING HIS ROSARY IN HIS

HANDS, AND HIS BIRRETA, THE HAT

HE WORE SIGNALING HIS RANK OF

CARDINAL AT HIS FEET.

THE BASILICA IS THE PLACE WHERE

HE MADE HIS RESIDENCE WHILE

SERVING THE ARCHDIOCESE.

IT WILL ALSO BE HIS FINAL

RESTING PLACE.

MNAY CAME OUT TODAY TO SAY A

PRAYER FOR HIM AND TO PAY THEIR

REPECTS ALL WITH DIFFERENT

REASONS.

>> HE WAS A BEAUTIFUL, BRAVE

PERSON, HIS WARM SMILE, HIS

GENTLENESS.

SO I WANTED TO COME HE MY

RESPECT.

>> HE WAS BELIEVED BY EVERYBODY

AND CERTAINLY EVERYONE ON OUR

STAFF.

IT IS AN HONOR TO BE HERE AND TO

BE IN THE BEAUTIFUL BUILDING

THAT HE RESTORED.

>> IT IS GOOD THAT HE FINALL

PASSED, WE ARE REALLY HAPPY THE

LORD CALLED HIM HOME.

>> HE WAS VERY TRANSPARENT.

HE GAVE UP ALL OF THE NAMES OF

THE PEDOPHILES WHO WERE IN

-- INVOLVED IN SEXUALLY ABUSING

YOUNG CHILDREN.

THE FACT THAT HE DID THAT WAS

EXTRAORDINARY TO ME.

LISA: WE WILL CARRY THAT LIVE AT

2:00 P.M. ON WBAL-TV 11.

VISITATION CONTINUES HERE UNTIL

7:00 P.M. AT WHICH TIME A MASS

WILL BE -- BEGIN AT 7:00 P.M.

AND THERE WILL BE A PUBLIC

VISITATION AGAIN TOMORROW FROM 9

A.M. TO 1 P.M. AT THE CATHEDRAL.

For more infomation >> Video: People honor late William Cardinal Keeler - Duration: 1:46.

-------------------------------------------

รู้งี้ - Phrik Supavej feat. BABY$CA$H & Chocolate-T【OFFICIAL MV】 - Duration: 5:11.

For more infomation >> รู้งี้ - Phrik Supavej feat. BABY$CA$H & Chocolate-T【OFFICIAL MV】 - Duration: 5:11.

-------------------------------------------

Two more students arrested in sexual assault/hazing scandal - Duration: 0:31.

For more infomation >> Two more students arrested in sexual assault/hazing scandal - Duration: 0:31.

-------------------------------------------

How To Live On Your Terms.

For more infomation >> How To Live On Your Terms.

-------------------------------------------

Grains Research Update 2017 | Adelaide | Organic amendments in phosphorus management - J. Mackay - Duration: 7:18.

Hi!

As you heard, I'm doing my PhD at the moment.

I'd like to start by acknowledging the GRDC and the University of Adelaide for funding

this, and also my supervisors Tim Cavagnaro and Lynne Macdonald for all of their support.

Today I'm going to be presenting some data to you with the conclusions that the incorporation

of organic amendments into phosphorus management plans can have beneficial effects on mycorrhizas

and while organic amendments alone may not be able to meet crop phosphorus demands, combined

use of organic amendment with mineral phosphorus fertilisers can successfully meet crop phosphorus

demands and that bicarbonate-extractable phosphorus gives a good indication of the phosphorus

fertiliser potential of organic amendments.

Before I present my data, first I'd like to give you some background.

Most phosphorus fertilizers are made from phosphate rock which is a finite resource

and therefore alternative sources of phosphorus are becoming increasingly important.

On the other hand, our waste - such as livestock manure and compost - contains a lot of phosphorus

and therefore could potentially be used as phosphorus fertilisers.

These materials are commonly referred to as organic amendments.

However, the phosphorus that these materials contain can be both in an unavailable form

and in an available form.

