Jonah Barber is the co-founder of MRX Xtractors. Learn how profitable cannabis oil extraction can be and the different business models available to those in the business or entering this business.
Hi. I'm Matthew Kind. Every Monday look for a fresh new episode, where I'll take you behind the scenes and interview the insiders that are shaping the rapidly evolving cannabis industry. Learn more at cannainsider.com. That's cannainsider.com. Now, here's your program. As the cannabis market continues to grow around the world, there's an increased focus on extraction, and for good reason. Extracted cannabis oil is arguably the most profitable and integral ingredient for cannabis companies. Here to tell us more about the extraction industry and his extraction solutions is Jonah Barber from MRX Xtractors. Jonah, welcome to CannaInsider.
Jonah: Thanks, Matt. It's great to be here. Really excited to speak with you today.
Jonah: In the beautiful green state of Oregon. Specifically, Canby, Oregon, which is located about 20 miles south of Downtown Portland.
Matthew: Okay. And I'm in Krakow, Poland today. So thanks for getting up so early to do this interview. I should tell everybody, it's about [7:00] your time. So thank you.
Jonah: Absolutely. Glad to do it.
Matthew: So what is MRX at a high level?
Jonah: So MRX is an OEM that makes super-critical CO2 and ethanol extraction systems, and we bring kinda complete turnkey solutions for our customers all the way through the whole entire extraction process.
Matthew: Okay. And give us a little bit of a sense about your background and journey, and how you got to this point, and why you started MRX?
Jonah: You know, the cannabis and hemp industry is something I've always been incredibly passionate about. You know, they always say, "Do what you love," which I always thought was cliché until I actually got to work in this industry. And, you know, how we actually got started was, you know, we looked...You know, Oregon's always been a leading state, as far as a medical cannabis program, you know, having a strong medical program for over 20 years. And when we saw that Colorado went legal, you know, Oregon had almost passed a couple times going legal, and we knew it'd be a matter of time. And we wanted to get in the industry, but we wanted to get into it in a way we thought would utilize our skill sets. We weren't, you know, master growers like a lot of your listeners are and we didn't have any retail experience, and so our background is very technology. And so we wanted to fit in on the technology side on cannabis, and we saw that there was gonna be the need for standardization and quality control when it came to analytical testing laboratories. And when we looked at the landscape about 4 years, we didn't see a lot of that.
And so we felt like we had the opportunity to kinda set the standard for what an analytical testing laboratory should be with quality controls, transparency, new state-of-the-art equipment, qualified staff with degrees. It was really kind of the Wild West there for a while, with a lot of people just pumping out high-potency numbers and kinda everything getting a pass for pesticides. And then we really wanted to help set the standard, so we opened up...MRX Labs is actually how we started in the industry.
Matthew: Okay. Yeah. It's almost, it can be a huge advantage sometimes to just come in as an outsider because you don't have any concept of the way things should be done. And if you come to the market with skills, you can just start fresh. Whereas people in the industry already can only make kind of iterative changes, where you can start where you wanna start and not have to worry about any kinda legacy. Is that how you felt when you were getting into it?
Jonah: We did. We really felt like we had the opportunity to really, I mean, develop a lot of the new methods and technologies, and stuff that just hadn't been developed before. And a lot of that wasn't because someone necessarily couldn't do it, you know, skill set-wise. But it was just because they really didn't have the access or ability to freely work with, you know, cannabis in a research and development capacity. And so we felt very fortunate to be kind of the forefront, to help develop a lot of those, you know, methodologies and things like that, when it came to standardizing testing.
Matthew: Okay. Okay. And how many customers have you helped so far?
Jonah: You know, from the...Well, there's two different answers. I guess, you know, when we started the lab in 2014, we grew to one of the largest cannabis/hemp testing labs in the U.S. And we ended up working with, you know, thousands of customers here in Oregon. And then on the MRX Xtractors side, where we're the OEM and build all the equipment, we've helped place about 80 different machines in about 10 different states and a couple different countries now. Yeah. So we have about 80 different customers on the extraction side.
Matthew: Okay. Okay. Now, the thing I kinda wanna help listeners understand is how you and your partner approach the extraction business. I guess, perhaps, maybe if you could just talk about, you know, frame how other extraction companies look at extraction and how to provide extraction solutions, and then how you and your partner approach it and perhaps how it's a little bit different or better?
Jonah: Yeah. So, you know, we do approach it quite differently, how we even came into the extraction industry. And with my partner's background, we've always looked at industries and found deficiencies or bottlenecks and came up with, you know, a better mousetrap, if you will. And so how we got really started on the extraction side was actually based off analytical test results. And so, you know, we started testing everything coming into our lab, and we started seeing all this oil about really flood into our lab. It was really almost overnight. You know, it went from like a lot of flower, then about 3 1/2 years ago, it just started flooding into our lab. And at the time, it was still all medical. And so when we looked at the quality of the oil, you know, it didn't look good, it didn't smell good from an analytical standpoint. When we did, like, a terpene test, it was nonexistent. When we did a solvents test, a lot of it still either had some hydrocarbons left in it or there was a lot of ethanol left in the oil. We actually saw a lot of products coming in in [sounds like] propylene glycol as well.
And, you know, it was really concerning from our standpoint. You know, being an analytical testing laboratory, our job is to keep the public safe. And a lot of the products and a lot of the stuff we saw in the products, what people were using for medical purposes, were concerning in the fact that they could potentially cause, you know, some additional damage to whatever ailments they were treating. And I even remember the very first time, you know, I tried CO2 oil. I so badly wanted to like it because I loved the concept, I loved the fact that CO2 was used as the solvent. And to be honest, I absolutely hated it when I first tried it. It tasted kinda like a burnt popcorn to me. And also, after the fact, when I looked at the test results, which it wasn't tested by us, it was like 35% cannabinoids, which meant 50% of it was propylene glycol as well.
Jonah: Yeah. And it just wasn't a pleasant experience. But at the same time, it was flying off the shelves. Like people could not make enough of it. You know, people really like the accessibility and discreteness of vape pens. But at the same time, it was like, "Okay, there's a market for this. But this isn't what we'd consider safe or a high-quality product."
Matthew: So Jonah, it sounds like being in kinda the testing part of the cannabis industry, you're in a unique vantage point. You're kind of like the hub where companies that are sending you extracted material or flower are coming to you and talking to you, and you're kinda getting the lay of the land of how this whole extraction business works. Can you talk a little bit about that and what you learned?
Jonah: Yeah. We really had a unique perspective because, coming from the testing side, we're kinda like Switzerland. We worked with everybody in the industry. And so we got a chance to talk to all of our customers that were using other extraction technologies and techniques, and kinda got together a list of what they didn't like, what could be improved. And really, kind of our three hallmarks that we came up with was that there was really no repeatability. And so a lot of people were relying upon an extraction artist or the one person that knew how to make the secret sauce or, you know, someone that knew how to stand in front of a machine and adjust 12 different knobs and try to keep it in a tight zone for temperature and pressure. And we just knew that wasn't commercially scalable from that side. You know, we knew that the industry, the way it was growing, had to have repeatability, no matter who ran the machine, that they could follow SLPs, and put the same product in there and get the same high-quality oil coming out. And we just weren't seeing that.
And just because they also didn't have control over their process, a lot of people were destroying terpenes. And that's actually where CO2 had gotten the knock on it about 4 or 5 years ago. That just kinda produced an inferior product because it stripped the product of the terpenes. And I'd say, rightfully so, at the time, it got that knock because, you know, people were destroying a lot of the terpenes.
Jonah: And then the third thing is the engineering, and a lot of the equipment we saw just wasn't safe and it would never be permitted and approved by fire marshals in a regulated market. And so that was kind of our three hallmarks was we wanted repeatability, we wanted control of your process to produce the highest quality product, and we wanted safe equipment that would be permitted by fire marshals. And that's how we set out to build Xtractors from that side.
Matthew: Okay. That makes sense. Yeah. I could see why being dependent on an extraction artist would be...you know, it's problem. Because then, you're at the whims of that person instead of having a process or, you know, some kind of standard mode with your equipment where you can just repeat it over and over again independent of different people or personalities. And actually, I've met a lot of people that are in that exact case, where they're dependent on a specific employee and they really don't know how the sausage is made. So I'm glad you brought that up. Okay. So let's get into a little bit about throughput and what people talk about with throughput. Actually, before we talk about throughput, can you mention why you didn't like the flavor of the CO2 oil when you first tried it? Did you prefer, like, butane extraction or something?
Jonah: You know, it wasn't so much that I preferred something over the other. It was really just, the primary reason was that the people, or the equipment that was making that extract, they didn't have control over their process and they destroyed a lot of the terpenes and overcooked the product in there. And so it almost had like, the best way I could describe it was like a burnt popcorn kinda taste. And it just wasn't even a really pleasant experience, just even like kinda agitating the throat and things like that too.
Matthew: Okay. Actually, before we talk about throughput, let's talk a little bit about what the different kind of outputs are from the MRX machines, what you can actually extract and make and do.
Jonah: Yeah. So, you know, about 90% of all of our customers wanna make as many full-spectrum vape oil pens as they can. They just cannot make enough to satisfy the market.
Jonah: And so that's what the majority of our customers wanna do. However, the more we've gotten into the industry here, the more diverse kinda the product lines are, and the more specialized and unique they are. And people have some really interesting ideas that they like to make. And so one of the things we always do is like talk to our customers about, "Okay, what's your goals? What's your throughput, and how much do you wanna do a day? What kind of products do you wanna make?" Then, we're able to actually bring kind of a complete turnkey solution.
Matthew: Jonah, tell us, just give us a sense of what kind of products can be created, what the most popular ones are, and what customers are asking for. So we can get a sense of the different things that your extraction equipment can do and just where the extraction market is at, in general.
Jonah: Yeah. Well, the majority of our customers are really going after one of the largest market segments, which really is the vape pens, the cartridges for the vape pens, and making some full-spectrum oil, which is a very high desirable product for that. And so that's about 90% of our customers just make as many vape pens as they can. But what's been interesting is there's been a lot more, you know, development, product development as well, too, with all of our customers coming with really unique products. And so, you know, what we usually always like to do is actually talk to our customers and identify, before they even start, you know, "What kind of products do you wanna make? What kind of throughput do you want to do per day?" And then put together a kind of complete and tailored package with all the equipment they need to achieve their goals.
And so what's unique about the CO2 side is that you can really stop it just about anywhere along the way. And so, you know, from going to a full-spectrum oil, or you can do further refinement or post-processing into like a distillate or then [inaudible [00:14:06] distillate, you can turn it into an isolate. And so you really have a lot of variety in [inaudible [00:14:15] different products you can make with it, is how we approach it and what a lot of our customers are making.
Matthew: Okay. So just to review, can you review, and can you just tell us what you mean when you say "full-spectrum oil," "isolate," and "distillate," so everybody's on the same page?
Jonah: Yeah. So full-spectrum oil is going to be an oil that preserves the majority of the original plant. Obviously, you're not pulling out, like, the plant material and the chlorophylls, and you're removing all the waxes and fats and lipids. So what you're left with is a cannabinoid oil that has, not just your THC or your CBD, but also minor cannabinoids as well. And then, also having good terpene preservation, and that's where all that kinda works together, is what a lot of people call or is known as like the "entourage effect." Which those cannabinoids and terpenes working together make for a much more pleasant high, or a lot more therapeutic or medicinal benefits, all that stuff working together in, like, a full-spectrum oil. And that's a very desirable product for a vape pen. And something like that, if you're doing a cannabinoid potency percentage, would test typically somewhere in like the 60% to 75% cannabinoids.
And then [what a lot of our customers will do] then too is, you know, distillate is a popular product as well too, for...It's very popular such as like the edible makers. Because with edibles, you typically don't want to taste the terpenes. And it's a more higher concentrated dosage, and so that is easier to control in your quality control for your recipes and things like that, hitting your certain dosing for your THC or your CBD.
Jonah: And so that's what they call "distillate." And that's what that is, is just further post-processing or refinement. And typically, people will use either like a short-path or wiped-film technology. And what that does is further concentrate your THC or CBD, and it pulls out and separates, like, a lot of your terpenes and some of your minor cannabinoids as well. And so that same full-spectrum oil, if you ran it through a short-path or wiped-film would probably end up testing closer to like that 80% to low 90% THC or CBD. And then from there, you can do further post-processing and take the product into isolate as well, which can be more like a powder or a crystal. And that's removing everything except the cannabinoid that you're looking to concentrate. And so one of the biggest and most popular things right now on the market [inaudible 00:17:03] like, CBD isolate. And so we've also developed some new technology to do CBD isolate at a high throughput as well.
Matthew: Okay. That's a good...Well, you know, let's just talk about vape cartridges for a minute there. They were wildly popular a couple years ago, and they still are. And they've just gotten better and better. Now, you know, you mentioned full-spectrum, is you can get a lot more out of a vape cartridge than you used to be able to. Is there any sense that the market's starting to stabilize and there's enough supply? Because it's something I've been hearing for years is just like the demand for vape cartridges is just insane. What's your thoughts [sounds like]?
Jonah: I'll say, it's still not there yet. You can't really make enough to support the market right now. Because if you actually look at, too, a lot of the...especially in the states that have now gone recreational, if you look at a lot of the economic data on the products that are really moving, you know, there's a lot of new social users coming on and trying things that maybe hadn't in the past. And a lot of these people just don't wanna feel that they're doing a drug, or they don't have the where for all, they don't have a dab rig, they don't have a bong, they don't know how to roll a joint. And they just want ease and discretion. And so that's where if you look at, you know, all the economic data, all the new social users or people that are kind of, you know, sitting back and not really partaking much, but now that it's legal, saying, "Oh, I wanna try that," they're really drawn to the vape pens, and also edibles from that side.
And, you know, what's I think also desirable about the vape pens is that you can really control your dosing, in a sense, too. Like, you know, if someone wanted to take a little puff here, [inaudible 00:18:49] pretty much know, you know, how that's gonna affect them. And they can control, you know, how high or how medicated that they would like to get.
Jonah: And so that's where I think a lot of people are more drawn. And then, now you just kinda see them everywhere now, too. You know, people don't typically know if it's a nicotine or a cannabis, or hemp cartridge that people have.
Matthew: Yeah. I'm sure there's gonna be some novel use of cannabis oil that might displace vape cartridges in the future. But it'll still be some form of extracted oil. And it's gonna, you know, come in some product form or drink. For me, I feel like kinda what's gonna happen is there's gonna be some company that come along that can consistently deliver the same mood over and over again, and they're available widely. And they're really gonna capture a lot of the market because right now it's just so fragmented, which is good. And I think there's always gonna be the equivalent of microbreweries, you know, doing really well. But, you know, it's nice to be able to be in California, then Oregon, then Illinois, then, you know, New York, and get maybe one vape cartridge that's the exact same everywhere I go, or one drink or one edible that is exact same.
Maybe that'll be done with like an intel-inside model, where it's gonna be like, "Hey, this extract, this contains, you know, this many milligrams of this kind of extracted oil with terpenes." But I feel like it's gotta move from that direction. Am I totally off base on that? Or where do you think it's going?
Jonah: I would say you're 100% correct. You know, when we first started too, there was really no repeatability. There was really no, even, specific product lines. And people would just run whatever trim or material they had that day and put a label on it, and sometimes it wasn't always even what it might have been labeled as, because people didn't know, you know, when they bought trim. And as the markets become more standard and more tracking, you're really dialing in specific strains. And now, with the amount of testing you can do and even the separation, with different equipment and stuff like we have too, you can separate different cannabinoids. And you can really dial in your dosing and have a repeatable product.
And that's absolutely where it's going. Especially, as you see, it's gonna become more of a nationwide product at some point. And that's what people are gonna expect is, you know, going into one state and buying a product, and then going into the other one and having the same thing. And so you're absolutely correct in that standpoint. We're already starting to see it go that direction. And it'll just continue to do so, I think, more so in the next 5 years.
Matthew: Now, we touched on throughput there. And maybe you can dive into that a little bit by telling us, you know, how we should think about throughput? Because you say you have clients coming to you and you ask them, you know, how much do they need. And aren't they just gonna say, "I wanna produce as much as I can?" Or where are kinda the limitation breakpoints with each of your extraction solutions? Or how should they be thinking about that, in terms of running 24/7 or how much throughput they need? What can you tell us about throughput?
Jonah: Yeah. It's really been amazing too, how far the industry has grown even in the last 3 years. You know, when we first started the extraction site about 3 years ago, we started building a 20-liter extractor, which was about the largest anybody was building that I'm aware of. You know, most people were building a 5 or 10-liter, so we said, "We're gonna build a 20-liter, you know, because that's gonna be a larger commercial system." And typically, on a 20-liter, a lot of your [inaudible 00:22:35] customers run about 6 to 10 pounds at a time. There's ways to kinda engineer the material to put 20 to 30 pounds in there. But, you know, most people are doing 6 to 10-pound strain-specific runs at a time, which is great. You know, it's great to be able to...And at the time, you know, a lot of people would sometimes only have, you know, 6 to 20 pounds of the same strain.
Jonah: But now, some of these grows are, you know, 100,000-square foot grows, and they have thousands of pounds of the same strain. And on top of it too just, you know, we do a lot of stuff on the hemp side as well. And, you know, Oregon has been kind of a leader in the U.S. here in hemp as well, having the ninth biggest hemp program over the last 4 years. And when we first started with the hemp farmers 4 years ago, if you had 5 acres, that was a lot. You know, that was...You know, 2,000 pounds an acre, that's 10,000 pounds, that's a lot of biomass.
Jonah: And then, 3 years ago, it was like, "Okay, 20 acres, wow." And then, 2 years ago, it was 50 acres. And then, last year, it was 100 acres. And now, we know some farms are a few hundred acres, and you're talking about millions of pounds of biomass. And so it's pretty amazing how fast everything has scaled. And so that's where we've also developed additional new technology to keep up with the market's demands for a higher throughput, bat the same time, not sacrificing quality. And that's where there might be a lot of manufacturers who will sacrifice quality with throughput by just saying, "Okay, you know, we're just gonna hit it at 5,000 psi and pull more plant material out." But, you know, you destroy a lot of the good cannabinoids and terpenes doing that. And we don't believe in sacrificing the quality with throughput. And so with some of our new equipment here, we have really game-changing CO2 equipment, [pumps] like 100C, which is 2 50-liter vessels that cycle back and forth between each vessel, designed to never stop. And so, as soon as one vessel is done, it switches, and then that person can load the next one.
And you know, people can get tricky sometimes when you talk about throughput, and sometimes people [sounds like] can give you the very best throughput on the very best day with the very best material. And, you know, we like to give real numbers, [inaudible 00:24:50] historical averages. And a lot of it too, depends on your starting cannabinoid percentage when it comes to CO2. If you have something that has, you know, like 6% CBD or THC versus 12%, it's gonna take longer to pull that 12% out versus that 6%. But a lot of our throughput now, in like the CO2, can be, you know, upwards from 100 to 300 pounds a day. And then we've also developed full ethanol processing centers that are desired to, not batch, but to be continuous extraction, that are looking at doing more in that 500 to 1,000-plus pounds a day as well.
Jonah: So we kinda have anything and everything in between, as far as if customers wanna do small batch stuff or if they wanna do full acres that weekend [inaudible [00:25:42].
Matthew: Okay. So you can pretty much do whatever the customer wants within reason, it sounds like. So with the two vessels, you can operate 24/7. So if you have one vessel full, or you have both vessels full, and the extraction machine is running, when it finishes with the first vessel, how long does it take to finish the second one, assuming it's full and your typical extraction machine? Like how many hours do they have before they have to fill it again?
Jonah: Yeah. Like on the 100C, we're looking at closer like to that 2 to 4 hours per kinda 15, 20 pounds per vessel.
Matthew: Okay. So I'm a businessowner. I'm thinking about buying an extraction machine. And the first question you would ask me is, "How many pounds do you want to do per run?" Is that kinda the first question?
Jonah: Yeah. Actually, the question I'd more probably ask is, "How much throughput do you wanna do per day or per week?" is typically what we would ask them. And then, "What kinda products do you wanna make?"
Matthew: Okay. Okay. I wanna kinda dive into some business models here and looking at return on investment and things, because extraction is really, as I said in the intro, becoming a bigger and bigger part of the business. And it's also gonna be an ingredient to all of this, amazing products that are being created. But the people that are gonna buy your machines are like, "Hey, what can I do with that? How much money can I make? What should my business model be?" When a customer or a potential customer, or a friend says, "Hey, what can I expect to make with an extraction machine?" I've heard a lot of great scenarios, but how do you kind of describe, like, the ROI on an extraction machine?
Jonah: So, you know, we always like to look at, you know, your gross margin. Or it doesn't necessarily even, you know, potentially matter what your gross is, you know, as far as your gross sales. But, you know, what kind of gross margin are you looking at? And also too, just how big of a company they want to have versus maybe a smaller company that can make similar margins, but not have as many people. And so, you know, some people want to be the biggest and best, you know, vape company in their state, or launched from state to state, and that's a big business. I mean, you have, you know, your material acquisition, your new supply chain. You have your compliance, your testing, your cartridges, your consumables, you know, your sales, marketing, packaging, distribution. That can quickly, you know, go from a small scale of, you know, 10 people up to hundreds of people from that side.
And, you know, the other side being is, or, "I wanna be, you know, an oil house or a toll processer," or you actually are just making bulk oil and/or doing contract processing to hire. That's a much simpler business model, and it's a very needed businesses model for a lot of either...You know, there's a lot of great farmers that wanna have their own product lines, but they don't want to be an extractor.
Jonah: And so they look to some of these third parties to use their award-winning flowers and strains to make oil that complements that. Or there are some companies that want to have end products, but don't want to make the oil, and they want someone to make oil to their specifications. That's a much simpler, smaller business model, but it's also still very profitable and you can still make a lot of the same margins that you'd be making, you know, versus going to a full-scale cartridge line as well, too. And so there's needs from both those sides. That's kinda where we wanna talk to people and see what their goals are, what they want to do. And some of it too, just comes down to what's gonna be the most profitable for them and the least amount of headache potentially too?
Matthew: Okay. And let's talk, what's the typical cost for a gram of oil right now?
Jonah: So I guess, I can answer that three ways, is, you know, if you look at the retail side, you know, with compliance and testing now and everything too, in Oregon...I'll use Oregon and California right now, as kinda the metrics for that. But typically, a gram of oil is gonna end up costing somewhere typically between probably $50 to $80 a gram, typically, is what that would sell at a dispensary to the end consumer.
Matthew: Okay. And if you were to say, "Hey, my average client, they're..." I mean, I'm sure it ranges wildly, but kinda the middle of the bell curve, it's being sold at $80 a gram at the dispensary. What does it cost to make that same gram on average?
Jonah: You know, so as it goes through the supply chain, you know, from your side as an extractor, a lot of it depends on how much you're getting your biomass for. And that's where it's incredibly important to be able to do your own quality control testing before you even buy products, buy biomass to extract, if you're buying it. Because, you know, you can't just have a blanket price like, "Okay, I'm gonna get everything at $100 a pound, or $200 a pound." There's a big difference between something that tests at, you know, 8% THC trim or kind of B-buds, versus something that's like 12% or 15%. And that's directly gonna affect your yield primarily. It won't so much affect the quality of the end product. You'll still have a great product. It's just, "How much yield are you gonna have come out of there?" is gonna be directly dependent upon your starting cannabinoid percentages. And so if you're buying product at $200 a pound, it typically costs about $5 to $6 to produce a gram of full-spectrum oil.
Jonah: Yeah. If you're closer at buying trim, you know, at the $100 a pound, you're closer to that kinda $3 to $4 a gram, is what it costs. And then what a lot of these companies do is they will actually then sell to other distributors or people that wanna make their products, and they'll typically sell that, you know, between $8 to $10 a gram. And so that gets sold to then someone that's gonna take that oil, and that's bulk oil. And that's where people are moving a lot of kilos or pounds doing that. And then other companies will then take that oil and put it in a cartridge, package it, brand it, market it. And then, you know, that will typically then go to a dispensary or a distributor, depending on, you know, what state you're in. And then that will typically then get sold, you know, in that $20 to $40 a gram. And then, so once it gets in the dispensary, then that's where then, it goes to, you know, that maybe $50 to $80 a gram, is typically how that works.
Michael: Okay. And how do you preserve terpenes as you go through this process? I mean, is it a matter of temperature and pressure? 'Cuz I'm kinda boomeranging all over the place here but, you know, you talked about how critical it is for the experience and for the end product. And also, end customers are getting much more savvy about this and they talk to each other, and you really wanna make sure you maintain terpenes. What's the art and the science of doing that just right?
Jonah: So the biggest thing is having control over your process. And you hit pretty much two of the most important parts when it comes from a CO2 site is terpene preservation is maintained primarily per your temperature control and control over your pressure. And so temperature is so critical to your extraction process. And I feel like sometimes that's an afterthought. Sometimes people will just use an off-the-market kinda chiller or hot water bath. And, you know, if you look at the specifications on some of those, you know, off-the-shelf kinda chillers, sometimes they're +/-5 degrees. And we have built for us, heater/chiller combinations that are exactly specified per machine specifications. So when we set our temperature, this stays typically about 1 degree. And so we have really tight control over our temperature.
And then from the pressure standpoint, see, a lot of times people will just want...they'll try to do more throughput. And they can achieve more throughput if they go through 3,000, 4,000, or 5,000 psi. But what happens is, at those higher levels, if you look at, you know, like a whitepaper, typically anything over 1,800 psi, you start to degrade some of the cannabinoids, the terpenes, you pull on additional plant material and chlorophylls. And so you really start to degrade a lot of the great therapeutic benefits of some of those things. And then you have to spend a lot of time in your post-processing and cleaning up. And so where we increase throughput without sacrificing the quality is with temperature and then also what we call "flow rate," which is, you know, essentially, how fast CO2 or a solvent moves through your product. And so that's how we're able to preserve, you know, the majority of our terpenes through the extraction process.
Jonah: I will say too, you also do have the ability, terpenes you can actually run very low, like almost like a subcritical, in the very beginning of your extraction run. But some customers like to try to pull those terpenes in like that first half-hour to hour, and then they'll just change the settings. You don't have the stop the machine to change the settings. And they'll take a pull and pull those...Especially, if their goal is to go to distillate later, they'll just pull those terpenes, and then set them aside and use them later, either reintroduce them or use them for a different product, because they're very valuable.
Matthew: Now, we touched on this briefly, but I just want to be really clear for listeners about the most common business paths for people buying extraction machines. So you get to create your own brand or line of products, there's a toll processer, which you mentioned, and then there's the bulk oil house. Are those kinda the big buckets you would say exist?
Jonah: Yes. Those are the three that our customers really focus on. There's incredible opportunities to be a toll processor or kind of a bulk oil house. And primarily that's because the extraction site, you know, there's a capital investment that comes with it, and also I think sometimes people are just like, "Well, I don't know anything about extraction." You know? Even amazing growers that are great growers that know cannabis better than [inaudible 00:37:16] anyone, they sometimes are just like, "Well, I just don't know about extraction or what to do."
Jonah: So I think some people are kind of, maybe [sounds like] a little nervous just thinking of, "Can I do that?" You know? And so a lot of times there's not enough processors, or toll processors to handle the amount of extraction that needs to take place. And so that's where there's been these industries that have stepped up to where, I had one customer here in Oregon, a company called "Tosmos" [sp], that was initially gonna do their own cartridge line. And then they got offered a pretty lucrative contract to do toll processing for one of the biggest cannabis companies out there that just wanted them to toll process. And so they did that and they started with a 20-liter. They added a second 20-liter, and then a third 20-liter, and then a 100-liter, and they just kept adding more equipment. And they've really found their niche in doing toll processing extractions.
Jonah: Yes. But now, on the toll processing, it's more you're specifically extracting it to that customer's needs and specifications and wants. And that's where you have to have good quality control and repeatability to satisfy the customer there. And so, yes, a lot of times, they'll provide their trim or product, and then you extract it and turn it into, you know, a full-spectrum oil or a distillate.
Matthew: I've heard about the overproduction. It was overproduction. It was kind of a subjective term. But I've heard that there's a big supply in Oregon. So that's amazing, $200 or $300 a pound.
Jonah: Oh, it is. And it's really changed even the whole quality of your yields. You know, so now instead of maybe historically getting a 10% to 12% yield, you know, of full-spectrum oil, now some of our customers are getting closer to, you know, 13%, 15%, which really changes your financials modeling, when you're getting that kinda return in yields. And so a lot of the customers will also then just make bulk oil and just sell that to edible companies, you know, sell it in pounds or kilos at a time to edible companies or vape companies that don't wanna do their own processing, but wanna have oil made that meets their standards and quality.
Matthew: Okay. So the toll processor already has in mind exactly what they need, and they have specifications. And when a company comes to a toll processor, they say, "Make x, y, and z for me with these specifications." A bulk oil house has like a menu you can pick from of extracted oils and products. Is that right?
Jonah: That's a great analogy. Yes. You got it.
Matthew: ...the input costs were $1 a gram or $3 or $4 a gram, but oil was selling for $80 a gram at a dispensary. So you can get a sense of how profitable this can be for a mass that's very small. I mean, a gram is a tiny, tiny amount of a mass. So that's really just incredible. And one of the reasons I'm so excited about it, it's also exciting too because compared to cultivating, extraction is kind of an esoteric thing still. People really, they don't know how to get into it. It seems really opaque. It's just, you know, "What do I do?" There's all these insiders, and they don't wanna really talk about it because it's going so well from them. Not uncommon to hear from people to pay for their extraction machines in a week, and these are expensive machines. So it's really something that's just remarkable. We're in a remarkable spot in history here. And actually, it was 2 or 3 years ago, I was talking about this, but this opportunity still exists.
So I want to just move forward with some other topics here. So we've talked about the three different types of businesses most of your clients operate under. We talked about preserving terpenes. But I want to talk a little bit about your partner's background and what he's brought to the business. Because in talking to you earlier, he sounds like an interesting character and has brought a lot of cool things, just kinda cool skills to the extraction realm. So if you can talk about him a little bit?
Jonah: Yeah. I'm very blessed. I couldn't ask for a better partner. His name is Paul Tomaso. He's my partner and our CEO of our company here. And when we decided that we were gonna set up an analytical testing laboratory, he was back on the East Coast doing some of the largest solar rooftop and fuel cell installations in North America. And he was the very first call because we knew with his background that, once he got into the cannabis and hemp industry, not only would he help us set up the most professional lab with quality controls and standardization, and new methods, but we knew once he got in the industry, he would identify bottlenecks and deficiencies and come up with better solutions. And that's exactly what he did. And his background is really unique in the sense that, it's like his whole life culmination has come together to develop the best extraction equipment, which he never, ever would have expected. You know?
And so, you know, he came from actually a military background, joining the military when he was 17. And then he actually ended up working for John Fluke, doing Fluke multimeters up there in Seattle area. And then he did, like, the TERCOM [sounds like] section of the Tomahawk Missile, the layout for that. He did some stuff on the NASA space shuttle, some contract work. And then he developed some of the fastest laser technology in the world for laser marking and engraving. And then he even developed some robotic pick-and-place equipment that you could take any image, any photograph, any customer logo, and it would pixelate it into, you know, 1/2-inch by 1/2-inch or 1-inch by 1-inch tiles. And it would robotically go grab those tiles, place them, and then you'd have like a beautiful mural. Like he did the D-Day Map in the Eisenhower Building, back in Washington as well.
And so he's had all these...Everything he's ever done, he's developed new technology. And I don't know. When it comes to extraction, you know, and the fact that we do automation on everything which is unusual, a lot of equipment's just not automated, whether it be CO2 or ethanol, or butane, and we automate everything to have control over your process and also, you know, reduce the cost of labor. And so the fact that I don't know of any other person that has the electrical, the mechanical, the controls, the pressure to have all those knowledges over his life experience to bring them together to build extraction equipment. Yeah. So I've very, very fortunate to have someone like that as a partner, because he's really the driving force and the genius kinda behind all the technology that we build here.
Matthew: That's great. Now, he went from military applications to cannabis. That's a huge divergence.
Jonah: Oh. Yeah. But, you know, Paul, he's a big believer in the medicinal benefits. You know, he's even seen that himself in a sense, where he loves CBD, in particular. You know, his mind never stops, and also he always has to be very alert. And so he doesn't really partake so much on the THC side. But the CBD side, he's a big believer on. And, you know, he's taken some full-spectrum CBD capsules, just goes to bed, you know, let's the mind shut off for a little bit, and just wakes up refreshed. And that was one of the biggest changes for him is realizing, "Wow, this stuff really, really works."
Jonah: And so he's just incredibly passionate about helping people. You know, and him being a veteran too, you know, he really likes to help a lot of the veterans. And that's been one of the biggest things, we've enjoyed helping and seeing how many veterans that cannabis has really helped and saved their lives even. And we also like to hire a lot of veterans as well. And so anyways, that's been special to him as well, from that side.
Matthew: How do you see the extraction business changing and morphing, evolving, in the next 3 to 5 years as the industry just...I mean, there's more and more demand. There's gonna be more and more biomass coming in. Where do you see it going?
Jonah: Yeah. It's gonna be higher, faster, more efficient throughput with maintaining the best, highest quality, and repeatability is really where it's gonna go. And you'd hit on part of that, is it's gonna become even more standardized to where your product lines, even by a state-by-state basis, are gonna be repeatable. And so there's gonna be just more and more quality control. There's probably gonna end up being more requirements for good, you know, GNP kinda stuff too, for good practices for manufacturing. It's really gonna turn more, I think, into somewhat of a pharmaceutical environment with some of the production of stuff, whether it be edibles and oils. But just having that repeatability and quality control over your product.
Matthew: Yeah. It's funny because, you know, I've met some people from the pharmaceutical industry that have come over to the cannabis industry, and they're kinda bringing their best practices. But I don't think it'll be long before the cannabis industry is giving other industries their best practices. Because so much capital is moving into cannabis, and there's not any legacy architecture or systems. So it's all being built fresh. So we don't have to, you know, rely on kind of sclerotic processes. But with that, talk a little bit about your ISO-certified processing center. What is ISO? Why should we care about that? And what's important to know about it?
Jonah: Yeah. Well, you know, ISO is actually International Organization of Standards, who publishes quality standards or just good manufacturing processes.
Jonah: And it's really important because it helps, you know, answer the question, "You know, what is the best way to do this when it comes to manufacturing and to uphold certain standards as well?" And, you know, our background is in engineering, and you'll find that we created a lot of the standards to achieve, you know, high-quality extracts. And also, too, it's going into different jurisdictions, or even countries for that matter, or different states. You know, they all have different standards, but things like ISO or CE and things like that, those are all accepted. And so it's important for our customers in whatever jurisdictions or states, or cities, or countries we go into, that we have really high-quality engineering and documentation so that they can get through a permitting process as well, too. And so that's been incredibly important from our customer side.
Matthew: Okay. And so how long does it take? If someone's listening and they're like, "Hey, I want to reach out to MRX and find out if they have an extraction machine that works for me," how long does the whole process take from initial order to completion? And is there any sense on cost that you can give us, so we can kinda get an idea about this?
Jonah: Yes. So typically, you know, we build everything to order.
Jonah: And, you know, we require a 50% deposit, and we start building. And, you know, we have machines priced anywhere from the $150,000 up to $850,000, and then kinda anywhere and everywhere in between. And so typically, you know, on some of our smaller systems, a 6 to 8-week build time is fairly typical. Then, some of our bigger systems, like our 100C or our ethanol processing center, those are typically gonna be closer to the 12 to 16 weeks. But it usually works out really well timing-wise. Of course, every once in a while, we get the guys or existing customers that need another machine right away. And we're usually able to accommodate that in some way. But typically, that lead time is the right lead time in the sense that, once they put their deposit down, we start working with their team, helping with facility layout and design. And because what we see with a lot of our customers too, is not just their needs right now, like, "Okay, I need, you know, two 20-liters." "Okay. But what about your second phase or your third phase?"
And you can do a lot of infrastructure stuff up front with not a lot of additional capital but make it a lot easier to win. Because we've seen it over and over, where every 3 months, 6 months, our customers who start from a machine, and then they need more equipment. And then if they don't prepare for that on the front end, you know, they're moving things around, trying to bring more electrical in. And so we try to help in the beginning with a lot of their facility layout and design. That's not something we charge extra for. That's just part of kinda the value-added working with us. And we just kinda help them through their facility readiness, as well, making sure their facility is ready so when the equipment arrives. And a lot of times, too, we'll even have our customers come in and do training. We always go do training onsite, as well.
But a lot of times, we'll invite our customers to come in before their equipment even ships and come spend, you know, a few days here at our facility, learning about the equipment, you know, learning the extraction process. And that way, they have a good foundation, and it really shortens the learning curve when their equipment arrives.
Matthew: Well, that's good. Those are helpful services. I mean, just quickly, when's the most appropriate time to...When you're designing an extraction facility, maybe it's adjacent to a grow or part of some business planning, when is the ideal time to bring in you? Like when the architect and the general contractor have kinda been picked and blueprints are being drawn, be like, "Hey, we wanna bring in, you know, MRX to talk a little bit about this facility and just to make sure that we're implementing the best practices?" 'Cuz I've seen a lot of people and a lot of businesses doing that, like wondering when to pull in who in the planning process.
Jonah: That's exactly it, is we like to typically be involved in that at least at 4 to 6 out before you want to be processing. And we work more and more now with architects, designers, engineering firms, from the very beginning, just helping spec in the equipment, and then also with, like I said, the facility layout and stuff. And so, yeah. You know, that 4 to 6 months is usually when we get involved.
Matthew: Okay. Well, Jonah, I'd like to ask some personal development questions to help listeners get a better sense of who you are personally. With that, is there a book that's had a big impact on your life or way of thinking that you'd like to share?
Jonah: You know, the one book that I really took a lot from was a book called "From Good to Great," I think the author is Jim Collins.
Matthew: Get them on the bus, right? Is that what they call that?
Matthew: Get them on the bus.
Jonah: Yep. Exactly. And so that's one of the things I really took from that book and I thought was really helpful to me, as far as a book like that.
Matthew: Okay. I should also ask, you know, you're a growing business, what's the type of skill set, like degree, are you looking for chemists, mechanical engineers, electrical engineers...I mean, what's the type of skill set for the employees of your company now? Like what does it look like? So I wanna, A, give young people listening or people looking to make a career transition, looking for what skills are, like, in demand. What would you say is in demand?
Jonah: Yep. You hit two of my top ones right there, is kinda that chemistry background and then that mechanical engineer side. You know, people with kinda [inaudible [00:56:46] HVAC kind of experience or refrigeration experience is very helpful to us from that side.
Jonah: But, you know, we're always just looking for just good, talented people that are hard workers, that are not afraid to get their hands dirty and work hard. And, you know, we do a lot of training in-house too. And so we don't necessarily have to have a degree, but those are two degrees that we do tend to hire a lot of.
Matthew: Yeah. And one more personal development question. Is there a tool, web-based or otherwise, that you consider vital to your business or productivity individually??
Jonah: Yeah. You know, one is something that everybody already knows, but it's amazing the amount of texting that now happens in this industry. And just being able to use, like, voice text, I use that. I never thought I would use something like that to that level, but the amount of texts you get in a day can be 50, 100 texts.
Jonah: ...and track everything through the whole entire process.
Jonah: And so that's been a very valuable tool for us, Vtiger, because it kinda ties in the potential new sales opportunities, it ties in our existing customers, and it also kinda syncs and manages all the calendars and stuff too, with visits and things like that. So that's been a pretty good tool that we use a lot.
Matthew: And how do you spell that?
Jonah: V as in Victor, and then just tiger.
Matthew: Okay. Cool. I've never heard of that one. Well, Jonah, this has been very educational. Thanks so much for coming on the show and teaching us about everything you're doing. This sounds like just an incredible business opportunity, not just for you, but for also your clients. And so I wish you all the best, and I hope you come back on and tell us how the industry is evolving.
Jonah: Oh, I'd be happy to do that. I really appreciate you taking the time. And I sure enjoyed getting a chance to speak with you.


