Related Posts A group of scholars from Germany, Austria, and the U.K. recently put together a case study about the tweeting habits of conference attendees. Entitled “How People are using Twitter during Conferences,” this research report (available here on Scribd.com), reveals some interesting, although not altogether shocking, insights into the role the microblogging service plays during major events. Most notable of their findings is the number of individuals who actively use the service during conferences – a figure showing high participation levels among attendees. According to the report, the researchers were motivated to find out if using Twitter could actually help improve the interactions among the learners and enhance their learning experience when attending presentations in large groups. They looked into the motives of Twitter users, contents of tweets, and how this impacted the user’s network. The researchers found that the majority of conference attendees already had a Twitter account (95.1%) and many of those who did actively used it to tweet during the conference (67.5%). 74.1% of the attendees send between 11 and 20 messages per day and 51.2% discussed topics via @ replies and DMs. The Dos and Don’ts of Brand Awareness Videos sarah perez As to what the conference goers shared, it was discovered that nearly half the tweets were simple plain text messages while tweets with links to web sites only accounted for 10% of the messages. In other words, the Twitterers were using the medium to share the information they were learning at the present moment as opposed to posting links to information already available on the web. The participants were also asked open-ended questions like “Why do you think Twitter encouraged the discussion about topics?” and what the added value of Twitter at conferences was. In response, the survey participants answered that Twitter gave conference goers a greater sense of community and encouraged discussion in the backchannel, often allowing them to discuss things in more detail than the “guys on the stage.” Other participants noted that Twitter helps you connect with people who have similar interests, provides networking potential, and allows those who could not attend to gain value from your experience. Unfortunately, the data collected comes from only five conferences and forty-one different attendees, so the sample size isn’t what we would consider to be large enough to draw any definite conclusions. However, based on these initial findings, it does seem to show that a good majority of conference goers today use Twitter to share information and interact with their network when attending these sorts of events. Facebook is Becoming Less Personal and More Pro… Guide to Performing Bulk Email Verification Tags:#Trends#twitter#web A Comprehensive Guide to a Content Audit
As the Lautenberg Act’s lead sponsor, Senator Tom Udall, told Ensia by email, “Most Americans believe that if they can buy a product at the grocery store or the hardware store, the government has tested it and determined that it’s safe. But that hasn’t been true. There has been no cop on the beat testing chemicals to make sure they’re safe — even the ones in your home.”But exactly what the revisions should look like was a matter of considerable debate, and the new legislation was years in the making. Overall, the revised TSCA gives the EPA far more authority to act on hazardous chemicals. And while questions and reservations about the bill remain on all sides, it’s largely been greeted with hope that the new law will enable the EPA to do a better job of evaluating and acting effectively on chemical safety.EPA is already putting the new legislation into practice. But as Environmental Defense Fund lead senior scientist Richard Denison said, “It’s not going to be an overnight process. The original law dug a very deep hole that we have to climb out of.”As that process gets underway, here’s what anyone concerned about the safety of chemicals we all encounter daily should know about what the new TSCA will — and won’t — do: 10. What aspects have yet to be settled, and what can citizens do to influence them?Instead of hammering out chemical prioritization criteria and the details of how the EPA will evaluate chemical risks before the Lautenberg Act was passed, lawmakers decided to leave those to rules that will become part of the overall law. The rule-making process involves official public comment periods, so the EPA will be considering those as it writes these rules, along with a rule about potential chemical industry fees that will go toward covering some of the law’s costs. Initial public comment periods for these rules are already closed. The law also includes public comment periods before the EPA finalizes these rules, as well as for ongoing chemical selections and evaluations.And, points