After addition of organic amendments to soil, the phosphorus in these materials can move

between these two pools.

For example, unavailable phosphorus can become available by the microbial mediated processes

of mineralisation and solubilisation.

It's because of this that organic amendments may make really good slow release phosphorus

fertilisers.

Arbuscular mycorrhizas are symbioses between plant roots and mycorrhizal fungi in which

the fungus grows into the plant root and extends into the soil.

AM can improve plant phosphorus uptake because they can reach phosphorus beyond the root

zone.

As well as improving plant phosphorus nutrition, arbuscular mycorrhizas can provide other benefits

to plant health and can also improve soil structure and fertility.

However, arbuscular mycorrhizas are negatively affected by mineral phosphorus fertilisers,

but their response to organic amendments is still not completely understood.

I conducted two experiments - I've conducted more than two experiments but today I'm going

to talk about two experiments.

The aims of the first experiment were to investigate the forms of phosphorus in the organic amendments

and determine the availability of that phosphorus to wheat.

I analysed two chicken litters, a pig litter and a compost.

I analysed them for both the total phosphorus that they contained and their percent of phosphorus

which was bicarbonate extractable.

The bicarbonate extractable method is essentially the same as Colwell phosphorus method, so

it can give an indication of the availability of that phosphorus.

I found that the chicken litters had the highest concentration of phosphorus, but the pig litter

had the highest percent of phosphorus which bicarbonate extractable and therefore we predicted

that the pig litter would provide more phosphorus to plants if these materials were applied

at the same rate of total phosphorus.

I then tested this in a pot experiment in which I applied these organic amendments at

the same rate of total phosphorus and I also included a phosphoric acid treatment as a

completely mineral phosphorus control and there was a no-phosphorus treatment.

I grew Axe to determine early phosphorus uptake by wheat and I found that, as expected, the

pig litter did provide the most phosphorus to the plants - however, none of the organic

amendments provided nearly as much as the phosphoric acid treatment.

These results along with others from this experiments are discussed in detail in my

paper, so if you're interested in that please look that up.

However, the main conclusions from this were that organic amendments alone may not be able

to meet crop phosphorus demands, but that bicarbonate extractable phosphorus does give

a good indication of the phosphorus fertiliser potential.

In the next experiment, I further investigated chicken litter with straw bedding.

I chose to investigate chicken litter because it's a readily available organic amendment

and the aims of this experiment were to investigate whether chicken litter can be effectively

used in combination with minimal phosphorus fertilisers and to determine the effect of

combinations of mineral and organic fertilisers on arbuscular mycorrhizas.

I decided to pair the chicken litter with the mineral phosphorus fertiliser based on

the assumption that the mineral phosphorus fertilizer would be able to supply an immediate

source of phosphorus to plants to support early growth while the organic amendments

could provide a slow release of phosphorus for later growth and development.

Once again, I set up an experiment where I grew wheat, this time for a longer time period,and

I measured phosphorus uptake by wheat, and in this the first numbers in the treatment

names refer to the amount of phosphorus supplied in the form of mineral fertiliser, and the

second number refers to the amount supplied in the form of chicken litter, and you can

see that we found an increasing amount of phosphorus uptake with increasing additions

of mineral phosphorus.

When chicken litter alone was added, we saw low phosphorus uptake but with combinations

of mineral phosphorus fertilizer and chicken litter, there was sufficient phosphorus uptake

by wheat.

I then investigated the colonisation of these wheat roots by arbuscular mycorrhizas and

I found that there was a decrease in colonisation with increasing amounts of mineral phosphorus,

high colonisation when only chicken litter was used and also a reasonably high level

of colonisation in most of the combination treatment.

So, the main conclusions from this experiment were that the combined use of organic amendments

and mineral phosphorus fertilisers can successfully meet crop phosphorus demands while at the

same time reducing our reliance on mineral phosphorus fertilisers, and the incorporation

of organic amendments into the phosphorus management plan can have beneficial effects

on arbuscular mycorrhizas.

