Intel's Sandy Bridge Microarchitecture Debuts: Core i5 2500K and Core i7 2600K CPUs Reviewed

Enter the "Sandy Bridge" 32nm architecture, which marks the introduction of the 2nd generation Intel Core processors. Sandy Bridge is designed to be a two-chip platform consisting of a processor and Platform Controller Hub (PCH). It incorporates an Integrated Display Engine, Processor Graphics, and Integrated Memory Controller. However with Sandy Bridge we are not just getting new processors, but an entirely new platform that will be backed up by new chipsets (P67, H67, H61) using the new LGA1155 socket.

After numerous rumors and even formal announcements throughout 2010, we all knew Intel was launching their next-gen CPUs in time for CES 2011, meaning it was slated to happen the first week of the New Year. But before we delve deeper into Sandy Bridge details and performance, let's step back to 2006, the year in which Intel transitioned from the Pentium branding for its flagship desktop CPUs and turned to the "Core" processors.

The Core series started with the Core 2 Duo which was manufactured using a 65nm process. The Core 2 Duo E6700 laid waste to all that came before it, making high-end Pentium 4 and Pentium D processors look pokey, while the Athlon 64 range that at the time was topping Intel's best offerings was also left well behind. In fact, it took several years for AMD to recover and show us something really worthy of contention, the Phenom II X4 range didn't debut until early 2009.

The launch of the Core architecture set the pace for the years to come with a nearly impeccable execution on Intel's side and its "tick-tock" strategy. By the time AMD was able to hold its number against Core 2 Duo processors, Intel was ready to unleash the Core 2 Quad family. Some of the early models in this range were on the expensive side, which had AMD targeting the budget and mainstream sectors to attract consumers.

Later on came Nehalem, the predecessor to today's Sandy Bridge. The first "Bloomfield" 45nm processors from the infamous Core i7 series made light work of the Phenom II X4, but with prices starting at $284 per chip, the more affordable AMD quad-core processors still provided a viable alternative.

Needless to say that AMD has been traveling through rough seas for the past few years and unfortunately for them things were about to get a whole lot tougher. On late 2009, the Core i5 series made its debut with a single model known as the 750, which quickly became the #1 mainstream choice. At just $200 it provided Core i7-like performance but on a more affordable platform. At this price there was no Phenom II X4 model that could touch it and as a result all AMD CPUs were forced to sell below that threshold making them an incredibly good value. The current Phenom II X4 flagship, the 970 Black Edition costs just $185.

Currently competing against this AMD range as well as its smaller and budget-minded X3 and X2 siblings are the Intel "Clarkdale" 32nm CPUs, better known as the Core i5 6xx and Core i3 5xx series. These relatively new processors boosted a few new features, most notable of which was the die shrink and the integrated HD Graphics engine.

Which brings us to today. The debut of Sandy Bridge will result in the replacement of almost the entire Intel desktop CPU lineup and an important segment of their mobile line as well.

All in all, 14 new desktop CPUs are being launched today spanning the Core i7, i5 and i3 series, in addition to 15 mobile processors and several more supporting chipsets. Although we will focus on the desktop side of things on this review, there's still a lot to cover. Before jumping into performance benchmarks we will detail the inner workings of the Sandy Bridge architecture and how it differs to its predecessors. We are also putting special emphasis on the improved integrated graphics logic, Turbo Boost and the new 6 series chipsets. Read on!

Online Business Consulting | Internet Business Consulting

Source: http://www.techspot.com/review/353-intel-sandy-bridge-corei5-2500k-corei7-2600k/

virginia lottery nittany lion tcu football own network channel

Give Me Back My Water Wings

Sprinting, shooting, jumping, punching. Name any human action verb, and you'll probably find it simulated reasonably well in a game somewhere. Unless, of course, it's swimming.

Despite all the water-levels inflicted on us, games have never quite managed swimming. In fact, Grand Theft Auto III famously featured a main character so downright terrified of the wet stuff that he?d curl up and die as soon as he got a splash on his little toe. I used to regularly bemoan the fact that I could lose all my best weapons merely by getting a dunking.

Thankfully, this is no longer common in these modern days of expansive gameplay, multimillion dollar budgets and huge areas to explore, but that doesn't mean matters have improved. Instead, we?re been handed some of the most dull swimming experiences we?ve ever had the misfortune to experience.