out Kathy Curtis, the executive director of Clean and Healthy New York, the new law leaves ample room for continued action on the part of state legislatures and citizens. This includes action on chemical uses TSCA doesn’t regulate and new bills on chemical use reporting — both of which have been instrumental in influencing which chemicals get used in consumer products.As many have cautioned, substantive changes will take time. But according to the EPA’s Cleland-Hamnett, the new law opens the potential for “a huge increase in human health and environmental protection.” But this won’t happen without public engagement on the part of those with a stake in the outcome — essentially, all of us. 7. Will the new law keep hazardous materials out of furniture and clothing?Because some chemicals used in these products (which aren’t covered by TSCA) have additional uses that fall under TSCA’s purview, the upgraded review process could potentially avert hazardous chemicals’ use in a wide range of consumer products. Elizabeth Grossman is an independent journalist specializing in environmental and science issues. Her work has appeared in a variety of publications, including Scientific American, Yale e360, the Washington Post and Mother Jones. This post originally appeared at the website Ensia. RELATED ARTICLES 2. Will the new law make it easier to restrict highly toxic chemicals?Unlike the old law, the new TSCA requires the EPA to review the safety of all chemicals used commercially in the U.S. “The EPA is actually required to look at existing chemicals,” says Wendy Cleland-Hamnett, director of the EPA’s Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics. “Under the old TSCA there was no mandate that the EPA look at existing chemicals. That’s huge.”The new TSCA “gives EPA sweeping new authority to prioritize and evaluate existing chemicals so it will be easier for EPA to regulate these substances, if found to pose unreasonable risks,” says chemical regulation expert Lynn Bergeson, managing partner at the law firm Bergeson & Campbell.The EPA must also review all new chemicals and decide if they present “an unreasonable risk” to human health and the environment. If such risks are found, the EPA may restrict or ban a chemical. Under the old TSCA, chemical manufacturers had to submit certain information to the EPA before new chemicals could go on the market — but unless the EPA raised objections within 90 days, the chemicals could be sold without further scrutiny. According to the EPA, the agency has taken action on only about 10% of the nearly 40,000 new chemicals submitted to the agency between 1979 and September 30, 2015. EDF’s Denison says this 10% may be an overestimate.Now, new chemicals must be found safe before they can be sold, says Environmental Working Group legislative attorney Melanie Benesh.What the EPA does under the Lautenberg Act will, however, also depend on available funding. The law requires the chemical industry to help pay for the program, but the EPA also depends on federal budgets as determined by Congress. Udall says he “will be fighting to make sure the EPA has the resources it needs to do its job.” 3. Will the new law let the EPA act more quickly?Yes — in theory. The new law requires the EPA to prioritize chemicals for evaluation. It also sets enforceable deadlines for the EPA’s chemical reviews.By mid-December 2016 (within the bill’s first 180 days), the EPA must have begun to review at least 10 chemicals. These will come from a list of existing chemicals the agency had already decided to evaluate. Within the first three and a half years, the EPA must have 20 ongoing chemical evaluations. Reviews are supposed to be completed within three years, but that deadline can be extended six months. The EPA is supposed to issue any regulations within two years after that. The EPA can extend either of these deadlines, but extensions for one chemical can’t add up to more than two years.Given the enormous backlog, progress through the untested chemicals will still be slow — to say the least. In fact, doing the math on 62,000 chemicals shows it could take the EPA centuries to work through every substance. But given that the old TSCA had no chemical review deadlines, the Lautenberg Act aims to improve substantially on the decades-long reviews of single chemicals that occurred under its predecessor. Toxic and Non-Toxic HousesToxic Dust: The Dangerous Brew in Every HomeIndoor Microbes and Human HealthVentilation Rates and Human HealthAll About Indoor Air QualityStudy Linking Autism to Vinyl Flooring Stokes Phthalate DebateRecycled PVC Raises Health ConcernsCalifornia Law Addresses Fire Retardants in HomesMaking Healthier, Greener Foam InsulationThe EPA’s Indoor AirPlus ProgramHelping People With Multiple Chemical SensitivityGetting Spray Foam Right By ELIZABETH