I'd like to thank the GRDC very much for inviting me to speak today and for my scholarship,

and thank you all for listening.

For more infomation >> Grains Research Update 2017 | Adelaide | Organic amendments in phosphorus management - J. Mackay - Duration: 7:18.

-------------------------------------------

Grains Research Update 2017 | Adelaide | Phenotyping technologies for wheat breeding - J. Walter - Duration: 8:58.

Alright, can everyone hear me?

I'll be talking to you a bit

about my PhD project. First I'd just like to

say thanks to GRDC and to SAGIT

for funding my work and also to my

supervisors James Edwards, Glenn McDonald

and Haydn Kuchel.

First off, let's

start with wheat breeding, so what's

the goal with that? Well, we want to

produce better varieties through selecting

traits. Recently, this is down mostly

with molecular technologies like

molecular markers and genomic selection

but this is at the point now where this

information is really readily available

to breeding programs where as it used to be

a bottleneck. But both of these tools are

still really underpinned by phenotyping

so that's going out and observing the

physical characteristics of the wheat

growing in the field. So if we look at a

plot of wheat in terms of the wheat

breeding program,

what do we actually want to look at with

it? Well, we might want to look at things

like grain yield or flowering time,

head numbers, disease - we might want to

look at the height, or we might want to

know how much biomass is in the plot.

Each of these things by

themselves isn't too hard to measure -

it's pretty easy - but when you start

looking at lots of plots, it becomes

difficult, especially with things like biomass

where you have to destructively sample.

This is now creating a new bottleneck in

the breeding program where we have all

the molecular information we want, but

not all this phenotypic information. Just

to illustrate that a bit, here is 30,000

plots out at Roseworthy, AGT's main breeding

site, and when you look at it in that

scale the idea of going through and

measuring each one of those plots just

becomes unfeasible - even more so when you

think about South Australia and having

100,000 crops spread across it.

This is really where my project

fits in - looking at how we can use new

technologies to try and speed up this

phenotyping process and make it a bit

easier for plant breeding. Over the past

year or so, we've been working on this

prototype imaging boom -

so this is a collaboration between AGT,

UniSA and Limagrain, and we've

put this together with a couple of

different sensors on there. Up the top

there we've got four digital cameras - two

on either side of the boom - and we also

have two LiDar units, which are a 3D laser

scanner. Basically, what we do is

we drive this boom through our plant

breeding trials and we measure one plot either

side as we go.

All of that capturing is

triggered by an RTK GPS in the

tractor and then all of it gets sent

back to a laptop in there and so we've

got all the data ready to go when we get

back to the office. Now I'll just talk

to you a bit about both of those

different sensors and what I've been

using them for and how I think they

fit into the context of plant breeding.

First off with digital imaging - and

we're taking photos down into the plot,

so directly from above.

The simplest thing we do with this is

digital imaging segmentation so

basically selecting parts of that photo

and separating them out and analyzing

them. Here in this example, we've got

the original image and then I've taken

out the background there so there's no

soil, it's just plant material - and you can

use that for things like ground

cover or potentially early vigour early

in the season - and then I've gone a step

further here and just separated out the

yellow. In this example I was looking at

physiological yellowing in wheat, so I wanted

to measure what percentage of that leaf

area was yellow - but you can use it

for other things, like the ground cover,

you can also use it for senescence and

I've tested it also for measuring septoria

within a septoria nursery. Looking at

that data in a bit more detail, I

obviously have those digital scores I've taken, but

also visual scores I've gone and made

myself in the field. When we look

at the relationship between the two, it's

pretty good - I don't think you can complain

too much about that - but in terms of

plant breeding, what we can then look at

here is the heritability. You can

think of that as genetic repeatability,

or in essence it's a measure of accuracy

that we use in the breeding program.

Looking for my visual score of the data,

it's around 48% - so that's pretty

good, it's a fairly heritable

trait, but when we look at my digital

score at 73%, we

saw a nice big increase there, which

means that using that digital data

within the breeding program should

be more reliable. I'm not sure if I said

visual or digital there, but using the digital

data in the breeding program should

be more reliable than the visual data.