Take, for example, Grand Theft Auto IV. Nico?s an accomplished swimmer, and he?s happy to take a dip whenever he feels the urge. As such, when the temptation appears, usually at about the time his Wanted level hits the four-star mark, he?ll rush off to the nearest patch of water and paddle off into the middle of nowhere.

The police, being happy to stick to dry land unless you?ve committed mass-genocide, will soon give up and trot off back to their coffee and donuts. However, in all the excitement, Nico will by then have drifted out to sea. This means that you're now stuck with a good ten-minute button-prod-a-thon until you get back to dry land.


What's more, when you get there, unless it?s one of the handy, easy-to-grip areas, Nico isn?t going to play ball. Instead, you?re left slowly paddling along the coastline for a good 15 minutes, cursing your refusal to give yourself up to the cops. Woe betide you if you happen to be near the airport at this point; you might as well reload an old save game and rescue yourself from the sheer boredom of getting back to solid ground.

Swimming, it seems, simply isn?t fun. Nearly everyone?s gaming lives have been affected by the frustrating inclusion of water-based torment. Who hasn?t suffered a multitude of deaths in the guise of Lara Croft, as she twists and contorts in oxygen-free agony? Surely no-one can claim that Mario?s swimming levels even hit the heady heights of the poorest quality of those that take place on dry land?


The problem is that land offers freedom and quick manoeuvring; water doesn't, at least not to anything like the same degree. Ezio Auditore in Assassin?s Creed 2 may be able to hop from rooftop to rooftop like an agile moggy, but stick him in the water and he paddles along like an asthmatic donkey. It?s simply not fun going for a lengthy and tedious swim before you can find a bit of soil low enough to grab onto.

The solution? Unless you can make a swimming section somehow as action-packed as the rest of the game, make a dip in the ocean impossible. I?d much rather be annoyed by the inability to hop into the sea, than drop in and find I?ve got a 15-minute paddle to dry land ahead of me.

Online Business Consulting | Internet Business Consulting

Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/bit-tech/blog/~3/3QKYz503lvU/

virginia lottery nittany lion tcu football own network channel

Navigating Your Energy Risk

Editor's Note: This introduction begins our Business Impact report on the topic of Corporate Energy Strategy, unfolding here daily throughout January.

Businesses can be excused for feeling some confusion about what to do about their energy consumption. Though they've been told to expect an economy-wide price on carbon, the U.S. Congress failed to impose one last year, and the nations participating in the Copenhagen climate summit in 2009 did not reach a binding agreement on how to cut carbon dioxide emissions. But despite the uncertainties about what national energy policy will bring, companies ranging from big-box retailers like Wal-Mart and Costco to high-tech leaders like Google and Cisco to industrial behemoths like General Electric and IBM are embracing cleaner energy technologies that lower their carbon footprints and reduce their overall reliance on fossil fuels.

The overriding motivation has become one of simple economics. "Some of these things just pencil out well," says Greg Neichin, a managing director at the Cleantech Group, a market intelligence firm. Indeed, a new report from Environmental Leader, a publisher of energy news and research, found that the majority of nearly 400 companies now generating their own renewable energy are doing so in order to reduce operating costs or to hedge against the prospect of higher prices for fossil fuels (see chart on next page).

This is a marked shift from the reasons companies have previously turned to environmentally friendly policies, such as a way of enhancing branding while largely continuing with business as usual?a tactic that some critics deride as "greenwashing." In the past, companies typically pursued such efforts through corporate social responsibility (CSR) programs rather than core business units directed by senior management. According to a 2007 survey of 420 global businesses by public-relations firm Hill & Knowlton, 52 percent of companies cited "improved reputation" as the main reason for pursuing green policies and technologies.

This special report on corporate energy strategy will argue that the new corporate focus on the economic benefits of going green is being made possible not only by advances in technology but also by innovations in business models that help companies mitigate their energy risk. We'll hear from corporate leaders who are putting energy strategies into practice, and we'll cite research showing for the first time that a broad range of companies are actually receiving a return on their renewable-energy investments.

Over the course of this month, we'll explore how better, cheaper renewable-energy technologies are making a difference for companies. Some of these technologies are well established. For instance, wind power has achieved "grid parity" in many parts of the world, matching the price of power generated by fuels such as natural gas. New ways of financing solar power have been making it more attractive to business. All-electric vehicles are coming to market in significant volume for the first time, and companies such as UPS and Coca-Cola are adding them to their fleets alongside hybrid vehicles.