GROSSMAN“This is a big deal,” said President Barack Obama as he signed into law the bill that updates — for the first time in 40 years — the nation’s main chemical safety legislation. Called the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act to honor the late senator for whom this was a special cause, the law revises the Toxic Substances Control Act that gives the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency authority to regulate chemicals used commercially in the United States.As Obama noted at the June 22 signing ceremony, TSCA was supposed to ensure that chemicals used in the U.S. were safe for human health and the environment. But, said the president, “Even with the best of intentions, the law didn’t quite work the way it should have in practice.”In fact, TSCA allowed the approximately 62,000 chemicals already on the market when it was passed in 1976 to continue being used without safety testing. It also placed enormously high hurdles for the EPA to clear before demonstrating a chemical was hazardous enough to ban. Even asbestos has failed to meet those requirements. It was widely agreed by industry and environmental advocates alike that TSCA was badly in need of revision. 4. What chemical hazards is the new TSCA designed to protect us from?The first chemicals the EPA will evaluate must come from a list the agency has already decided merit review — chemicals that pose concerns for children’s health, are carcinogenic, environmentally persistent, toxic and build up in fat or other living tissue, or are widely found in biomonitoring programs.After that, when choosing chemicals to review, the EPA must give priority to those with large exposure potential, those that are environmentally persistent and bioaccumulate, and those that are stored near important drinking water sources. The new law also tells the EPA to address chemicals that are likely to pose health and safety threats to those considered most vulnerable — including infants, children, pregnant women, workers, and the elderly.Additional criteria for chemical prioritization are due from the EPA by June 2017. 6. Will the new law do a better job of preventing chemical spills?While TSCA is not intended to address or prevent chemical spills, the new law’s requirements should eventually help reduce the impact of spills or other accidents. Among these is the requirement that chemical companies disclose their products’ contents in emergencies rather than claim such information as trade secrets. 1. What does TSCA regulate?TSCA regulates chemicals used commercially in the United States. That said, TSCA does not regulate pesticides, chemicals used in cosmetics and personal care products, food, food packaging, or pharmaceuticals. Some chemicals, however, have multiple uses and so may be regulated concurrently by TSCA and other federal laws. For example, TSCA regulates the plastics ingredient bisphenol A when it’s used as a receipt paper coating, but the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act regulates BPA when it’s used in food packaging. 5. What chemical hazards will the new TSCA leave untouched?The new law authorizes the EPA to review all existing and new chemicals, to identify those that pose unreasonable risks, and to regulate or eliminate those risks. The goal is to leave no unreasonable risk untouched. The details of EPA’s risk evaluations, however, have still to be worked out in a rule that must be completed by June 2017. These — along with the additional chemical prioritization criteria — will play a big role in determining exactly how effective the Lautenberg Act will be at reducing exposure to hazardous chemicals. 8. Is the new TSCA likely to change chemical companies’ practices?Because the new TSCA requires all chemicals to be evaluated, it’s expected to influence which chemicals are chosen as product ingredients, how chemicals are used in manufacturing and how chemicals are manufactured as companies try to avoid using chemicals likely to be restricted or banned. This may also create an incentive for new, safer chemicals and finished products. 9. What are its implications with respect to environmental justice?The new TSCA requires the EPA to consider impacts of chemical exposures on those most “susceptible” to these effects, “such as infants, children, pregnant women, workers, or the elderly.’’ How the EPA defines “susceptible” and “vulnerable” and how it considers impacts to these groups is yet to be determined. But already, public interest groups have asked the EPA to consider social and economic factors.
