Datasets:
Recag
/
C4_13

Dataset card Data Studio Files
xet
Community
text
stringlengths
9
72.5k
Many people are simply not prepared for a chronic, critical, or terminal illness. They think that just because they have a health insurance or disability plan, they will be sufficiently covered in the case of a sudden or serious health problem such as a heart attack, stroke, or cancer diagnosis. The fact is, that’s probably not true.
A great health insurance plan might cover a large part of those medical costs, but there could be deductibles, co-payments, and out-of-pocket expenses to deal with first.
Regardless of how old you are, how much money you make, or what kind of health coverage you have, two things are inevitable in the case of an unexpected illness: your expenses will go up, and your income will go down—resulting in debt that could leave you paralyzed financially.
According to a study by Harvard researchers, over 60 percent of all personal bankruptcies in the United States was a direct result of medical problems. What’s even worse is that nearly 80 percent of the people included in this study who were suffering from a critical condition had health insurance at the start of their illness. This clearly demonstrates that additional protection is needed—more than what many of the health and/or disability plans are able to provide for you.
That’s where life insurance with living benefits—also known as an Accelerated Death Benefit Rider—can help you when you need it most.
What Happens When You Have Life Insurance with Living Benefits?
If you should experience any qualifying critical, chronic, or terminal illness—such as a heart attack, stroke, or cancer, to name a few—you would have the option to collect part of your death benefit to help pay for expenses associated with your illness.
Of course, the amount of money your beneficiary would receive as part of your death benefit would be reduced by that amount. But, having the option to accelerate your death benefit funds could be a critically important step in helping you and your family through an unexpected and unfortunate crisis. It might even be the difference in helping you enjoy a long and healthy life after your illness.
As of the 1st January 2015 the sulphur limit in Emission Control Areas (ECAs) will take a highly significant drop from 1% to 0.1%. It may only look like a small number but this shift will have a high impact.
The following are Fathom cTech’s top 10 reasons why ship operators should be nervous about the sulphur challenge that the maritime industry is facing and what can be done to remain competitive.
* There is a significant price differential between Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO) and Marine Gas Oil (MGO). For example, in the previous three years the current price differential is at $260 per tonne in Rotterdam and $330 per tonne in Houston according to Bunkerworld, whilst in the previous two years Rotterdam has seen as much as $337 differential.
* MGO prices are expected to rise as much as 20% in 2015 due to the increased pressure expected on their supply.
* Maersk Line estimates that the MGO is likely to be around $900 dollars per tonne once the regulations are introduced – 50% more than what carriers pay today for regular fuel. The volume of low sulphur fuel from 2015 onwards is expected to create additional costs of around $150 million dollars per year for them.
* The cost of transportation is likely to continue to increase. Carriers will have to meet additional costs to meet the tighter pollution controls. However, large shippers may take more convincing to pay a separate low sulphur surcharge, according to Drewy Maritime Research.
* Carriers will also need to provide calculations to justify these increases.
* Avoiding ECAs to reduce fuel surcharges may result in increased transportation time.
* Increases in freight rates, particularly for short sea services,could lead to modal shift.
* Large scrubbers can be costly and take up vital space on board a vessel which in turn can reduce cargo carrying capacity.
* Ship scrubbers are still a relatively ‘new’ technology to the industry. Providers may not necessarily have a well proven history of the reliability of the systems machinery and its application onboard a vessel.
* The time taken to undertake a retrofit to a vessel reduces the time that vessel is in operation, increasing standby and impacting costing.
* If the uptake of scrubbers dramatically increases, the suppliers may not be able to scale up production in order to meet the demand.
* Newbuilds may be easier and/or cheaper to run with the technology than retrofitting current vessels. If companies choose to wait and start retrofitting their newbuilds instead of current ones, their establishment of a fully functioning newbuild fleet that will meet the 2015 standards, will take considerable time to establish.
* Awareness of overboard discharge is crucial, particularly as IMO guidelines and inspections are to become more stringent in line with the new regulations.
* It is expensive and difficult to retrofit a vessel to enable it to use LNG as fuel.