Other technologies are newer to the mainstream. Among these are fuel cells that can now power entire buildings or retail centers for about the same cost as grid electricity, and low-power LED lighting, which retailers including Starbucks are installing in their stores. Telepresence systems and low-cost videoconferencing can dramatically reduce the need to travel by car and air. Creative new ways to power data centers can minimize carbon emissions while offering more capacity in less space. Smart building technology is poised to work with the coming smart grid to save companies substantial sums of money.

As more companies adopt these technologies, the cumulative effect could be big. Business software giant SAP calculates that its customer base, which includes 40,000 companies in 120 countries, collectively accounts for one-sixth of the world's carbon emissions. By comparison, the entire European Union is responsible for about 14 percent.

Online Business Consulting | Internet Business Consulting

Source: http://feeds.technologyreview.com/click.phdo?i=c4b7e6b3297b87f29eeeb167657085e5

stowe vermont rose bowl va lottery frontdoor.com/sweepstakes

Is the iPad the future of computing?

You?ll need to bear with me on this one, and not just because this idea struck me after a sleepless long-haul flight. Suggesting that the iPad might be the future of computing needs a heck of a lot of explanation, both in defining my terms and moving beyond the iPad?s current incarnation as a mobile device. As such, if I may, I?ll ask you to give me a little bit of time before inviting your comments, whether they're flames or petitions to sanctify Steve Jobs? turtle-neck sweater.

Here?s the crux of my thought ? imagine a PC that doesn?t fail, yet is cool, fun and easy to use. That?s the iPad, but not in its current form. Even my mother would feel much more at home if her computer still had a keyboard and mouse, as these input devices enable a person to be more productive than mere fingers. Similarly, the iPad's screen needs to be larger than 9.7in if the iPad's going to be a useful computer, rather than a frivolous distraction.

[enter]Is the iPad the future of computing? *Is the iPad the future of computing?
Your next PC? Probably not, but it might be everyone else's[/center]

A larger device based on the iPad is what I?m talking about. You might call it an iPad Maxi, or Apple could call it an iPC (hopefully people will be able to tell the difference between a computer and the publishing house). A device that?s as neat as an iMac, cheaper than a conventional PC and as easy to use as the iPad should have a big future.

Such a device wouldn?t just be useful at home; it would also be great for work. IT managers all over the world would love to deploy PCs that can?t crash, or have dodgy software installed on them. After all, you just need to password-protect or remove the App Store, and you?ll have a locked down system. What's more, your employees would thank you for the cool new PC on their desk, rather than feeling as if they're being treated like children, as many workers do feel about their locked-down work PCs.

While there will always be a market for high-performance systems for gaming, media creation and so on, most people don?t need that level of power. What's more, with ARM delivering ever faster CPUs, a larger, desk-bound iPad PC wouldn?t have to be slow, and Apple could release speed increases yearly, as ARM delivers faster designs.

I can imagine Apple being bold enough to deliver such a system, but it wouldn't have to be an Apple-only deal. The likes of Sony, HP or even Asus could make a similar device based on a modified Android (or even Windows Phone 7) OS. Either way, such a PC could potentially initiate a massive swing in power away from Intel, AMD and Microsoft towards ARM, Apple and possibly Google.

Bearing in mind that any ?iPC? device wouldn?t be aimed at enthusiast-level bit-tech readers, but rather the other 80 per cent of PC users, do you think a desktop-based iPad-like PC would make sense? If so, just how much influence do you think it might have?

Online Business Consulting | Internet Business Consulting

Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/bit-tech/blog/~3/2pk4sr8heF0/

hgtv.com/dreamhome joe paterno stowe vermont rose bowl

E.P.A. Limit on Gases to Pose Risk to Obama and Congress

While only the first phase of regulation takes effect on Sunday, the administration is on notice that if it moves too far and too fast in trying to curtail the ubiquitous gases that are heating the planet it risks a Congressional backlash that could set back the effort for years.

But the newly muscular Republicans in Congress could also stumble by moving too aggressively to handcuff the Environmental Protection Agency, provoking a popular outcry that they are endangering public health in the service of their well-heeled patrons in industry.

?These are hand grenades, and the pins have been pulled,? said William K. Reilly, administrator of the environmental agency under the first President George Bush.