That's kind of what I've been doing with

cameras, now let's have a look at the

LiDAR. Like I said, this is a

3D sensor, it's a laser scanner

and it gives us data that looks like

this for each of the plots. This is

just coloured based on height, just to make

it a bit more visible, and you can see

here the five individual rows of wheat

within that plot. I mean, that's some

pretty cool-looking data and we then have

that for each of the plots in our trial.

But what can we do with that data?

Well, the first thing we can do is look at

height - so here we have that same plot but

looking at it from the side, and you can

see how we would measure plant height with that.

Again, comparing these LiDAR

derived heights with some manual heights

I've taken out in the field, we get a

really nice correlation there and then

we look at the heritability, and it's the

same for both - so we're not seeing an

improvement in accuracy there by using

the LiDar, but what we are seeing is an

increase in speed, where being on a

tractor you can drive it through the

field pretty easily and I don't have to

be out there with a ruler measuring all

of these plots. Something else I'm

interested in with the LiDar is biomass,

which is particularly hard to measure

especially within plant breeding - you have to

take biomass cuts, so you cut out part of the

plot, dry it and weight it and if you do that too

many times you don't have any plot left.

Here we have that same LiDar plot but

looking directly down so you can start

to see some of the

fidelity in that scan, you get

individual leaves in there and you can

even start to make out heads. Again,

comparing manual biomass measurements

with this LiDAR derived biomass score,

we get a pretty good correlation. It's not

perfect, it's obviously not as good as

the height one, but it's still pretty

reasonable and the really exciting thing

about this in terms of plant breeding is

when we look at the heritability we go

from 15% with the manual

measurement - which is

pretty average, you wouldn't really want

to use it - to 62% with the LiDAR,

which is really good and it means that

this data should be pretty useful

within the breeding program. On that

note, what do we actually do with the

data in the breeding program?

Well, the short answer is statistics.

Basically, we get all this phenotypic

data and feed it into things like

mixed linear models and multivariate

analyses, and basically what that does is

it gives us a more accurate analysis and

ultimately it leads to us

predicting better future varieties to

extract from the breeding program and

release. I guess just a short summary

on that - I've been looking mainly at

the digital imaging and the LiDAR.

The digital imaging and cameras -

they're easy to use; even though I have

it on a tractor, you don't have to -

you can use it on foot,

you don't need GPS or anything. You can

do all of that analysis with free

software, which is really good, and you

can look at traits like ground cover,

potentially disease and also in future

we're working towards things like

counting objects - so heads and plants.

Then we have the LiDAR data, which is

unfortunately not so easy to work with -

it needs to be on some sort of vehicle

and have spatial information fed in so that

you can make that 3D data and

and it all has to be done with custom

software, but the information we're

getting for traits like height and

biomass is really promising. For the

breeding program, we're getting some

really good looking data and I guess

the next step for me is to repeat this

all again at a much larger scale this

season and collect more data and see

how it feeds into those statistical

analyses. I guess just in terms of

looking forward,

where do I think this technology is

going? Well, definitely plant breeders and

researchers I think are going to

be using it, but it's also showing really

promising potential for advisors and

growers. I'd just like to thank the UniSA

PBRC, as well as the AGT Roseworthy team and

Limagrain for their help on this project, as

well as SAGIT, GRDC, University

of Adelaide Ag, Food and Wine, and the ARC for

their funding. Thank you.

For more infomation >> Grains Research Update 2017 | Adelaide | Phenotyping technologies for wheat breeding - J. Walter - Duration: 8:58.

-------------------------------------------

Get more Views and Subscrib...

For more infomation >> Get more Views and Subscrib...

-------------------------------------------

(2000) Rescue Shot Bubibo (English captions available) - Duration: 0:15.

Bo-kun, you ate all that?!

Bo-Kun!

About earlier, forgive me..

Rescue Shot Bubibo

Play it with the Guncon!