* LNG retrofits are very large and often are viewed as not being cost effective. They take up a lot of space and reduce the amount of vessel available to carrying cargo.
* LNG retrofits can be a lengthy process and significantly reduce the amount of time a ship is operating in waters.
The variation in sulphur content has a significant impact on the fuel properties. Unless systems are carefully maintained and prepared, significant issues may arise when utlising the same systems with the different fuels.
* Distillates do not require heating like HFO. If the temperature of distillates is too high, the viscosity will be greatly reduced below the point at which systems function correctly.
* Pump failure can occur from increased wear due to a lower hydrodynamic lubricating fuel oil cover exists, driven by the low viscosity.
* Distillate fuels can ‘gas up’ at too high temperatures leasing to vapour locking and fuel starvations.
* Blocked fuel filters can result from incompatible fuels mixing leading to precipitation of heavy sludge and potential filter clogging. Improper engine function and shutdown are the result.
* Pump malfunction can occur where the changeover takes place too quickly. If this leads to total pump seizure, engine shutdown may result.
* Fuels of unduly low viscosity will flow through fine clearances previously ‘sealed’ by fuel at higher viscosity resulting in fuel leakage and reduced power.
These are just some of the issues that can arise with further being seen through the cleaning/searching action of distillates, the lubricity issues and more. However, all of these issues can be avoided by careful preparation of the vessels.
* Low sulphur fuel may not be readily available in ports due to the increased demand. It may only be able to be supplied if specifically requested. Ship owners should not assume a low sulphur fuel can be guaranteed for them on arrival at port.
* Refineries have to reflect the availability of bunker fuel because they prioritise higher-level distillates.
* Managing price differences in fuel availability while in long-term contracts can be challenging for ship owners. A separate bunker fuel surcharge is created with changes along with fuel prices to offset the destabilising effects. Because of the volatility bunker fuel availability and cost is a huge concern for ship owners.
* Cruise ships in particular need to be aware regarding fuel availability and their choice of sailing destination. Lack of fuel availability in specific ports may result in changes to their itinerary which may also increase the cost of cruising to passengers.
* It can also not be guaranteed that the fuels will be close to the 0.1% limit. For example it maybe that distillates of automotive grade could be supplied if supplies are short which can be as low as 0.001% sulphur and have very different characteristics. Ship owners need to consider the characteristics of these fuels if they use them within their vessels.
* Switching and changing of the lubricant supply to the main engine at the same time is complex and can result in ship’s loss of power and in the worst case scenario an engine room fire.
* Loss of power and the risk of accident needs to be considered in the event of a collision. Poor switchover has been reported to be a major cause of engine damage and fire.
* Lack of training and ability for crew to be able to safely operate the fuel switchover process enhances risk.
* In California, as of July 2014, 93 loss of propulsion incidents occurred of which 15 were directily related to fuel switiching to meet the state’s regulations on sulphur limits in fuel. This equates to 0.17% of all vessel movements.
* Based on the California statistics, there is likely to be an average of a loss of power incidence in the English Channel every three days. There are around 60,000 vessels which move in and out of the entrance of the English Channel, the North Sea and English Channel ECA border annually, a loss of propulsion incident occurring from fuel switching to just 0.17% of these vessels could translate to 102 incidents per year.
Operators should ensure that not only are their systems suitably upgraded and maintained, but crew training to enhance the fuel changeover process and to minimise the risk of engine cut out is crucial.
Experience in California has proved that crew training has minimised the risks and number of incidents.
* Some operators choosing not to comply because of the low fines will have an unfair advantage over those who do comply. Poor enforcement will increase this competitive advantage. According to Alan Murphy, SeaIntel partner: “Our analysis shows that a 4,500 teu vessel sailing at 16 knots from the beginning of the English Channel to Hamburg will save EUR 12,000 ($16,600) if it uses bunker fuel with a 1% sulphur content, instead of the mandated 0.1% sulphur content.” If some carriers choose to take on this risk and prefer to be fined rather than expend more on compliance options, the other companies will be at a much higher disadvantage.