Reinstating your loan requires a lump sum payment.
1 How Can I Still Pay the Past Due After Foreclosure Starts?
2 Can Foreclosure Be Stopped Once the Bank Initiates It?
4 What Is a Reinstatement of a Mortgage?
A homeowner who has missed at least three monthly payments may face foreclosure in California. When you're that far behind on the mortgage, catching up is hard to do. Depending on your financial circumstances, your lender's willingness to work with you and how far into the foreclosure process you are, you may have a chance to bring your loan current to stop a foreclosure.
You have to catch up on all payments and pay the lender's penalties and late fees to bring the mortgage current. Reinstatement entails repaying any missed payments and restarting regular payments. Lenders generally prefer full reinstatement, although they offer many other options to avoid foreclosure. Lenders might accept a partial reinstatement, which requires you to pay at least half of the missed payments and giving you more time to repay the remaining half. They also may offer repayments plans, in which you pay an extra amount on top of your regular payments until you to bring the loan current. Lenders may also offer a "temporary indulgence" when you anticipate receiving a large sum of money. In that scenario, you have 30 days to bring the loan current.
Some lenders may pursue foreclosure more quickly than others. In general, your loan is considered delinquent after a payment is 30 days late. The lender must contact you to explore any options you might have to bring the loan current. It must wait 30 days after contacting you to file a 90-day notice of default with the county. As soon as 90 days later, you may receive a 20-day notice of trustee sale, indicating the date on which your home will be sold to the highest bidder. You can reinstate your loan up to five days before the trustee sale date.
California's Mortgage Reinstatement Assistance Program, or MRAP, helps borrowers catch up on missed payments and avoid foreclosure. The state taps into its federally-subsidized Hardest Hit Fund to cover up to $25,000 on behalf of the borrower. The funds pay the loan principal, interest, property taxes and homeowners insurance, plus escrowed homeowners association dues or HOA assessments, allowing borrowers to get completely caught up on housing payments. To qualify for MRAP, you must meet low- to moderate-income guidelines. Your household must earn 120 percent or less of the area median income. San Francisco County's income limit is $123,600 for a family of four.
In addition to bringing the loan current via reinstatement at least 5 days before the trustee sale date, you may have other options to stave off foreclosure. They include modification, refinance or a sale of your home. Typically, borrowers facing foreclosure can only sell via a short sale, in which the lender agrees to accept less than the mortgage debt owed. To refinance, the current lender usually must agree to write off a portion of the delinquent loan amount; and to modify, the lender must change one or more loan terms to bring your payment to an affordable level.
C., Karina. "If You Bring Your Home Loan Current Can You Stop the Foreclosure Process?" Home Guides | SF Gate, http://homeguides.sfgate.com/bring-home-loan-current-can-stop-foreclosure-process-96976.html. Accessed 22 April 2019.