He said that the agency was wedged between a hostile Congress and the mandates of the law, with little room to maneuver. But he also said that anti-E.P.A. zealots in Congress should realize that the agency was acting on laws that Congress itself passed, many of them by overwhelming bipartisan margins.

President Obama vowed as a candidate that he would put the United States on a path to addressing climate change by reducing emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas pollutants. He offered Congress wide latitude to pass climate change legislation, but held in reserve the threat of E.P.A. regulation if it failed to act. The deeply polarized Senate?s refusal to enact climate change legislation essentially called his bluff.

With Mr. Obama?s hand forced by the mandates of the Clean Air Act and a 2007 Supreme Court decision, his E.P.A. will impose the first regulation of major stationary sources of greenhouse gases starting Jan. 2.

For now, administration officials are treading lightly, fearful of inflaming an already charged atmosphere on the issue and mindful that its stated priorities are job creation and economic recovery. Officials are not seeking a major confrontation over carbon regulation, which offers formidable challenges even in a less stressed economic and political climate.

?If the administration gets it wrong, we?re looking at years of litigation, legislation and public and business outcry,? said a senior administration official who asked not to be identified so as not to provide an easy target for the incoming Republicans. ?If we get it right, we?re facing the same thing.?

?Can we get it right?? this official continued. ?Or is this just too big a challenge, too complex a legal, scientific, political and regulatory puzzle??

The immediate effect on utilities, refiners and major manufacturers will be small, with the new rules applying only to those planning to build large new facilities or make major modifications to existing plants. The environmental agency estimates that only 400 such facilities will be affected in each of the first few years of the program. Over the next decade, however, the agency plans to regulate virtually all sources of greenhouse gases, imposing efficiency and emissions requirements on nearly every industry and every region.

Lisa P. Jackson, administrator of the E.P.A., has promised to pursue a measured and moderate course. The agency announced last week that it would not even begin issuing standards for compliance until the middle of 2011, and when it did so the rules would not impose unreasonable costs on industry.

But the reaction in Congress and industry has been outsized, with some likening the E.P.A. to terrorists and others vowing to choke off the agency?s financing for all air-quality regulation. A dozen states have filed suit to halt the new greenhouse gas rules, with one, Texas, flatly refusing to comply with any new orders from Washington.

Two federal courts, including one this week in Texas, have refused to issue restraining orders halting the implementation of the new rules. But both left open the possibility of finding the new rules unsupported by federal law.

Representative Fred Upton, the Michigan Republican who is set to become chairman of the powerful House Energy and Commerce Committee, said he was not convinced that greenhouse gases needed to be controlled or that the E.P.A. had the authority to do so.

?This move represents an unconstitutional power grab that will kill millions of jobs ? unless Congress steps in,? Mr. Upton wrote this week in a Wall Street Journal opinion essay.

His co-author was Tim Phillips, president of Americans for Prosperity, a conservative group financed by Koch Industries and other oil companies that has spread skepticism about global warming and supported many of the Tea Party candidates who will join the new Congress.

Mr. Upton has proposed a moratorium on all global warming regulation until the courts have ruled definitively on the legality of federal action on the issue, decisions that are probably years away.

Others in Congress, including Senator John D. Rockefeller IV and Representative Nick J. Rahall II, both Democrats from West Virginia, have proposed a two-year delay in regulation by the E.P.A. while Congress comes up with its own rules. Virtually no one expects action on climate change legislation in the next Congressional session.

White House officials have said that they will recommend that Mr. Obama veto any measure that restricts the administration?s power to enforce clean air laws.

So the stalemate continues.

Greenhouse gas emissions in the United States are already falling faster than any current legislative or regulatory proposal envisions, because of the recession-driven drop in demand for electricity. Carbon dioxide emissions from the energy sector, by far the largest source of total emissions, fell to about 5,400 metric tons in 2009, down from 5,800 metric tons the year before, and they are likely to fall even further this year. Demand for electricity in 2009 fell by the largest amount in six decades and is almost certain to slip further in 2010.

When demand for power begins to rebound with the economy, emissions are expected to rise more slowly than in the past, in part because utilities are using fuel more efficiently and switching to cleaner-burning natural gas for part of their electricity generation. But such moves will not take the place of the across-the-board reductions in emissions that will be required to meet the administration?s target of a 17 percent reduction in emissions over 2005 levels by 2020.

And it is that broader mandate that has set off such intense opposition from industry and its allies in Congress.

