Part of excelling in the thermal management industry is being able to provide clients with advanced solutions quickly and with consistently high quality. For instance, centralizing the design and manufacturing process within a single facility eliminates risks of specifications being lost in translation. It also shortens the time between a products conception and manufacturing. To ensure the level of quality that clients rely on, we also employ 3D printing for rapid prototyping of tools and components, which allows us to iron out the little things before a product goes into final manufacturing.
Advances in technology, engineering, and thermal management provide for a higher level of design and analysis services during the heat exchanger manufacturing process. Experts in each field can thoroughly examine aspects of any given application to determine its unique thermal management needs, and apply the appropriate heat exchanger technology to address them. However, design is only half of the advanced in-house manufacturing process. To reduce time and costs and manufacture products with higher precision, rapid prototyping is employed using high-resolution 3D printers to test each design in its intended real-world setting.
Designing heat exchangers is a much more precise science thanks to advanced technology, but not everything can be accounted for in the design process. When a product has to be re-manufactured because a miniscule error affects the unit’s function, companies can lose precious time waiting for a redo. Rapid prototyping with 3D printing can eliminate that risk, and because it’s conducted in-house, any necessary changes can be implemented and tested again without long wait times.
Saturday’s gig with the H-box could have been a disaster but wasn’t. Guitarist Sam wasn’t there, Lynsey had all but lost her voice to lurgy, Val was in pain from an infliction of tattoos and Ross was playing a drumkit that was constantly moving away from him. But in fact we pulled out a good performance, better than the last two. I think it was because this one was well organised (thanks Jamie) unlike the last two fiascos. Lyns found good voice and we all locked into each other.
Spent Saturday and Sunday clearing out my room. Cleared out two boxes of books to a charity shop and nearly four binbags of shredded paper to the bin and the room doesn’t look that different. But it feels better.
Tonight, practising for Wednesday’s solo set at the Left Bank (actually Nelson will be joining me). This loopy stuff isn’t easy – why do I torture myself this way? (‘And us!’ – the plain people of Scotland)
We write to restate our request that you do not sign the lease for 108 Ladbroke Grove, the first purpose-built public library in the area, proudly serving the community for 125 years. We write to you in this forum, because you have recently made clear that you have nothing to say to us, and that you believe that our whole campaign should be directed solely at the Council.
Friends of North Kensington Library have been campaigning for some time to keep the historically important library building on Ladbroke Grove in public use. In the past year, we have held public marches, petitioned the Council, spoken to a full Council meeting, contacted Councillors, engaged with the planning and consultation process, and scrutinised the decision-making process, all in order to open the public dialogue about the future of the building that the Council has offered to you. We think it important to point this process out, as in communication with your Head, Jane Cameron and John Mackay, (registered director of the company, and Co-Chair of your Board of Governors), you have suggested that we take up our cause with the Council as indeed we have. We write to you once more, to give you the opportunity publicly to weigh in on the only issue over which you have agency: signing the lease for North Kensington Library.
Our members are currently collecting signatories to a petition directly calling for you to refuse to sign the lease that you have been offered on this building. In our communications with you, we have invited you to engage in dialogue with the wider community about alternative options for the expansion of your business; we have recalled your own publicly stated commitments to be a School engaged with the local community; we have made suggestions as to how to move forward with your plans; and even offered our support in proposing that you lease the whole of the new £11m building proposed on Lancaster Road. Our petition requesting that you refuse the lease offered is in no way a demand that your business cease to expand. We merely ask that you seek to expand in ways that do not further reduce the wider communitys access to the much-loved building on Ladbroke Grove in particular, and in ways that do not support the loss of public space and community assets in general. We do not ask you to intervene on the Councils process or argument: we simply ask you to do what you can do, which is to refuse the lease you have been offered.
It is tiresome here to have to refute the arguments offered by the Council about your business take up of the lease of North Kensington Library, because clearly these are arguments that we have made, and continue to press, to the Council itself. However, as you continually refer us back to the Council in our communication with you, it is worth prcising our case to them for your own records; and to clarify to you that in fact, we do not ask you to comment, respond to, or defend the Councils own disingenuous and outright misleading narrative about the necessity removing the building on Ladbroke Grove from public use. In fact, we ask only that you do not sign the lease which is clearly something you do have agency over, despite your repeated assertions to us that the entire decision is in the lap of the Council.
In the first place, the decision to take North Kensington Library building out of the public realm should be a decision for the wider community, who were not consulted about any aspect of this proposal until after you had been approached and offered the lease on the building. We do not ask for you to defend this.
Secondly, you were offered the building in a closed process, effectively disabling the communitys ability to offer alternative plans for the use of the building. We do not ask for you to defend this.
Thirdly, the head of the Council committee who took the decision, Rock Feilding-Mellen, has his own childrens names down for places on your school, a clear conflict of interest that he only begrudgingly declared after pressure from our campaign. We do not ask you to defend this.
Fourth, you have been offered a lease which requires the tax-payer to foot the build of the Grade 2 listed exterior, meaning that the tax payer is not relieved of the cited expense of the upkeep of the building under the proposals. We do not ask for you to defend this.
Fifth, you have been offered a discount on the lease over the first five years to offset the cost of internal upgrade and repair work. This means that the tax payer is effectively funding the upgrade and repair work that the Council have claimed was unaffordable for the tax payer. We do not ask for you to defend this.
Sixth, the building could not be turned into flats or coffee shops if it were not offered to you, as it has D1 status, it would need to remain an educational institution. We do not ask for you to defend this. Seventh, the revenue stream that leasing the current building to you (at 365k a year) for the proposed 25 years will not offset the cost of moving the current library (11m). We do not ask for you to defend this.
Eighth, the new library will not be bigger unless you discount the unused space in the current library (unused because it requires the repairs that the tax payer will be paying for you to have). We do not ask for you to defend this.
Ninth, the new library will not be better as it will not have a designated childrens library, as the current library does, it will not have separated computer rooms for study, and is not even guaranteed to house the whole collection of the current library. We do not ask for you to defend this
Tenth, the current building is fully wheelchair accessible, according to the only research ever conducted on this issue by the Council. The Council are therefore being disingenuous in citing lack of accessibility as a reason to move the library. We do not ask for you to defend this.
Eleventh, ours is the richest council in the country, with close to half a billion pounds in reserve, who nevertheless intend to use recent changes in the law to raise the extra cash for front line services, particularly social care, that they say they need. It is therefore disingenuous to suggest that the money from this lease is intended or required, for front line services. We do not ask for you to defend this.
Twelfth, the Councils spending plans have reduced spending on adult social care, year on year, and so the claim that extra is required for adult social care, is not borne out by the Councils own figures, and means that the lease on the current library building is unrelated to the costs of adult social care, as has been claimed. We do not ask for you to defend this.
Finally, the new building is not a new library but a new multi-use space, some of which will house consolidated library services, but the majority of which is earmarked for the use of private schools.
We think you are probably aware of this last point, given that your own private school business has been offered a chair on the steering committee of the new building, alongside your old frenemy, Chepstow House School. We do not ask for you to defend this, although, we cannot help but wonder why you would not offer to lease a bigger portion of the new building, producing the revenue stream the Council (disingenuously claim) that they require
To be clear: Friends of North Kensington Library appeal to the Governors of Notting Hill Preparatory Ltd to refuse the lease of the current building on Ladbroke Grove, and seek to expand their business premises elsewhere. We have collected hundreds of signatures of people who support this appeal, including parents of children at the school. Friends of North Kensington Library understand and are aware of the arguments made by the Council about their actions in this process, and do not hold Notting Hill Preparatory Ltd responsible for the disingenuity, inaccuracy and corruption of the process which has led to RBKC offering the lease at 108 Ladbroke Grove to Notting Hill Preparatory Ltd. We do not ask you to engage in those arguments or defend them. We simply ask, with the voice of hundreds of your neighbours, friends, and parents of your school, that you do not sign this dishonourable lease.
At 3:20 a.m. on August 17, a public address system passed repeatedly under my apartment. I woke up, looked out my window and saw a police car with a mounted bullhorn. A large truck followed behind. They moved together slowly – about 10 miles an hour – as the truck sprayed a 30-foot cloud into the air, which nearly reached my window.
I couldn’t understand any of it, even after they passed under my window six times, spraying both sides of the street until 4 a.m.
The indecipherable “police message” was clearly a half-hearted compliance with a legal notice requirement.
I was curious what the City of New York was doing to my neighborhood at 4 a.m., with garbled police messages.
They had sprayed my neighbourhood for “Zika Virus” and “West Nile Virus.” Nobody had told me about it.
I dug a bit further, and found a NYC Dept. of Health report which claimed that this area – and this area alone – had been “treated with an adulticide due to a significant presence of Aedes albopictus, or Asian Tiger mosquitoes.”
This Asian Tiger mosquito is unusually finicky. It came all the way from Asia, but it only congregates in specific zip code areas of Manhattan…the ones with the highest concentration of Latino residents.
The Asian Tiger mosquito will only eat mofongo and asopao, and will date your sister if she has a college degree.
It will rarely venture below 155th street…and never, ever below 96th street, because it simply abhors white meat.
If this analysis of the Asian Tiger mosquito seems ridiculous – and it is ridiculous – then there is only one other explanation.
They sprayed only in Washington Heights and Inwood, because of the Latino population that lives there.
Apparently, the NYC Dept. of Health wants to combat Zika, by spraying the people rather than the mosquitoes.
The George Washington Bridge is the busiest bridge in the world, with 400,000 vehicles passing over it every day.
In the future, when New York City decides to fumigate the Latinos in Northern Manhattan, we would appreciate being told about it.
Sadly, in addition to this neighborhood, many other New Yorkers through all the boroughs are being sprayed again this summer – it is true that the bulk of Manhattan rarely gets sprayed because this would surely attract mainstream media attention.
The city is up to the 8th pesticide spraying “event” by truck of Duet (a new pesticide in the equation) and Anvil 10+10 this season. The number of dousings seems to be something the city is boasting about in its press releases.
The Department of Health press releases continue to garner little media attention, and the notification to communities, as the War Against All Puerto Ricans site notes, remains poor; the police message, if you even hear it, once the spraying is underway, is very fast and typically garbled, and so basically none of these “notifications” mean anything and people remain being poisoned by these dangerous pesticides with no way to avoid it.
Categories New York City, sprayingTags department of health, health problems, new york city, pesticide spraying, war against all puerto ricans, west nile virus, zika	Post navigation