New York, April 23, 2007—The Committee to Protect Journalists is very concerned about the effective closure of the Educated Media Foundation in Moscow last week. The foundation, the successor to Internews Russia, has been shut down since last Wednesday, when economic police searched its premises for 11 hours, seized all financial records, and shut down the organization's servers.
At noon last Wednesday, more than 20 officers arrived at the Educated Media Foundation, saying they were checking the organization for financial improprieties. "The police are polite," the foundation's director, Manana Aslamazian, told CPJ by phone that day. "No one is being roughed up." But the raid continued into the night and resulted in the suspension of all activity.
Active since 1997, Internews Russia has played a key role in the development of the country's independent media. According to the group's statistics, about 15,000 people have taken part in its programs through the years, receiving training in areas such as reporting, media management, and broadcast production.
Aslamazian said the raid on the Educated Media Foundation was connected to a criminal case opened against her in February on charges of smuggling foreign currency into Russia. On January 21, after a personal trip to Paris, she was detained by customs officers at Moscow's Sheremetyevo Airport for failing to declare 2,964 euros (US$4,024) over the allowed cash limit. Aslamazian, who said the violation was unintentional, was charged with smuggling. Customs police confiscated all 9,550 euros (US$12,964) she was carrying—a personal debt she had collected from a friend in Paris, according to the English-language daily Moscow Times.
Board Member Svetlana Sorokina told Russian media on Wednesday she believed authorities were using the criminal case against Aslamazian as a pretext to search the organization as part of a broader campaign of harassment against independent NGOs, particularly those receiving foreign funding.
In late 2006, Internews Russia joined with Educated Media Foundation, a group founded by private Russian individuals from the television, education, culture, science and business sectors, the Educated Media Foundation's statement said. As of January 2007, the foundation became the official legal successor of Internews Russia.