?Early next year we?re going to have a very serious debate on whether the E.P.A. should be allowed to unilaterally go forward and restructure the American economy,? Jack Gerard, the president of the American Petroleum Institute, said in an interview.

?As the president looks to 2012, his message has to be job creation, and this kind of regulation is inconsistent with that,? he said. ?The public has a long memory. Anything viewed as hurting the opportunity to create jobs will not be well received.?

Matthew L. Wald contributed reporting.

Online Business Consulting | Internet Business Consulting

Source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=296c0332c862aafffa46bd0e15588711

penn state football dillards rose bowl game time virginia lottery

Give Me Back My Water Wings

Sprinting, shooting, jumping, punching. Name any human action verb, and you'll probably find it simulated reasonably well in a game somewhere. Unless, of course, it's swimming.

Despite all the water-levels inflicted on us, games have never quite managed swimming. In fact, Grand Theft Auto III famously featured a main character so downright terrified of the wet stuff that he?d curl up and die as soon as he got a splash on his little toe. I used to regularly bemoan the fact that I could lose all my best weapons merely by getting a dunking.

Thankfully, this is no longer common in these modern days of expansive gameplay, multimillion dollar budgets and huge areas to explore, but that doesn't mean matters have improved. Instead, we?re been handed some of the most dull swimming experiences we?ve ever had the misfortune to experience.

Take, for example, Grand Theft Auto IV. Nico?s an accomplished swimmer, and he?s happy to take a dip whenever he feels the urge. As such, when the temptation appears, usually at about the time his Wanted level hits the four-star mark, he?ll rush off to the nearest patch of water and paddle off into the middle of nowhere.

The police, being happy to stick to dry land unless you?ve committed mass-genocide, will soon give up and trot off back to their coffee and donuts. However, in all the excitement, Nico will by then have drifted out to sea. This means that you're now stuck with a good ten-minute button-prod-a-thon until you get back to dry land.


What's more, when you get there, unless it?s one of the handy, easy-to-grip areas, Nico isn?t going to play ball. Instead, you?re left slowly paddling along the coastline for a good 15 minutes, cursing your refusal to give yourself up to the cops. Woe betide you if you happen to be near the airport at this point; you might as well reload an old save game and rescue yourself from the sheer boredom of getting back to solid ground.

Swimming, it seems, simply isn?t fun. Nearly everyone?s gaming lives have been affected by the frustrating inclusion of water-based torment. Who hasn?t suffered a multitude of deaths in the guise of Lara Croft, as she twists and contorts in oxygen-free agony? Surely no-one can claim that Mario?s swimming levels even hit the heady heights of the poorest quality of those that take place on dry land?


The problem is that land offers freedom and quick manoeuvring; water doesn't, at least not to anything like the same degree. Ezio Auditore in Assassin?s Creed 2 may be able to hop from rooftop to rooftop like an agile moggy, but stick him in the water and he paddles along like an asthmatic donkey. It?s simply not fun going for a lengthy and tedious swim before you can find a bit of soil low enough to grab onto.

The solution? Unless you can make a swimming section somehow as action-packed as the rest of the game, make a dip in the ocean impossible. I?d much rather be annoyed by the inability to hop into the sea, than drop in and find I?ve got a 15-minute paddle to dry land ahead of me.

Online Business Consulting | Internet Business Consulting

Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/bit-tech/blog/~3/3QKYz503lvU/

virginia lottery nittany lion tcu football own network channel

Blog - Best of 2010: Physicist Discovers How to Teleport Energy

In 1993, Charlie Bennett at IBM's Watson Research Center in New York State and a few pals showed how to transmit quantum information from one point in space to another without traversing the intervening space.

Read the full story...

Print Favorite Share facebook twitter
-->

Online Business Consulting | Internet Business Consulting

Source: http://feeds.technologyreview.com/click.phdo?i=d42c688e1881f8e0379fa4de7df099cf

own network channel winter classic fafsa.gov stores open on new year s day 2011

E.P.A. Limit on Gases to Pose Risk to Obama and Congress

While only the first phase of regulation takes effect on Sunday, the administration is on notice that if it moves too far and too fast in trying to curtail the ubiquitous gases that are heating the planet it risks a Congressional backlash that could set back the effort for years.