Ben Mbala. Photo by Tristan Tamayo/ INQUIRER.netFor all of Ateneo’s brilliance in the elimination round and gutsy performance in the Final Four against Far Eastern U, one player still casts a huge shadow over the UAAP Season 80 Finals starting this Saturday at Mall of Asia Arena.La Salle’s Ben Mbala, who is set to pick up a second straight Most Valuable Player trophy, looms as the biggest stumbling block to the Blue Eagles’ bid for a first title since 2012 when the fierce rivals collide in another blockbuster series.ADVERTISEMENT “Mbala” was the first word uttered by Ateneo assistant coach Sandy Arespacochaga when asked on his thoughts of facing the Green Archers in the Finals just moments after the Eagles survived the Tamaraws, 88-84, in overtime on Wednesday.“That’s the first name we got to handle. We have to find a way to stay out of foul trouble against Mbala,” Arespacochaga added.FEATURED STORIESSPORTSWATCH: Drones light up sky in final leg of SEA Games torch runSPORTSSEA Games: Philippines picks up 1st win in men’s water poloSPORTSMalditas save PH from shutoutIsaac Go and Chiz Ikeh took turns in guarding Mbala, but the strong and athletic forward still got away with 28 points and 19 rebounds in La Salle’s 79-76 second-round win over Ateneo last Nov. 12. Mbala also added six steals and six blocks in another dominant performance.Although his rebounding is down from 16 boards to 13.1 per game this season, the hulking Cameroonian has turned into an even lethal scorer, averaging 26 points in 12 games, up from 20.6 points an outing in the previous season. Typhoon Kammuri accelerates, gains strength en route to PH Don’t miss out on the latest news and information. Kris Aquino ‘pretty chill about becoming irrelevant’ Read Next Japan ex-PM Nakasone who boosted ties with US dies at 101 QC cops nab robbery gang leader, cohort But the Eagles will also have to deal with the likes of Ricci Rivero, Aljun Melecio and Santi Santillan in the Finals.Rivero in particular has become a key contributor, filling the void left by Jeron Teng as the secondary scorer with 14.1 points per game in the elimination round—a marked improvement from his 5.5 points an outing average from Season 79.“We’re saying that La Salle’s not a one-man team,” said Arespacochaga. “They’re a good team. There’s a reason why they’re in the Finals, why they’re waiting in the Finals, they’re the defending champs. So we have no illusions that it’s gonna be an easy game for us (in the Finals).”ADVERTISEMENT Olsen looks at next season with hope-tinted glasses Brace for potentially devastating typhoon approaching PH – NDRRMC LATEST STORIES Trending Articles PLAY LIST 00:50Trending Articles00:50Trending Articles00:50Trending Articles01:29Police teams find crossbows, bows in HK university01:35Panelo suggests discounted SEA Games tickets for students02:49Robredo: True leaders perform well despite having ‘uninspiring’ boss02:42PH underwater hockey team aims to make waves in SEA Games01:44Philippines marks anniversary of massacre with calls for justice01:19Fire erupts in Barangay Tatalon in Quezon City CPP denies ‘Ka Diego’ arrest caused ‘mass panic’ among S. Tagalog NPA Kammuri turning to super typhoon less likely but possible — Pagasa Stronger peso trims PH debt value to P7.9 trillion MOST READ View comments
Mumbai, Dec 6 (PTI) National badminton coach, Pullela Gopichand, today expressed happiness at the performance this year of Indian shuttlers and termed Kidambi Srikanths feat of winning four Super Series titles as “phenomenal”.”Its been a great year. I think all the players have done well. At the beginning of the year if you had said this is what you would get this year, I would have taken it very happily,” said Gopichand here.”In the big events – World Championships or Super Series events, we have done well. Also varied people have done well. Last year was, may be, (P V) Sindhus year. This year mens singles has come off (well). Three of them winning Super Series titles, winning GP gold level – (HS) Prannoy and Sameer (Verma) winning. Overall it has been a good year. Now hoping for a good finish in Dubai (Super Series finals) to what has been a great year already,” he remarked.”We have a pretty cramped calendar in the world level. Considering that, what we have been able to manage has been good. Its a good stepping stone for the next year as well,” he noted.”To win four Super Series titles and becoming runner-up at one and, at the end of the year, reaching a ranking of world no. 2 is phenomenal. Not many players in world badminton (have achieved that). The only players who have achieved what he has achieved – we call them legends of the sport across time,” said Gopichand on Srikanths brilliant run this year.advertisementSrikanth had started his brilliant title-run by clinching the mens singles title in the Indonesian Super Series and followed it up by winning the singles Super Series crowns in Australia, Denmark and France.In between, the Hyderabad shuttler also finished runner-up to compatriot B Sai Praneeth in the Singapore SS and was a losing quarter finalist in the World Championships.”Hes 24 and has many