For the main part of our spiritual preparation for the Shokai we were each asked to think of three people, who at this very point in our lives, we feel especially grateful towards for what they have done for us. We then shared our expressions of gratitude with each other during a series of meetings during the Shokai. This gave rise to a wonderful atmosphere of joy and thankfulness which really brought the theme of the Shokai alive for all of us. After the conclusion of the retreat we were able to share this atmosphere of gratitude which the participants of the Hooko Otorikoshi (Memorial for Shinran Shonin) London Eza meeting which followed immediately after the close of the retreat on Sunday afternoon.
Saturday was a full and busy day from the early morning work session (sagyo) starting at 6.30am to the final activity of writing our impressions of the retreat which concluded around 10pm. Following an extended morning Eza meeting in which more of us shared our expressions of gratitude to three people, Rev. Kenshin Ishii gave his own in the form of his Dharma-talk entitled Invaluable gifts to me from those who went back to the Pure Land. In this powerful and direct talk which one participant likened to a "transmission", Rev. Ishii discussed the important teachings he had received from three late teachers of his, namely Rev. Kojun Shinohara, Rev, Eshu Seno and Dr. Kazuhiko Shimizu, that had such a deep and lasting impact on his life course. I found the essence of Rev. Ishii's talk in the following words he gave, "What makes it possible to change our mind entirely is a true encounter with our own Good Teacher. This true encounter finishes our life, fully occupied by active karma, but also it gives us a new joyful life of Nembutsu". It is deeply affecting to witness the still living influence of Rev. Ishii's teachers on his life and we are so very fortunate at Three Wheels to receive the energy of their teachings from Rev. Ishii. Also on Saturday some much need tree pruning and garden maintenance work was done in the afternoon sagyo which was followed by a chanting lesson in which we practiced the liturgy to be used in the following day's Hoonko Otorikoshi ceremony.