But the newly muscular Republicans in Congress could also stumble by moving too aggressively to handcuff the Environmental Protection Agency, provoking a popular outcry that they are endangering public health in the service of their well-heeled patrons in industry.

?These are hand grenades, and the pins have been pulled,? said William K. Reilly, administrator of the environmental agency under the first President George Bush.

He said that the agency was wedged between a hostile Congress and the mandates of the law, with little room to maneuver. But he also said that anti-E.P.A. zealots in Congress should realize that the agency was acting on laws that Congress itself passed, many of them by overwhelming bipartisan margins.

President Obama vowed as a candidate that he would put the United States on a path to addressing climate change by reducing emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas pollutants. He offered Congress wide latitude to pass climate change legislation, but held in reserve the threat of E.P.A. regulation if it failed to act. The deeply polarized Senate?s refusal to enact climate change legislation essentially called his bluff.

With Mr. Obama?s hand forced by the mandates of the Clean Air Act and a 2007 Supreme Court decision, his E.P.A. will impose the first regulation of major stationary sources of greenhouse gases starting Jan. 2.

For now, administration officials are treading lightly, fearful of inflaming an already charged atmosphere on the issue and mindful that its stated priorities are job creation and economic recovery. Officials are not seeking a major confrontation over carbon regulation, which offers formidable challenges even in a less stressed economic and political climate.

?If the administration gets it wrong, we?re looking at years of litigation, legislation and public and business outcry,? said a senior administration official who asked not to be identified so as not to provide an easy target for the incoming Republicans. ?If we get it right, we?re facing the same thing.?

?Can we get it right?? this official continued. ?Or is this just too big a challenge, too complex a legal, scientific, political and regulatory puzzle??

The immediate effect on utilities, refiners and major manufacturers will be small, with the new rules applying only to those planning to build large new facilities or make major modifications to existing plants. The environmental agency estimates that only 400 such facilities will be affected in each of the first few years of the program. Over the next decade, however, the agency plans to regulate virtually all sources of greenhouse gases, imposing efficiency and emissions requirements on nearly every industry and every region.

Lisa P. Jackson, administrator of the E.P.A., has promised to pursue a measured and moderate course. The agency announced last week that it would not even begin issuing standards for compliance until the middle of 2011, and when it did so the rules would not impose unreasonable costs on industry.

But the reaction in Congress and industry has been outsized, with some likening the E.P.A. to terrorists and others vowing to choke off the agency?s financing for all air-quality regulation. A dozen states have filed suit to halt the new greenhouse gas rules, with one, Texas, flatly refusing to comply with any new orders from Washington.

Two federal courts, including one this week in Texas, have refused to issue restraining orders halting the implementation of the new rules. But both left open the possibility of finding the new rules unsupported by federal law.

Representative Fred Upton, the Michigan Republican who is set to become chairman of the powerful House Energy and Commerce Committee, said he was not convinced that greenhouse gases needed to be controlled or that the E.P.A. had the authority to do so.

?This move represents an unconstitutional power grab that will kill millions of jobs ? unless Congress steps in,? Mr. Upton wrote this week in a Wall Street Journal opinion essay.

His co-author was Tim Phillips, president of Americans for Prosperity, a conservative group financed by Koch Industries and other oil companies that has spread skepticism about global warming and supported many of the Tea Party candidates who will join the new Congress.

Mr. Upton has proposed a moratorium on all global warming regulation until the courts have ruled definitively on the legality of federal action on the issue, decisions that are probably years away.

Others in Congress, including Senator John D. Rockefeller IV and Representative Nick J. Rahall II, both Democrats from West Virginia, have proposed a two-year delay in regulation by the E.P.A. while Congress comes up with its own rules. Virtually no one expects action on climate change legislation in the next Congressional session.

White House officials have said that they will recommend that Mr. Obama veto any measure that restricts the administration?s power to enforce clean air laws.

So the stalemate continues.

Greenhouse gas emissions in the United States are already falling faster than any current legislative or regulatory proposal envisions, because of the recession-driven drop in demand for electricity. Carbon dioxide emissions from the energy sector, by far the largest source of total emissions, fell to about 5,400 metric tons in 2009, down from 5,800 metric tons the year before, and they are likely to fall even further this year. Demand for electricity in 2009 fell by the largest amount in six decades and is almost certain to slip further in 2010.