* Those who have committed to remaining within the permitted emission limits could effectively be punished. “Nobody wants to see a situation where those that have made the biggest commitment to the new regulation suffer the most damaging financial consequences” according to European Community Shipowners’ Association (ECSA) head Patrick Verhoeven.
* Those companies with plans for newbuilds will find it easier to comply than those who own older fleets where implementing compliance options can be more challenging. Technologies or fuel switching may prove more expensive on older vessels than newbuilds, putting newer companies with younger vessels at an immediate advantage.
* Individual member states may provide incentives such as subsidiaries or lower port charges if ships choose to comply with sulphur regulations earlier than the mandatory date.
* Ship owners and operators must be aware that changes to the Bunker Delivery Note may be in force. Where technology is used to comply with regulations, as supposed to a low sulphur fuel, new text must be added to the delivery note.
Lubricant suppliers may also face challenges in supplying ship owners with the required lubricant quantity to meet demand.
* Increasing pressure on marine lubricant providers will occur due to new fuels requiring new engine lubricants.
* lubricant switching is now needed much sooner with the new sulphur content of fuel. According to Iain White from ExxonMobil Marine Fuels and Lubricants ‘If the time in the ECA can be measured in hours rather than days, it may be possible to avoid changing oil, but for longer periods the oil must be switched.
* Whatever the compliance method, increased costs for vessel adaptation will apply notwithstanding the price of fuel utilised.
* Changing fuel due to rising prices also drive engine modifications due to the variations in viscosity and increase costs of compliance.
* The separation of different fuels require separate storage tanks, exacerbating cost and creating logistical difficulties.
* The requirement for separation tanks for different fuels increases not only the technology itself but the installation, maintenance and logistical difficulties will significantly increase capital output. However, using a low sulphur fuel may provide cost efficient in the long run due to the fact that a lower sulphur fuel is kinder to the vessel engine and may help to mitigate the impacts of a higher cost fuel.
What do you expect to be the three most challenging aspects of compliance with the 2015 Emission Control Areas sulphur limits in the first year?
Young children—even toddlers—are spending more and more time with digital technology. What will it mean for their development?
Video: Hanna Rosin and her 4-year-old son demonstrate how children use iPads.
Can Jordan's Abdullah II, the region's most pro-American Arab leader, liberalize his kingdom, modernize its economy, and save the country from capture by Islamist radicals?
What Exactly Is Donald Trump's Deal?
Is he a buffoon? A genius? An exploration of the man, his brand, and his chronic bluster.
A trip to the Iranian resort island of Kish illuminates the strange consequences of economic sanctions.
The wealthiest Americans donate 1.3 percent of their income; the poorest, 3.2 percent. What's up with that?
Mike Merrill puts the "I" in IPO.
Essay: Richard was disciplined and controlling. Lorenz was undisciplined, uncontrollable, and often drunk. But it worked.
Has Obama Turned a Generation of Voters Into Lifelong Democrats?
After more than three years in prison and an implausible makeover, Abramoff is still Abramoff.
Technical advances may make upper-body strength less important in combat—and level the playing field for women.
James Fallows talks with space entrepreneur Eric Anderson about the next wave of space exploration.
And new fiction by Elizabeth Strout. Two short book reviews.
What Was the Worst Marriage Ever?
There's something else big at the fair, and it's pretty sweet too.
In the Elwell Family Food Center, there's a life-size chocolate moose.
It's new to the state fair. It was crafted by chocolatiers at Chocolaterie Stam. Hundreds of pounds of Dutch chocolate were applied in layers and hand-carved. In all, it took nine week to create the 850 pound moose.
The chocolate used is equal to more than 4,000 Stam chocolate bars.
Constance Wu says she felt intense pressure before the release of “Crazy Rich Asians,” which became a box office sensation in 2018. Not only was the film her first time as the lead, it was her first studio movie ever, and Wu says she’s grateful that Warner Bros. trusted emerging voices.
Wu also points out that many of these creators didn’t have a “track record” of box office success, not because they aren’t capable of such, but because Asian-Americans hadn’t been given such opportunities to prove themselves in the past.