text:
Ernest J KIBBEL[1]
Helena J LAST
Birth 16 Dec 1889 Grafton, Ozaukee, Wisconsin, United States
Christened 23 Feb 1890
Died 17 Oct 1980 Vancouver, Clark, Washington, United States
Father Carl Friedrich Hermann LAST, b. 26 Sep 1851, Döringshagen, Naugard, Pommern, Germany
Mother Augusta Johanna Wilhelmine LUEDTKE, b. 3 Jul 1863, Storkow, Pommerania
Married 25 Feb 1883 Milwaukee, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, United States
Family Ernest J KIBBEL, b. 22 Aug 1885, Wayne, Washington, Wisconsin, United States
Married 10 Oct 1914 Port Washington, Ozaukee, Wisconsin, United States
Name Ernest J KIBBEL
Born 22 Aug 1885 Wayne, Washington, Wisconsin, United States [2]
Died 3 Jun 1954 Port Washington, Ozaukee, Wisconsin, United States [2]
Person ID I407 Zalewski Family
Last Modified 4 May 2017
Family Helena J LAST, b. 16 Dec 1889, Grafton, Ozaukee, Wisconsin, United States , d. 17 Oct 1980, Vancouver, Clark, Washington, United States (Age 90 years)
Born - 22 Aug 1885 - Wayne, Washington, Wisconsin, United States
Married - 10 Oct 1914 - Port Washington, Ozaukee, Wisconsin, United States
Died - 3 Jun 1954 - Port Washington, Ozaukee, Wisconsin, United States
[S3] Birth Certificate.
[S341] Headstone.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
The Aston Martin DB2 made its first public appearance as a road car in 1950.
The DB2's chassis and running gear were so well designed that they remained the basis of all the Aston Martin's road cars produced throughout the Fifties.
The basic design style persisting although being modified continuously as newer models were released.
Produced with a multi-tube frame and with a shorter wheelbase than the DB1, Aston Martin took their time on developing the DB2s design. Making several significant changes to "stiffen up" the car's chassis and make it more durable.
The DB2's rear axle was also the subject of significant modification.
Once again, Aston Martin called upon the services of design team of Frank Feeley and Claude Hill's who had worked together on the DB1.
Feeley and Hill came up with a sleek two-seater fastback design mainly clothed in aluminium, a winning formula that would be used in many of the Aston Martins of the David Brown era.
Carrying on from the DB1, the DB2 had a split widescreen, which the motoring media pointed out dated the car considerably. In contrast, others claimed it added a sense of drama to the vehicle.
Done away with was the vertically slatted centre grille found on the DB 1 replaced by a modern horizontal slatted version which gave the car's front a more modern, pleasing slant.
Launched initially as a coupe, Brown commissioned Feeley and Hill to develop an open tourer to be produced by renowned coachbuilders Tickford, that had just become part of his stable.
The first open-topped version of the DB2 were available for sale by 1951.
While generally well-received by the UK motoring press, most did underline that the vehicle was still in need of further refinement, especially in passenger comfort.
Aston Martin were also aware of the fact and overcame the objections with the release of a stablemate in 1953- the larger DB2/DB4.
Some of the very first DB2s were prepared for the track enjoying limited success. Production versions, powered by a Lagonda designed 2.6 litre engine.
During its three year production run, Aston Martin sold 339 coupes and 102 drop head tourers.
The DB2 was another step in the growth of Aston Martin in the David Brown era and significantly less of a commercial failure than the DB1, with a longer production run, only replaced by the iconic DB4 launched in 1959.
History of Aston Martin
Aston Martins of the Fifties
Aston Martin DB2/DB4
Aston Martin DB Mark III
A guide to acquiring, restoring and maintaining UK or European Classic Cars of the Fifties and Sixties- as well as a recollection of the iconic cars of the era and the visionaries that produced them