When demand for power begins to rebound with the economy, emissions are expected to rise more slowly than in the past, in part because utilities are using fuel more efficiently and switching to cleaner-burning natural gas for part of their electricity generation. But such moves will not take the place of the across-the-board reductions in emissions that will be required to meet the administration?s target of a 17 percent reduction in emissions over 2005 levels by 2020.

And it is that broader mandate that has set off such intense opposition from industry and its allies in Congress.

?Early next year we?re going to have a very serious debate on whether the E.P.A. should be allowed to unilaterally go forward and restructure the American economy,? Jack Gerard, the president of the American Petroleum Institute, said in an interview.

?As the president looks to 2012, his message has to be job creation, and this kind of regulation is inconsistent with that,? he said. ?The public has a long memory. Anything viewed as hurting the opportunity to create jobs will not be well received.?

Matthew L. Wald contributed reporting.

Online Business Consulting | Internet Business Consulting

Source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=296c0332c862aafffa46bd0e15588711

fafsa.gov stores open on new year s day 2011 fafsa hgtv dream home 2011

Blog - Best of 2010: Big Bang Abandoned in New Model of the Universe

As one of the few astrophysical events that most people are familiar with, the Big Bang has a special place in our culture. And while there is scientific consensus that it is the best explanation for the origin of the Universe, the debate is far from closed. However, it's hard to find alternative models of the Universe without a beginning that are genuinely compelling.

That could change now with the fascinating work of Wun-Yi Shu at the National Tsing Hua University in Taiwan. Shu has developed an innovative new description of the Universe in which the roles of time space and mass are related in new kind of relativity.

Read the full post...

Print Favorite Share facebook twitter
-->

Online Business Consulting | Internet Business Consulting

Source: http://feeds.technologyreview.com/click.phdo?i=5362e90f033f507588b3d3ee6800b9bf

fafsa hgtv dream home 2011 colorado lottery hgtv.com/dreamhome

iPhone Review: Rage

The easy, initial reaction to Rage for the iPhone is to say that id Software has done it again, delivering a game that sets a benchmark of graphical splendour for the platform and will doubtless grow to be one of the iPhone?s definitive shooters.

Closer inspection, however, reveals that early assessment to only be two thirds right. Yes, Rage is a technical marvel and it?s amazing that id Software has managed to cram such large, detailed levels into a mobile phone game. However, this isn?t a definitive shooter. If anything, Rage follows in the steps of Quake Wars and Doom 3; it's graphically magnificent, but a fundamentally boring game.

Rage is closer to a lightgun game than an actual first person shooter. Cast as contestants on Mutant Bash TV ? a gladiatorial TV show for the post-apocalypse civilisation ? players basically run a scripted gauntlet and kill all the baddies they see along the way. You can?t control your movement, and your role in the game is merely to aim and shoot using the three weapons provided.


Really, that?s all there is to Rage on the iPhone ? scripted hallways and enemies that pop up and down like cardboard cutouts. There are bonus targets to shoot along the way too, plus an active reload system that marketing execs would probably claim adds ?tactical depth?, but it?s all much of a muchness. Rage is essentially just Virtua Cop or House of the Dead with fancier graphics.

The fact that Rage is just a lightgun game, however, isn?t the problem. Instead, the issue is that it doesn?t feel like it was originally designed as one. Levels, for example, are so long and complex that, while they?d be great in a first person shooter, they become tiring when dropped into a lightgun game.

The levels take so long to complete, and are so lacking in variety, that they reduce players to yawns by the end of the first level. There are only a handful of different baddy-types, all with the same attacks. There are no bosses or sudden changes of pace to keep the game interesting, merely more rooms of mutants who stand perfectly still and throw easily-dodged bricks.

Despite the fact that the levels are so overly long, Rage still ends up feeling light on content too. There are only three levels to play at the moment, and all of them are very similar. The only replay value in any of them involves either finding all the hidden targets (which don?t unlock anything), or beating your high-score.

The result of all this is that Rage ultimately feels like little more than an expensive tech demo. The technology id has created is really the only grounds on which to recommend the game, unless you?re a big fan of monotonous, ceaseless, shallow and pointless shooting.

Verdict: Boring and badly designed, Rage?s only real appeal is its pretty looks. If that?s all you?re after then you'd be better off downloading Epic Citadel for free.

Online Business Consulting | Internet Business Consulting

Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/bit-tech/blog/~3/qGZsYsU9mHs/

outback bowl 2011 penn state football dillards rose bowl game time