Data breaches are a growing fact of digital life. Every year, hundreds of millions of consumers—and hundreds of breaches—occur, according to a June 2017 report from the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia. But the Equifax breach raises the warning bell on digital security to a new level. In the coming weeks and months, business reporters can look into one or more of these stories.
The “peace offering” extended to victims by Equifax of free credit monitoring for a year isn’t enough, say privacy activists. The credit bureaus have “shown themselves to be terrible stewards of very sensitive data, and are long overdue for more oversight from regulators and lawmakers,” security expert Brian Krebs, a former Washington Post reporter, told the Los Angeles Times. Develop a story focusing on the specific ways that credit reporting agencies need to change. Laws should allow companies to “only collect the bare minimum of data necessary,” Beth Givens of the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse in California told Vox.com. Other guidelines can address how long a company can store data and encryption requirements. Reporters can search for an expert in their area on kroll.com.
“Congress is not known for strong consumer protection laws,” says Givens. In 2015, a proposal by President Obama requiring companies to notify consumers 30 days after a breach was voted down. The tougher challenge lies at the state level. Only eight states specify notification between 30 and 90 days. In Georgia, where Equifax is based, no timeline is specified, and in Alabama and South Dakota, no law existed at all as of September 1, 2017. What regulations are on the books in your state? Find out by calling the attorney general’s office in your state.
Data breaches have a profound effect on consumers, with 14 percent of victims suffering out-of-pocket losses, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia. Survey readers in your circulation area who have been victims of a previous data breach. How did they recoup? What advice can they offer those who may be affected by the Equifax breach? Talk with a behavioral psychologist or call the National Center for Victims of Crime for some insight and information.
How will the Equifax hack affect how online lenders do business? Talk with firms such as LendingClub Corp. and Kabbage Inc. They are two of the more than 200 digital lenders in the U.S. often promising near-instant approval for personal or small-business loans online or through a mobile app. Quicken Loans Inc.’s Rocket Mortgage, which relies on a consumer’s credit report when evaluating a home loan, is another source. How will they check personal information going forward? Unlike traditional lenders, which lend to people they already know or who come into a branch for an in-person meeting, “those checks could become less effective in weeding out someone putting in a loan application with a false identity,” says the Wall Street Journal.
• Beth Givens, executive director of Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, 619-298-3396.
• Maureen Ohlhausen, acting chair of the Federal Trade Commission. Contact the Office of Public Affairs, 202-326-2180.
• Brian Krebs of Krebs Security. Contact him at his website.
• Scott Sanborn, CEO of Lending Club, 888-376-6642.
Research uncovered a vast public health crisis in Flint, Michigan, but being good scientists can come with a cost.
Our team of more than two dozen students and research scientists at Virginia Tech has spent much of the past year analyzing and publicizing unsafe drinking water in Flint, Michigan.
Legionella , and damage to potable water infrastructure due to a failure to implement corrosion control treatment.
Despite Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) messages that the water was safe, we fought to educate residents about severe public health risks. That work led to a declaration of a public health emergency—first by the city of Flint and later by the state of Michigan and President Barack Obama—garnered hundreds of millions of dollars in relief for Flint residents, and informed a national debate on “safe” drinking water in America.
Virginia Tech students process water samples from homes in Flint.
Our work, by any measure, succeeded. But at the same time, this experience has forced us to confront broader questions.
We have learned that as well-trained scientists and engineers, we can be agents for positive change. However, we have also learned that many obstacles make it hard to do good science—not only in crisis situations, but every day.
By now the details of Flint’s water crisis are well-known.
In 2014, a state-appointed emergency manager decided to stop buying treated Lake Huron water from the city of Detroit and instead to treat and distribute Flint River water to city residents.
The MDEQ, which was responsible for ensuring that Flint’s water met federal standards, violated federal regulations when it did not require the city of Flint to properly treat the water—which we now know is highly corrosive —to minimize leaching from lead pipes.
Citizens in Flint could smell, taste, and see that their water was contaminated almost immediately following the switch. But when they tried to bring their concerns to public officials’ attention, they were ignored , dismissed, and ridiculed.