text:
The Nine Worst Claims About Guns From John Lott's New Book
Research ››› March 12, 2013 10:21 AM EDT ››› TIMOTHY JOHNSON
Gun researcher John Lott's chapter on firearms in his new book titled, At the Brink: Will Obama Push Us Over The Edge?, is filled with inaccurate claims about guns and firearm policy. Lott makes a range of misleading or blatantly false statements, including that the worst school shootings in the world have not occurred in the United States and that concealed carry laws help prevent mass shootings.
CLAIM: "Gun-Free Zones" Make Mass Shootings More Likely
Lott: "Facts And Figures" Prove "Establishing 'Gun-Free Zones' (At Schools, For Example) Actually Makes Mass Shootings More Likely." In At the Brink: Will Obama Push Us Over the Edge?, Lott claims that shootings are more likely to occur in "gun-free zones" and that civilians with guns often stop these shootings:
Soledad O'Brien, for example, could not wrap her head around that idea when she interviewed me after Sandy Hook. I tried to explain that research into gun crimes indicates that establishing "gun-free zones" (at schools, for example) actually makes mass shootings more likely, and I offered facts and figures to back this up. Ms. O'Brien would have none of it. [At the Brink: Will Obama Push Us Over the Edge?, Kindle locations 1739-1741, 2/19/13]
REALITY: Most Recent Mass Shootings Have Occurred Where Guns Are Allowed
Mayors Against Illegal Guns: Most Mass Shootings Since January 2009 Have Occurred Where Guns Could Be Lawfully Carried. From a January 2013 report on mass shootings:
Nineteen of the 43 incidents (44%) took place in private residences. Of the 23 incidents in public spaces, at least 9 took place where concealed guns could be lawfully carried. All told, no more than 14 of the shootings (33%) took place in public spaces that were so-called "gun-free zones." [Mayors Against Illegal Guns, January 2013]
Schools, Which Typically Ban Guns, Are Much Safer Environments For Young People Than The Surrounding Communities. A 2011 report from the Bureau of Justice Statistics found that the proportion of youth homicides that occurred at school has never exceeded 2 percent of total youth homicides for all years where data was collected. In 2008-09, 17 youth homicides occurred at school while 1,562 youth homicides occurred away from school:
[Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics, February 2012]
CLAIM: Obama Supported A Ban On Handguns While A Member Of The Illinois State Senate
Lott: "In 1996, Obama Supported A Ban On Handguns." Lott alleges that President Obama once supported banning handguns, a claim that is based on a questionnaire filled out during Obama's 1996 bid for state Senate that asked about his position on various gun regulations. [At the Brink: Will Obama Push Us Over the Edge?, Kindle locations 1775-1776, 2/19/13]
REALITY: Fact Checkers Have Dismissed Survey Answer As Evidence That Obama Wants To Ban Handguns
PolitiFact: "Obama's Alleged Endorsement Of A Proposed State Law In 1996 Does Not Add Up To A Plan To Ban Handguns." According to PolitiFact, the survey response, which was also cited by the National Rifle Association to claim that Obama supported a ban on handguns, does not accurately reflect Obama's stance on the issue. From the August 2008 article:
In 1996, as a candidate for the Illinois state Senate, Obama filled out a questionnaire for a community group called Independent Voters of Illinois-Independent Precinct Organization. It asked if the candidate supported state legislation to "ban the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns." Obama's answer: "Yes."
The Obama campaign claimed the questionnaire was filled out by a campaign aide who "unintentionally mischaracterize[d] his position" on gun control and other issues, even though Obama's writing was on another part of the questionnaire. (Tommy Vietor, a spokesman for Obama's campaign, said in an e-mailed statement to Politico, "He may have jotted some notes on the front page of the questionnaire at the meeting, but that doesn't change the fact that some answers didn't reflect his views.")
On a more recent questionnaire, he said, "A complete ban on handguns is not politically practicable," but reasonable restrictions should be imposed, according to the Associated Press.
Obama's alleged endorsement of a proposed state law in 1996 does not add up to a plan to ban handguns, particularly in light of evidence to the contrary that has accumulated since then. We find the NRA's claim to be False. [PolitiFact, 8/1/08]
FactCheck.org: Another Survey In 2003 Revealed Obama's Support For Limitations, But Not A Ban, On Handguns. From a September 2008 article addressing the NRA claims about Obama's 1996 survey response:
Whatever his position may have been in 1996, in 2003 he submitted another survey form to the same group avoiding a yes-or-no answer to the gun ban question and stating a position similar to his current stance. According to the Chicago Sun-Times, Obama's answer read:
Obama, 2003: While a complete ban on handguns is not politically practicable, I believe reasonable restrictions on the sale and possession of handguns are necessary to protect the public safety. In the Illinois Senate last year, I supported a package of bills to limit individual Illinoisans to purchasing one handgun a month; require all promoters and sellers at firearms shows to carry a state license; allow civil liability for death or injuries caused by handguns; and require FOID [Firearm Owner's Identification] applicants to apply in person. I would support similar efforts at the federal level, including retaining the Brady Law."
[FactCheck.org, 9/22/08]
CLAIM: Assault Weapons Are No More Dangerous Than Small-Game Hunting Rifles
Lott: Assault Weapons "Inflict The Same Damage" As "Small-Game Hunting Rifles." In At the Brink: Will Obama Push Us Over the Edge?, Lott claims that the firearms used in the Aurora, Colorado, and Newtown, Connecticut shootings only bear a "cosmetic resemblance" to military weapons and do not cause the same amount of damage:
The Smith & Wesson M&P 15 used in the Aurora shootings and the Bushmaster.223 used at Newtown are "military-style" weapons -- emphasis on "style." They bear a cosmetic resemblance to the M-16, which has been used by the U.S. military since the Vietnam War. The civilian versions of the M&P and Bushmaster use the same sort of bullet as small-game hunting rifles, fire with the same rapidity (one bullet per trigger-pull), and inflict the same damage. [At the Brink: Will Obama Push Us Over the Edge?, Kindle locations 1786-1789, 2/19/13]
REALITY: An Assault Weapon Typically Fires A More Powerful Round Than A Small-Game Hunting Rifle, Resulting In Devastating Tissue Damage
Firearms Manufacturer Ruger: Remington Brand .22 Rimfire Ammunition Commonly Used For Small-Game Hunting Has A Muzzle Velocity Between 700 And 2000 Feet Per Second. From Ruger's website:
[Ruger, accessed 3/11/13]
Firearms Manufacturer Remington: Remington Brand .223 Ammunition Commonly Used In Assault Weapons Has A Muzzle Velocity Between 3000 And 3550 Feet Per Second. From Remington's website:
[Remington, accessed 3/11/13]
Study Of Soldiers Killed By High-Velocity Rifle Rounds: "The Nature Of Internal Tissue Injuries From Rifled Firearm Weapons Depend Greatly On The Velocity Of The Missile." An October 2011 report by doctors who had performed autopsies on soldiers killed by gunfire in Iraq found that rounds with a velocity "exceeding 2,500 feet per second" cause a shockwave to pass through the body that caused catastrophic injuries even in areas remote to the direct wound:
For damage to occur some or all of the kinetic energy of the missile has to be absorbed by target tissues So the mode of injury depends on the velocity of the missile, (6) relatively the missile that travels in a speed (exceeding 2,500 feet per second) when it passes through the tissues sends a shock wave of compression ahead from the laceration track. (7) That wave lasts only for a brief period but it raises the tissue pressure up to thousands of kilopascals that can cause severe damage into fluid containing tissues like vessels lying away from the missile track. (8) Direct effect of missile is the permanent tissue loss along the local track; the tissues are compressed ahead of the track by a compression in the form of shock waves of spherical form so that tissue damage can be produced in a considerable distance away from the original missile track. [Medico-legal Study of Shockwave Damage by High Velocity Missiles in Firearm Injuries, Journal of the Faculty of Medicine, Baghdad, Vol. 53, No. 4, October 2011]
For more information about attempts by right-wing media to overstate the difference between a civilian assault weapon and a military assault rifle, click here.
CLAIM: Mass Shootings Are Often Prevented By Civilians Carrying Firearms
Lott: Civilian Holders Of Permits To Carry A Concealed Gun Have "Prevented Mass Shootings On Many Occasions." In At the Brink: Will Obama Push Us Over the Edge?, Lott makes the claim that armed civilians have prevented mass shootings:
Opponents of concealed-carry laws, such as Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York, insist that the presence of armed citizens at mass shootings would result in even more deaths because of crossfire. But armed civilians prevented mass shootings on many occasions -- in schools, a mall, and other public places -- and there is no instance on record of a permit holder's accidentally shooting a bystander.
One such incident took place at the New Life Church in Colorado Springs in December 2007. Seven thousand people were in the church when an armed man entered and began firing. He had killed two people and wounded others when a female churchgoer with a concealed-carry permit stopped him. [At the Brink: Will Obama Push Us Over the Edge?, Kindle locations 1898-1903, 2/19/13]
REALITY: Shooting Rampages Are Not Typically Ended By Civilians Carrying Concealed Firearms
Mother Jones Analysis Of Mass Shootings Over Past 30 Years: "In Not A Single Case Was The Killing Stopped By A Civilian Using A Gun." A 2012 Mother Jones investigation into 62 mass shootings with four or more fatalities concluded that none of these shootings was stopped by an armed civilian:
In the wake of the massacres this year at a Colorado movie theater, a Sikh temple in Wisconsin, and Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut, we set out to track mass shootings in the United States over the last 30 years. We identified and analyzed 62 of them, and one striking pattern in the data is this: In not a single case was the killing stopped by a civilian using a gun. And in other recent (but less lethal) rampages in which armed civilians attempted to intervene, those civilians not only failed to stop the shooter but also were gravely wounded or killed. [Mother Jones, 12/15/12]
Mother Jones: New Life Church Shooting Was Stopped By A Security Officer, Not A Civilian With A Gun. From a December 2012 article debunking claims by gun advocates that mass shootings have been prevented by civilians with firearms:
In 2007 a gunman killed two people and wounded three others before being shot himself; the pro-gun crowd likes to refer to the woman who took him out in the parking lot as a "church member." Never mind that she was a security officer for the church and a former cop, and that the church had put its security team on high alert earlier that day due to another church shooting nearby. [Mother Jones, 12/19/12]
CLAIM: Law Enforcement Supports Legislation To Loosen Concealed Carry Firearm Rules
Lott: Law Enforcement Backs Legislative Effort To Force States To Recognize Concealed Carry Permits Issued In All Other States. In At the Brink: Will Obama Push Us Over the Edge?, Lott claims that law enforcement officials largely support making states honor concealed carry permits "in the way that drivers' licenses are recognized through [sic] the country":
As for what policemen think about concealed carry, the 2010 annual survey by the National Association of Chiefs of Police found 78 percent of its members believed that concealed-handgun permits issued in one state should be honored by other states "in the way that drivers' licenses are recognized through [sic] the country" and that making citizens' permits portable would "facilitate the violent crime-fighting potential of the professional law enforcement community." [At the Brink: Will Obama Push Us Over the Edge?, Kindle locations 1906-1909, 2/19/13]
REALITY: Law Enforcement Groups Oppose Proposal To Expand Concealed Carry
National Law Enforcement Partnership To Prevent Gun Violence Opposes Federal Legislation To Expand Concealed Carry. Various law enforcement groups signed a letter in opposition to H.R. 822, a piece of proposed legislation that would force states to recognize the validity of concealed carry permits issued in other states:
H.R. 822 would severely undermine state concealed carry licensing systems by allowing out of state visitors to carry concealed firearms even if those visitors have not met the standards for carrying a concealed weapon in the state they are visiting. Every state but Illinois makes some allowance for concealed weapons. Local standards for permits vary widely. For example, 38 states prohibit people convicted of certain violent crimes like assault or sex crimes from carrying concealed guns. At least 36 states set a minimum age of 21; 35 states require gun safety training. The proposed National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011 would shred those standards and the public safety judgments behind them. [National Law Enforcement Partnership to Prevent Gun Violence, accessed 3/11/13]
A 2006 Survey Of Police Chiefs Conducted By Academics And Published In The American Journal Of Preventive Medicine Found That Most Police Chiefs Do Not Believe Civilians Should Carry Guns In Public. [Police Chiefs' Perceptions of the Regulation of Firearms, American Journal of Preventive Medicine, Vol. 3, No. 4, April 2006]
National Association Of Chiefs Of Police Survey Cited By Lott Does Not Contain Any Study Methodology. The survey cited by Lott in At the Brink to make the claim that law enforcement officials are in favor of expanding conceal carry laws does not include a methodology to back up its findings. [National Association of Chiefs of Police, accessed 3/11/13]
National Association Of Chiefs Of Police Is A Partisan Group That Has Opposed Gun Violence Prevention Measures. The survey cited by Lott in At the Brink to make the claim that law enforcement officials are in favor of expanding conceal carry laws was conducted by a partisan organization that has an agenda opposing gun violence prevention measures. [Media Matters, 8/3/12]
CLAIM: The Worst School Shootings In The World Have Occurred In Germany
Lott: "Germany, Despite Having Some Of The Strictest Gun-Control Laws Anywhere, Has Been The Scene Of Two Of The Three Worst School Shootings In The World." In At the Brink: Will Obama Push Us Over the Edge?, Lott claims that strict gun control measures in other countries, such as Germany, have not prevented mass shootings there. [At the Brink: Will Obama Push Us Over the Edge?, Kindle locations 1911-1913, 2/19/13]
REALITY: The Two Worst School Shootings In The World Occurred In The United States
On December 14, 2012, A Gunman Killed 20 Children And Six Educators At Sandy Hook Elementary School In Newtown, Connecticut. [NBCNews.com, 12/14/12]
On April 16, 2007, A Gunman Killed 32 Students And Educators At Virginia Tech In Blacksburg, Virginia. [The Washington Post, 4/17/07]
Lott Cited An Article He Wrote About Two German Shootings That Had Fewer Casualties Than Virginia Tech Or Newtown As The Basis Of His Claim. In a July 2010 article for the National Review Online about "the worst K-12 school shootings," Lott refers to a 2002 massacre in Erfurt, Germany where a gunman killed 17 people as the "worst" one, and a 2009 massacre in Winnenden, Germany where a gunman killed 13 people at a school and two people at a nearby car dealership as the "third-worst" school shooting. Lott wrote that a 1996 school shooting in Dunblane, Scotland where a gunman killed 17 was "the second-worst." [National Review Online, 6/11/10]
CLAIM: Permissive Gun-Carrying Laws Reduce Crime
Lott: The "Vast Majority" Of Studies Have Found Concealed Carry Reduces Homicide. In At the Brink: Will Obama Push Us Over the Edge?, Lott claimed that concealed-carry handgun laws do not lead to an increase in murder, suicide, or accidental death and that most studies had found "the opposite" was true:
None of the criminologists or economists who have studied concealed-carry handgun laws has found an increase in murder, suicide, or accidental death. Indeed, the vast majority of studies have found the opposite. [At the Brink: Will Obama Push Us Over the Edge?, Kindle locations 1821-1822, 2/19/13]
REALITY: Lott's Thesis That More Guns Lead To Less Crime Has Been Thoroughly And Repeatedly Debunked
John Hopkins Center For Gun Policy And Research: Concealed Carry Laws Most Consistently Linked To Increase In Aggravated Assault. An October 2012 report that surveyed research on the effect of loosening concealed carry laws found that enacting such a policy was associated with a one to nine percent increase in aggravated assaults:
A large body of research has been conducted to investigate the effect of RTC [right to carry] laws on violence. Most notably, research led by John Lott, Jr. suggests that RTC laws have led to significant reductions in violent crime. But the research showing crime-reducing effects of RTC laws, including Lott's, has been carefully reviewed by a National Council of Research panel of experts, and others, and has been found to have serious flaws. The most consistent finding across studies which correct for these flaws is that RTC laws are associated with an increase in aggravated assaults. Using various statistical methods, estimates range from a one to nine percent increase in aggravated assaults as a result of RTC laws. [John Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research,10/25/12]
Harvard Injury Control Research Center's David Hemenway: "More That A Dozen Academics Have Found Enough Serious Flaws In Lott's" More Guns, Less Crime Thesis "To Discount His Findings." From Private Guns, Public Health where Hemenway noted that Lott's work had significant coding errors and that "[r]esults from a more appropriate model suggest that permissive gun carrying laws increase violent crime in most states":
One study by John Lott (1998a) has frequently been cited in the national gun debate. The initial results seemed to show that permissive gun-carrying laws significantly reduced murder, rape, and aggravated assault but not robbery and increased larceny, auto theft, and property crimes generally (Lott and Mustard 1997).
In at least eight published articles, more than a dozen academics have found enough serious flaws in Lott's model to discount his findings (Alschuler 1997; Webster, Vernick, and Ludwig 1997; Zimgring and Hawkins 1997a; Black and Nagin 1998; Dezhbakhsh and Rubin 1998; Ludwig 1998; Dugan 2001; Ayres and Donohue 2003a, 2003b). These studies found, among many other problems, that Lott did not sufficiently account for the cyclical nature of crime or the differing nonlinear effects of the laws on various localities. The general consensus among those who have seriously analyzed the results is that "any inference that is based on the Lott and Mustard models is inappropriate, and their results cannot be used responsibly to formulate public policy" (Black and Nagin 1998, 219). The results of extending Lott's model through 1999, once his data coding errors are eliminated, show no significant effect of concealed carry laws on crime, except to increase property crime (Ayres and Donohue 2003a). Results from a more appropriate model suggest that permissive gun carrying laws increase violent crime in most states (Ayres and Donohue 2003b). [Hemenway, Private Guns, Public Health, pgs. 101-2]
CLAIM: Bureau Of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms And Explosives' Operation Fast And Furious Was A Study On Drug Cartel Behavior
Lott: ATF's Failed Operation Fast and Furious Was Designed To "Study How Mexican Drug Gangs Obtained Their Guns." In At the Brink: Will Obama Push Us Over the Edge?, Lott speculates over the intention of the Fast and Furious operation:
The program, which started in October 2009, was supposedly intended to study how Mexican drug gangs obtained their guns. Yet that explanation never made sense. [At the Brink: Will Obama Push Us Over the Edge?, Kindle locations 1992-1993, 2/19/13]
REALITY: Independent Investigation Into Fast And Furious Found Motive To Be Firearms Interdiction
Department Of Justice Office Of The Inspector General: Agents Involved In Fast And Furious Sought To "Dismantl[e] A Dangerous Firearms Trafficking Organization." From a September 2012 report on the OIG's findings from an investigation of Fast and Furious:
ATF's Phoenix Field Division, together with the U.S. Attorney's Office, bore primary responsibility for the conduct of Operations Wide Receiver and Fast and Furious. While we found no evidence that the agents responsible for the cases had improper motives or were trying to accomplish anything other than dismantling a dangerous firearms trafficking organization, we concluded that the conduct and supervision of the investigations was significantly flawed. [Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General, 9/19/12]
CLAIM: Fast And Furious May Have Been An Obama Administration Plot To Implement Further Restrictions On Gun Ownership
Lott: Independent Investigation Into Fast And Furious Never Examined Whether Its Purpose Was "To Build Pressure In The United States For Gun Control." In At the Brink: Will Obama Push Us Over the Edge?, Lott wondered why the Office of the Inspector General did not address the "concern" that Fast and Furious may have been a way of building support for gun control in the United States:
Is it too outlandish to speculate that an administration only too eager to depict Mexico as awash in American guns might have concocted Fast and Furious to build pressure in the United States for gun control? The inspector general's report never addresses or even acknowledges this concern. Given that prominent news outlets, such as CBS News and Fox News, as well as senators and congressmen were raising this question, one might expect the report to address it. [At the Brink: Will Obama Push Us Over the Edge?, Kindle locations 2094-2096, 2/19/13]
REALITY: The Office Of The Inspector General Examined And Dismissed This Claim
Department Of Justice Office Of The Inspector General: "No Evidence That ATF Phoenix Initiated The Investigation In Order To Facilitate Efforts To Obtain Long Gun Legislation." From a September 2012 report:
[Then-acting ATF director Kenneth] Melson told the OIG [Office of the Inspector General] that the impetus for the long gun reporting requirement came from him, though he could not recall the date that he asked his staff to pursue the matter. He also stated that when he discussed the long gun reporting requirement with staff at ATF Headquarters, "[n]o one ever suggested that [Operation Fast and Furious] was being done for purposes of supporting our position on the long guns," and that he did not make any decisions concerning the case in order to increase the likelihood that the long gun reporting requirement would be implemented. We found no evidence that contradicted Melson's statements to us concerning the long gun reporting requirement; and no evidence that ATF Phoenix initiated the investigation in order to facilitate efforts to obtain long gun legislation. [Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General, 9/19/12]
Justice & Civil Liberties, Guns
John Lott
Stories/Interests
Our research section features in-depth media analysis, original reports illustrating skewed or inadequate coverage of important issues, thorough debunking of conservative falsehoods that find their way into coverage and other special projects from Media Matters' research department.
Timothy Johnson ›››
All posts›
Twitter›
Timothy Johnson is a research fellow at Media Matters, where he has worked since April 2012, focusing on guns, public safety, and right-wing extremism. He previously worked at the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence's Legal Action Project and the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence. He has a bachelor's degree in art history from The George Washington University.