more years to compete. (With) Lee Chong Wei at 34 and Lin Dan at 33 (still playing), we can expect that he has 8-10 years of badminton left in him. What he has achieved is phenomenal. What he can achieve, considering his potential, is unbelievable,” Gopichand gushed.On Sindhu, silver medal winner in womens singles at last years Rio Olympics, Gopichand said it was a fine display by the lanky shuttler to maintain such high levels the year after the sports spectacle in Brazil.”Sindhu has been good – Super Series wins in the India Open and Korea and finals of the Super Series in Hong Kong and the World Championship (silver) medal. To come back after an Olympic year and, in the next year, perform like that and finish off as world no. 2 is good.”She had problems with (Spains Olympic champion) Carolina (Marin), she beat her; with (Japans Akane), Yamaguchi, she beat her. She is improving as a player. I believe, the next year could be even better. She is just 22, young and has a lot of potential.”He also said that Saina Nehwal, bronze medallist in the 2012 London Games who has moved back to Hyderabad from Bengaluru after the World Championships, is showing what she is capable of after her injury last year during the Olympics.”We will have to work on a few aspects of her game. Its good that in the last few tournaments she had good performances – beating Carolina after a while and the match against Chen Yufei which she played. Overall she is showing that she is capable now. She needs to be fitter and also get back from her injury, as well as ensure she is physically stronger to win match after match,” said Gopichand.Looking ahead to next years Commonwealth Games in Gold Coast, Australia, and the Asian Games in Jakarta, Indonesia, Gopichand hoped that the shuttlerss display would be better than that at Glasgow, Scotland and Incheon, South Korea.”Every two years we have these big events – whether its Commonwealth Games, or Asian Games or the Olympics. We are hoping we will come out strongly. In 2014 there were good performances and hopefully we can better it.” PTI SSR NRB
It seems Virat Kohli was in the mood for some experimentation during his practice session at the Punjab Cricket Association Stadium in Mohali ahead of Royal Challengers Bangalore’s away match of Indian Premier League (IPL) 2019 against Kings XI Punjab.Kohli was spotted playing some uncharacteristic flat-batted shots while going through his training routine on Thursday. He even tried a Dil-scoop before switching to some orthodox shots that hit the sweet spot of Kohli’s bat.Royal Challengers Bangalore took to social media to upload the video of Kohli’s training session, sparking a bit of optimism among ardent fans of the team who have faced nothing but disappointment so far in IPL 2019.Virat Kohli-led RCB haven’t managed to win a single match even as the tournament is nearing the halfway mark. With six defeats from as many matches, the former finalists are rooted to the bottom of the IPL points table.Kohli has also had an ordinary season by his standards, scoring just 203 runs in six matches at an average of 33.83. AB de Villiers’ form (or the lack of it) has been a major cause for concern as well.RCB need to win all their remaining matches to at least stand a chance of making the playoffs. Kohli’s men have been ordinary both with the bat and the ball in the ongoing season.While RCB were shot out for 70 in their IPL 2019 opener against Chennai Super Kings, they failed to defend a 205-run total against Kolkata Knight Riders at home last week.advertisementKohli and RCB have run out of answers and need some inspiration to reverse the fortunes and manage a bit of momentum. RCB will head into Saturday’s match in Mohali after a five-day gap and it remains to be seen if the break can help the team get back to winning ways.It’s not going to be easy as Kings XI Punjab have made Mohali their fortress with Mohali with three wins in IPL 2019. In fact, R Ashwin’s men are on a seven-match unbeaten streak at the PCA Stadium.Also Read | Have nothing more to tell the team: Virat Kohli after RCB lose again in IPL 2019Also Read | Unlike Captain Cool: MS Dhoni slammed for confronting umpire after no-ball controversyAlso See:
Agent: Southampton will regret losing Gabbiadiniby Paul Vegas10 months agoSend to a friendShare the loveManolo Gabbadini’s agent says Southampton will regret losing the Italy striker.Samp have agreed to re-sign Gabbiadini on loan with a €12m obligation to buy from Southampton.“He felt good at Sampdoria and wanted to go back home,” Silvio Pagliari told Sky Sport Italia from Milan Linate airport, where he was waiting for the 27-year-old.“We wouldn’t have gone anywhere on loan. It was his will to cut the cord with Southampton, although he had a great time there.“He also discussed tactics with Sampdoria and I’m sure he’ll carve out a place in the team.“He’s a good player and, in my opinion, one of the best strikers in Italy.” TagsTransfersAbout the authorPaul VegasShare the loveHave your say
David De Gea ‘honoured’ to sign new Man Utd dealby Paul Vegasa month agoSend to a friendShare the loveManchester United goalkeeper David De Gea has signed a new contract.De Gea has signed a new four-year contract with the option to extend that by a further year, ending long-term speculation over his future at the club.De Gea was signed from Atletico Madrid by Sir Alex Ferguson in 2011, taking time to adapt to English football before establishing himself as one of the best goalkeepers in the world.Now 28-year-old, he has won every major trophy, bar the Champions League, in his time at the club, and has been voted Sir Matt Busby Player of the Year on four occasions.“It has been a privilege to spend eight years at this great club and the opportunity to continue my career at Manchester United is a genuine honour,” De Gea told the club website. “Since I arrived here, I could never have imagined I would play over 350 games for this club.“Now my future is fixed, all I want is to help this team achieve what I believe we can and win trophies again, together.“As one of the senior players in the squad, I want to support and lead in any way that I can to assist the younger players, so they know what it means to play here.”I still feel that I have so much more to achieve at the club and I truly believe that Manchester United can build on the club’s tradition of success and reward our fans for their support.“I am committed to continue repaying the fans for all of the care that they’ve shown me during the good times and the bad.” TagsTransfersAbout the authorPaul VegasShare the loveHave your say
zoom Greek shipping companies Oceanic Illsabe Limited and Oceanfleet Shipping Limited, and two of their employees, were convicted of violating the Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships (APPS), obstruction of justice, false statements, witness tampering and conspiracy, according to the US Department of Justice.Convicted by a federal jury in Greenville, North Carolina, Oceanic Illsabe Limited is the owner of the M/V Ocean Hope, a large cargo vessel that was responsible for dumping tons of oily waste into the Pacific Ocean last year, while Oceanfleet Shipping Limited was the managing operator of the vessel.Also convicted at trial were two senior engineering officers who worked aboard the vessel, Rustico Ignacio and Cassius Samson. The jury convicted on each of the nine counts in the indictment.The US Department of Justice said that in June 2015 the vessel discharged around ten metric tons of sludge into the ocean. The vessel was also regularly pumping contaminated water directly overboard. None of these discharges were disclosed as required.The evidence presented during the nine-day trial demonstrated that the companies were aware that the ship had not offloaded any oil sludge from the vessel since September 2014 and that the ship rarely used its oil-water separator.Instead, the vessel’s second engineer, Samson, ordered crewmembers to connect what is known in the industry as a “magic pipe” to bypass the vessel’s oil-water separator and pump oil sludge overboard. In addition, crewmembers were ordered to pump oily water from the vessel’s bilges directly into the ocean up to several times per week. The dumping occurred with the knowledge and approval of the ship’s chief engineer, Ignacio.Finally, the engineers used a tank designated for oily wastes to store diesel fuel for sale on the black market.Upon arriving at the Port of Wilmington, Oceanic, Oceanfleet, Ignacio and Samson attempted to hide these discharges by presenting a false and fictitious oil record book to US Coast Guard inspectors. When inspectors uncovered evidence of dumping, the defendants ordered lower-level crewmembers to lie to Coast Guard personnel. Samson also made several false statements to a Coast Guard inspector regarding the bypass of the oil-water separator.At the conclusion of trial, defendants Oceanic and Oceanfleet were convicted of one count of conspiracy, one count of violating APPS, two counts of obstruction of justice, one count of false statements and four counts of witness tampering.Ignacio was convicted of one count of conspiracy, one count of violating APPS, one count of obstruction of justice and two counts of witness tampering, while Samson was convicted of one count of conspiracy, one count of violating APPS, two counts of obstruction of justice, one count of false statements and three counts of witness tampering.The companies could be fined up to USD 500,000 per count, in addition to other possible penalties.Ignacio and Samson face a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison for the obstruction of justice charges.
WASHINGTON – The Commerce Department slapped duties of nearly 220 per cent on Canada’s Bombardier C Series aircraft Tuesday in a victory for Boeing that is likely to raise tensions between the United States and its allies Canada and Britain.Commerce ruled that Montreal-based Bombardier used unfair government subsidies to sell jets at artificially low prices in the U.S.“The U.S. values its relationships with Canada, but even our closest allies must play by the rules,” Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross said.Canada responded by saying it “strongly disagrees” with the U.S. move.“This is clearly aimed at eliminating Bombardier’s C Series aircraft from the U.S. market,” said Chrystia Freeland, Canada’s minister of foreign affairs.Bombardier, meanwhile, called the decision “absurd …. U.S. trade laws were never intended to be used in this manner, and Boeing is seeking to use a skewed process to stifle competition.”In April, Boeing charged that Bombardier had received at least $3 billion in subsidies from the governments of Britain, Canada and the province of Quebec. The Chicago-based aircraft manufacturer asked the Commerce Department and the U.S. International Trade Commission to investigate the alleged “predatory pricing.”Specifically, Boeing said that Bombardier last year sold Delta Air Lines 75 CS100 aircraft for less than it cost to build them.“Subsidies enabled Bombardier to dump its product into the U.S. market, harming aerospace workers in the United States and throughout Boeing’s global supply chain,” Boeing said Tuesday.But Delta has said Boeing did not even make the 100-seat jets it needed.“Boeing has no American-made product to offer because it cancelled production of its only aircraft in this size range — the 717 — more than 10 years ago,” Delta said in a statement Tuesday.President Donald Trump campaigned on a promise to get tough on trade. He has repeatedly criticized Canada, saying it unfairly blocks U.S. dairy products and subsidizes its softwood lumber industry. Trump also has threatened to pull out of the North American Free Trade Agreement if he can’t negotiate a better version with Canada and Mexico.Boeing’s complaint against Bombardier drew a backlash even before Tuesday’s decision. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau threatened this month to stop doing business with Boeing, which is in talks to sell Canada 18 Super Hornet jet fighters. British Prime Minister Theresa May has discussed the case with Trump. Her concern: Bombardier employs more than 4,000 workers in Northern Ireland.Connecticut Democratic Sens. Richard Blumenthal and Christopher Murphy last week wrote a letter urging U.S. government officials to “refrain from taking action that will endanger the many jobs in Connecticut that depend upon Bombardier.” Engines for the C Series aircraft are made by Pratt & Whitney, based in East Hartford, Connecticut.Commerce’s findings Tuesday aren’t the end of the matter. The department is expected to announce its findings in another case against Bombardier early next month. Then the International Trade Commission — an independent federal agency that rules on trade cases — will decide early next year whether to uphold Commerce’s duties.Bombardier could appeal any sanctions to a U.S. court or to a dispute-resolution panel created under NAFTA. The Canadian government could also take the case to the World Trade Organization in Geneva._____________________________________Gillies reported from TorontoFollow Paul Wiseman on Twitter at https://twitter.com/PaulWisemanAP
DETROIT — Beer drinkers can’t claim blissful ignorance for much longer.Starting next month, packages of Bud Light will have prominent labels showing the beer’s calories and ingredients as well as the amount of fat, carbohydrates and protein in a serving.Bud Light is likely the first of many to make the move. The labels aren’t legally required, but major beer makers agreed in 2016 to voluntarily disclose nutrition facts on their products by 2020.Many brands, including Corona Light, Guinness, Heineken and Coors Light, already have calories and other nutrition information on their bottles or packaging. But it’s in small type, or hidden on the bottom of the six-pack, and ingredients aren’t listed.Bud Light went with a big, black-and-white label, similar to the ones required by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration on packaged foods. At the top, Bud Light lists its four ingredients: water, barley, rice and hops. Below that, it shows the calories in a 12-ounce bottle or can (110) and other facts. Bud Light contains 2 per cent of the recommended daily amount of carbohydrates, for example.“We want to be transparent and give people the thing they are used to seeing,” said Andy Goeler, vice-president of marketing for Bud Light.Individual bottles and cans of Bud Light won’t have the full labels, but they’ll continue to have some nutrition information printed in small type.Goeler said the brand’s research shows younger drinkers, in particular, want to know what’s in their beer.“They have grown up really in tune to ingredients,” he said.Goeler said he didn’t know when other brands owned by Bud Light parent Anheuser-Busch — including Michelob and Stella Artois — would adopt bigger nutrition labels.But the question is: Will such labels make a difference in the choices consumers make? At least one study suggests they won’t.Researchers at Cornell University and Louisiana State University tracked what happened when diners were given menus with calorie counts. It found that diners who knew the calorie counts ordered lower-calorie appetizers and entrees, but the calorie counts had little impact on orders for drinks and desserts.John Cawley, an economics professor at Cornell and one of the authors of the study, said diners seemed to respond most to information they didn’t already know. They were probably surprised by the calories in some appetizers, for example, but already knew the general range for a glass of beer or wine.Cawley said it’s telling that a light beer would be the most forthcoming about its ingredients and nutrition information. Bud Light’s sibling, Budweiser, has 35 more calories and four additional grams of carbohydrates, according to the brand’s website.Ultimately, the biggest changes may come from manufacturers themselves, not consumers, Cawley said. Since nutrition labels were first required in the early 1990s, companies have competed to look healthier or remove objectionable ingredients like trans fats.“That is actually the biggest public health victory of all,” Cawley said.Dee-Ann Durbin, The Associated Press