The state of Arkansas has been receiving money from gambling avenues for quite some time now. Although they have taken the tax money from these gambling establishments, they have done nothing to ensure problem gamblers have a place to go for treatment.
In November, voters approved a state run lottery. Previously, Arkansas had been one of the few states that did not have a state lottery. They did, however, have other forms of gambling such as pari-mutuel and electronic machine betting.
While the new Bill is being drafted to deal with the lottery, House Speaker Robbie Wills claims that money will be used from the lottery to finance problem gambling treatment.
"We have a provision in here that will take a portion of the unclaimed prize money…and we will direct that to the Department of Health to contribute to the programs they have to treat compulsive gambling disorders,' said Wills.
The only problem with that is there are no such programs within the Department of Health in the state. "That may be where the Bill is going in the future, but we don't have those programs set up now," Health Department Spokeswoman Ann Wright told The Morning News of Arkansas.
While the state claims that there are counselors who are trained to deal with gambling addiction, others believe that problem gambling is an addiction that needs individual attention.
"Of course counselors can de4al with any form of addiction, but that does not mean that they understand the specific problems related to gambling addiction. For the House Speaker to not know that no specific problem gambling programs exist in a state that has legally allowed gambling, it is shocking," said observer William Narbendie.
The Bill would call for a minimum of $200,000 going to help problem gambling, but with no programs in sight, many are left to wonder where that money will, or has, gone.
The Department of Health has acknowledged that they have received funds for problem gambling. They have used that money to fund addiction treatment in local community health centers. It still does not answer the question of why there is no specific treatment programs for problem gamblers.
Programs are available to Arkansas but have not yet been tapped as resources. The National Council on Problem Gambling has affiliate groups in many states, but as of now none of them are in Arkansas.
"It is important that if these lawmakers are going to continue to create a Bill that involves expanded gambling, then they need to first do their homework. The House Speaker and anyone else involved in this process need to explore how they can set up help for potential problem gambling situations before they expand gambling in the state through a lottery," said Narbendie.


A good friend of mine was in the Piemont region of Italy on vacation. On her return, she brought back 5 beautiful organic lemons and a bottle of Limoncello (Lemon Liquer) for me and while putting these offerings on my kitchen counter, she challenged me.
"Meeta, let's see what you can make with these ingredients!"
What do you think I made?
Considering the heat and the humidity outside the last few weeks I was in a mood for a true refreshment. Cool and tantalizing ... something that was so cooling that would linger for a while.
"Ok," I said "come back tomorrow evening for dinner."
Antipasti came and went and no signs of the lemons in any form or method.
Salads came and went ... no lemons anywhere.
Main course: I did serve two slicesw for decoration purpose on the main course.
We cleared up and went out side on the terrace. By now I could feel my friend's impatience.
"So? What did you make?"
I am such a tease aren't I? I went to the freezer and pulled out a fantastic looking and extremely refreshing lemon sorbet with peppermint.
BTW: Great guesswork going on in the comments folks. Thank you for playing with me. You all are so much fun and I hope you folks enjoy my little teasers!
After washing the lemons peel the zest from all five of them and squeeze the juice.
In a pot with 1/2 liter of water put the sugar and the zest and while constantly stirring bring to a boil. Allow to simmer for 2 minutes, then take off the heat and let cool.
Strain the sugar syrup through a sieve. Mix in the lemon juice and the Limoncello.
Put all the liquid in a clean metal container that fits into you freezer. Allow to set for at least four hours. In between the setting process stir the mixture well. I did it about every hour, some do it more often.
Serve in tall glasses decorated with peppermint leaves.
Chill Out! Soeren did not get any of this! I know but sometimes there are things that we adults want to spoil ourselves with. The fact that I put the liqueur in it was just for us to enjoy.
It was sweet and sour and just lovely. Perfect for such fantastic warm nights. It was easy to make and has a ton of flavor through the zesty lemons.
OK! I'll admit it! I had a guilty conscious that Soeri did not get any. So, I have ordered a ice-cream maker. Look forward to my first experiments and tries with it!
I stumbled across a delightful blog the other day and was excited to see that Sam from Sweet Pleasure was hosting a one off summer ice cream event. Well here you go Sam my Lemon Sorbet!
I was given five lemons from a friend's tree the other day. I made lemon curd, which I will post about eventually.
Perhaps you made lemon curd too?
lemon tart? lemon pie? lemon meringue pie?
I would make limoncello sorbet or granita using the lemons and jest.
bet anything you end up making with those ingredients will be tasty!!
with the liquer I guess it would have been a cocktail and the lemons.....hmmm ....pickle!
Lemon curd with the lemons and limoncello cheesecake! Yummy!!
Meringue or pie would be my guess with the lemons.
A couple of weeks back I made trifle with limoncello.
Lovely Lemon Drop Martini . . . Lemon Curd Tart, Gremolata for Lamb Shanks, Tabouli, Lemon Marmalade, Preserved Lemons for Moroccan Chicken, Lemon-Egg Soup, or naturally, more Limoncello!
What a nice friend to be so thoughtful. Wanna be my friend?
This looks so refreshing, perfect for cooling down in this weather.
Great result last night. Here's hoping Germany go all the way, they've definately go my support!!
What a great & refreshing looking sorbet, Meeta. I can feel the taste on my tongue. Ooooooh.... I am sure, your friend was glad that she got you those thingies from Italy.
Hi y'all! thanks for playing and giving a go! Do you like what I made in the end?
V! Yes, she was and this was just lovely.
The lemon sorbet with Limoncello look and sound wonderful. But I would be also tempted to do the same as Ivonne: "drink the limoncello and use the lemons to make more limoncello". Thanks again for sharing and for participating in the ice cream event.
Great blog you got here. I'd like to read more about this topic.


text:
Simon Willems
Born in Shoreham-by-sea, UK, in 1971.
Graduated in the Royal College of Art in 2000.
Political artist, social activist, his artwork is a reflexion of the human nature, social phobias and mass communication shows. His metanarrative paintings show ideal english gardens, imaginary landscapes, strange animals. His compositions are full of crowded landscapes that are always trying to emerge and dissolve.
Fascinated by mirror surfaces, his artworks have bubbles that sometimes can show hidden worlds, and every time you contemplate his sensible art pieces, there are new infinite meanings.
The works of Simon Willems are transformed by the abstraction of pigments and the figurative composition of his themes.
His imaginary and surrealistic situations mixed with utopic landscapes, and also his cinematographic view, are part of his research.
His work feature prominently in important public and private collections, and he has also exhibited widely in galleries and museums in both Europe and North America.
Public collections: The Zabludowicz Collection, The Leonard Nimoy Collection, Art Review, David Roberts Collection, Fondation COLAS, FRAC Auvergne, FRAC Haute-Normandie, Artotéque De Caen, Royal College of Art and the Frederick Weisman Foundation.
"The Library of Babel / In and Out of Place", Artist's tour, Zabludowicz Collection, London, 2010.
From Bacon to Zeller: Works on Paper
February 5 – July 31, 2020
Rogue Elements September 12 – October 20, 2012


text:
<?php
require('./../../../../../../application/libraries/oss/Alioss.php');

error_reporting(0);

function rename_timestamp($name) {
        $name_arr = explode('.',$name);
        $new_name = time().'.'.$name_arr[count($name_arr)-1];
        return $new_name;
}

function api_return($result, $data, $info, $encode = 'utf8') {
        $arr["result"] = $result;
        $arr["data"] = $data === null ? '' : $data;
        $arr["info"] = $info;

        $res = json_encode($arr);

        return $res;
    }

// Define a destination
//$targetFolder = '/uploads'; // Relative to the root

	$tempFile = $_FILES['Filedata']['tmp_name'];
	//var_dump($_FILES['Filedata']);exit;

	// Validate the file type
	$fileTypes = array('jpg','jpeg','gif','png'); // File extensions
	$fileParts = pathinfo($_FILES['Filedata']['name']);

	$file_name = rename_timestamp($_FILES['Filedata']['name']);
	$file_path = "images/car/{$file_name}";
	$uplaod = array(
			'object' => $file_path,
			'content' => $_FILES['Filedata']['tmp_name']
	);
	//var_dump($uplaod, $file_name, $file_path);exit;

	if ($_FILES['Filedata']['tmp_name']) {
		$object = $uplaod['object'];
		$content  = file_get_contents($uplaod['content']);

		$options = array(
			'content' => $content,
			'length' => strlen($content),
		);
		$alioss = new ALIOSS();
		$ret = $alioss->upload_file_by_content('dudubashi', $object, $options);

		$res = array();

		if ($ret->status == '200') {
			$res = array(
				'file_url'  => $ret->header['_info']['url']
				,'file_path' => '/'.$file_path
			);

			echo  api_return('0000', $res, 'success'); exit;
		} else {
			echo  api_return('0001', $res, 'error'); exit;
		}
	}

/*	if (in_array($fileParts['extension'],$fileTypes)) {
		move_uploaded_file($tempFile,$targetFile);
		echo '1';
	} else {
		echo 'Invalid file type.';
	}*/
//}
?>

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub