Snikiddy Snacks – Review [Video]

The people over at Snikiddy contacted me and asked if I would try their product.  I am sometimes leery of “healthy” snacks that are not actually healthy at all.  After looking at their website, I decided these snacks could be a healthy alternative and decided to try a few samples.

After the samples arrived, I knew exactly WHO I needed to get to try these for an honest opinion.  KIDS!  Kids will tell it like it is…no holds barred.  So, I asked my sisters three kids to come over and try the snacks and give their opinion.  Watch this video to see what they thought!

Obviously, they LOVED them.  It was so funny after the taping ended because Hannah said, “I really wanted to NOT like one.  On those shows on TV like Cupcake Wars, they always DON’T like one.  I was hoping there was one I didn’t like so it could be more like TV!”  Hilarious!

Now, for all the fun nutritional facts.  We will start with Hannah’s favorite, Eat Your Vegetables™:

Tastes Like a Dorito…but healthy!

Made with a blend of sweet potatoes, carrots, and navy beans.Excellent source of Vitamin A and more fiber and protein than most other snack products.Gluten and wheat freeFree of trans fats, high fructose corn syrup, hydrogenated oils and preservatives.4 Weight Watchers points plus per serving.Available in these flavors: Sea Salt, Sour Cream & Onion, Jalapeño Ranch.Next, we will talk about Haleigh’s favorite, the All-Natural Baked Fries: Yumm-O Fries!

Made with real potatoes, corn, and cheese.Contain 50% less fat than regular potato chipsGluten and wheat free.Free of artificial colors or preservatives, high fructose corn syrup, trans fats, hydrogenated oils, or cholesterol.Baked in a nut-free facility.3 Weight Watchers points plus per serving.Available in these flavors: Sea Salt, Cheddar Cheese, Original Seasoning, Bold Buffalo, Southwest Cheddar, Barbeque and Classic Ketchup.Now on to Hampton’s favorite, the All-Natural Cheese Puffs:Baked with real cheese and corn.Contain 50% less fat than potato chips.They are gluten and wheat free, without the drawbacks of other puff snacks.No artificial colors or preservatives, high fructose corn syrup, trans fats, hydrogenated oils, or cholesterol.3 Weight Watchers points plus per serving (One serving is 1/4 of a bag so it’s a big serving!)Available in these flavors: Grilled Cheese Puffs and Mac n’ Cheese Puffs

My husband and I both LOVED these snacks too!  His favorite was the cheese puffs followed by the fries.  I loved them all and couldn’t decide which I liked the best.  I am excited to try the Bold Buffalo fries.  Those sound like they would be right up our alley!

Would you like to purchase them in your area?  They are available in select stores around the country.  If you go to their website, you can put in your zip-code and it will tell you what locations are in your area.  I found out that these are sold not too far from where I live.  You better believe I will be heading out to stock up on these and all their yummy flavors.

Instead of buying them, do you want to try and WIN some samples for free?  Stay tuned for a giveaway soon where YOU could win some to try.

Until then, head on out and buy them because they are yummy!  Have you heard of these before?  I recently saw them in World Market store near my house.  What is your favorite healthy snack that tastes yummy?

My name is Jennifer, I’m 35 and I currently live in a suburb outside of Atlanta. I live with my husband, Jason and Shi-tzu, Maggie. I enjoy spending time with my family and friends.
My full time job is teaching elementary school. My part time job is private tutoring after school for grades K-6. I have been on my weight loss journey my entire life but just began to take it seriously two years ago when I decided it was time to start a family. I didn’t want to be one of those people who others look and and say, “Is she pregnant or just really fat?” At the rate I was going, that question would certainly be asked. So, two years ago I joined Weight Watchers. Now, closing in on losing 100 pounds, my life is healthier and I am happier. Now…bring on the baby!
My blog is here for you to be inspired, learn something new, and hear all about all new products I try. Join me on this weight loss journey as I go through ups and downs, good and bad, and continue to take it one day at a time!

View the original article here

Jobs? Revenue for Government? We Can Help

A new USA Today/Gallup poll finds two of the top three issues that Americans care about the most in this election year are … jobs and reducing the federal budget deficit. Check and check. America’s oil and natural gas industry can help with both. Respondents were asked to weigh the importance of a number of issues (see chart), and 92 percent said creating good jobs is “extremely/very important.” On cutting the federal deficit the figure was 86 percent. Jobs and revenue to the government – we can help.

With the right policies in place – increasing access to American natural resources, the right approach to energy regulation, encouraging energy investments and more – our industry could create 1.4 million jobs by 2030. Here’s how the Wood Mackenzie energy consulting firm charts the potential jobs growth:

Leadership is needed to make this happen. Industry is doing its part – investing in America – and it’s willing to do more.

As for tax revenue for government, to help with the deficit, Wood Mackenzie estimates a pro-energy development strategy could generate a total of more than $800 billion by 2030:

Again, in a struggling economy the oil and natural gas industry is adding jobs and supporting communities while generating revenues for government. Energy-driven economic growth that’s being seen in North Dakota, Texas, Pennsylvania and other states can be realized in other places with a true all-of-the-above (and below) energy strategy.

View the original article here

A Question of Leadership

On energy and jobs, we need leadership. Presidential leadership. We hear about an “all-of-the-above” energy strategy, but we are not seeing those words followed by substantive actions to expand and strengthen U.S. domestic production. At the same time we need leadership to capitalize on the oil and natural gas industry’s demonstrated ability to create jobs, millions of them – and billions in revenue to the government. We’re sitting on a lottery ticket, and we need to make sure we don’t squander this opportunity for our country.

During a conference call with reporters on API’s new “American Energy Works” campaign, President and CEO Jack Gerard challenged the administration to back its words with policies that help increase domestic oil and natural gas exploration and development.

Gerard said the United States is on the verge of a “new energy paradigm” in which North American energy resources are developed – in the process creating jobs and making the U.S. energy self-sufficient, perhaps within a dozen years. Again, it comes down to leadership. Gerard:

“It’s a game-changing opportunity we’ve never seen in our lifetimes. … The president says he’s for all of the above, but when you look beneath the surface the president’s policies, practices and regulations have actually discouraged production of oil and natural gas.”

“American Energy Works” tells the stories of a number of the people in the oil and natural gas industry, which supports 9.2 million jobs. These are the faces and voices of people benefiting from well-paying jobs, more of which could be created with an energy approach that’s all of the above – and below. Gerard:

“The oil and natural gas industry has been a major job creator at a time when overall U.S. job creation has stagnated. It has created thousands of jobs while other industries have been losing jobs or, at best, holding steady.”

The great news is this industry is ready to do more. With the right leadership and policies, it could create 1.4 million jobs by 2030. It’s an industry that’s investing in America, doubling down on her future. Our companies claimed five of the top 11 spots on the Progressive Policy Institute’s recent list of the top 25 nonfinancial U.S.-based companies, ranked by their 2011 U.S. capital spending. There can be more investment, more jobs, more energy – with the right leadership.

It’s not going to come from those running unrealistic “beyond” campaigns to halt the development of fossil fuels, including oil and natural gas. Gerard:

“They say we can stop using oil right now. If this campaign is beyond anything it’s beyond sense. These groups need to be asked, what is their solution to power America’s economy? … Their campaign would put a halt to the creation of jobs that have been a lifeline to thousands of working Americans. It would hurt people who need work and those looking for new opportunities.”

It might set us back centuries. So, a pair of questions:

Given America’s ample reserves of oil and natural gas, onshore and offshore, will there be leadership to develop our energy wealth or policies that keep that wealth off limits, unavailable?For those who oppose oil and natural gas: What’s your plan? What’s your plan to run an economy that currently gets more than 60 percent of its energy from oil and natural gas and which is projected by government to get nearly 60 percent of its energy from oil and gas over the next couple of decades?    

Gerard:

“Our industry is going to continue investing in America. And it’s going to continue to support common-sense energy policies that encourage development of all of our nation’s energy resources. That’s the only way we’ll be able to meet our future energy needs, supply affordable energy to our economy and, most importantly at this critical time, put people back to work.”

View the original article here

Act Like a Skinny Person

I cannot begin to tell you how much the emails, comments, and words of encouragement mean to me after yesterday’s post.  I know we ALL have slip-ups and it seems like lots of us have had a few lately.  I am so glad that when I continue to put myself out there (even though sometimes I don’t want to), you guys are blessed from it!  This morning, I got a text with this picture:

Isn’t she the cutest?

The text also said, “Track those points Swaffy!”

How could I NOT track after that cutie pie said to?!?

On a more serious note, it seems like many of us are in a slump lately.  At our meeting on Friday, my leader reminded us all that we need to “Act like a skinny person!”

How does a skinny person act?  Think about it for a minute.  Think of all the skinny people that you associate with.  Let’s look at some behaviors of skinny people in my life:

First, how do they eat?  Well, they eat very little.  When they are full, they actually STOP eating.  Even if they haven’t had dessert yet.  Crazy, right?!?If they have a slip up, do they beat themselves up day after day for it?  Well, I am sure SOME of them do but I think most just put on their big kid panties and move on.  I doubt they talk to themselves for days/weeks like I have.  I doubt they say how stupid they were to eat that.  I doubt they say they are fat and will never be skinny.  Nope, they move on.Next, what if they do overeat let’s say at lunch, what do they do?  Well, they have a very light dinner or might even skip dinner altogether.  What?!?   Not eat a meal?  No!Also, if they get off track for one meal an say eat too many calories, they IMMEDIATELY get back on track.  As in, the next second.  They don’t say, “Forget it, I will start over next week!”Lastly, if they have too much dessert or eat too many calories, they make up for it with extra exercise.  They will work out harder, or longer, or maybe even twice that day to burn a few more calories than normal.

This week, I want to challenge you (and myself) to act like a skinny person.  Get right back on track immediately after a slip up, exercise more, and no negative self talk.  We might not be skinny people but we can sure act like one.

Love this!

Did I forget any behaviors of skinny people?  If so, leave me a comment with how skinny people in your life act!

Photo Credit

My name is Jennifer, I’m 35 and I currently live in a suburb outside of Atlanta. I live with my husband, Jason and Shi-tzu, Maggie. I enjoy spending time with my family and friends.
My full time job is teaching elementary school. My part time job is private tutoring after school for grades K-6. I have been on my weight loss journey my entire life but just began to take it seriously two years ago when I decided it was time to start a family. I didn’t want to be one of those people who others look and and say, “Is she pregnant or just really fat?” At the rate I was going, that question would certainly be asked. So, two years ago I joined Weight Watchers. Now, closing in on losing 100 pounds, my life is healthier and I am happier. Now…bring on the baby!
My blog is here for you to be inspired, learn something new, and hear all about all new products I try. Join me on this weight loss journey as I go through ups and downs, good and bad, and continue to take it one day at a time!

View the original article here

Enter Innovation: Improving the Fracking Process

One of the factors involved in pulling energy from shale through hydraulic fracturing is how much water is needed – typically 2 to 4 million gallons per well. Though that’s not as much water as it sounds (electrical generation for the Susquehanna River Basin requires nearly 150 million gallons per day), it’s a public concern. More on water usage at the FracFocus website.

Water also is an industry concern. It isn’t free, and once the well has been stimulated with fracking, there’s waste water that has to be disposed of or recycled. Enter innovation. A number of companies are tackling the issue.

Schlumberger’s HiWAY flow-channel technology claims to use less water, with greater effectiveness:

“HiWAY technology fundamentally changes the way proppant fractures generate conductivity. The first technique of its kind, HiWAY fracturing creates open pathways inside the fracture, enabling hydrocarbons to flow through the stable channels rather than the proppant. This optimizes connectivity between the reservoir and the wellbore—resulting in infinite fracture conductivity.”

Other companies are marketing waterless alternatives, using other agents to apply pressure to the shale – producing microscopic fractures and introducing sand or other proppants to keep the cracks open so the oil or natural gas can drain from the shale and be collected.

Baker-Hughes has developed VaporFrac, combining a high-pressure nitrogen and/or carbon dioxide gas stream and an ultra-lightweight proppant slurry:

“This method safely creates a flow stream that is more than 90% gas, significantly reducing post-frac cleanup. The high energy of the gas phase makes for easy flowback. There’s a quicker tie into pipelines.”

GASFRAC Energy Services’ liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) gel is primarily propane, which the company says has a number of advantages in fracking:

“Since our gel regains permeability with the hydrocarbons we stimulate, we have the ability to recover 100% of the fracturing fluids within days of stimulation. This creates economic and environmental benefits reducing clean-up, waste disposal and post-job truck traffic, while creating higher initial production levels.”

No doubt, other companies, other energy innovators, are at work on this question. The point here is to show the kind of invention that’s being sparked by necessity surrounding water and fracking. Businesses are taking on this issue and others associated with energy development with the goal of making processes better, safer, more efficient and more environmentally friendly. When we hear about their stories, we’ll pass them along.

View the original article here

American Energy Works: Jill

Jill is a district manager for Total Safety, a company that provides service solutions for various aspects of the oil and natural gas industry, as well as power-generation and industrial markets. For her, the industry is about future job security: “It’s really an industry that’s not going away.”

Her video:

Visit American Energy Works.org for more videos and information about the people who’re at work for America’s energy future.

View the original article here

Bakken Shale: Supplying Energy, Supporting Communities

Check out a couple of new videos from North Dakota in which Hess employees and others talk about how energy development in the Bakken Shale formation is changing lives and growing the state’s economy.

Part 1:

Part 2:

The narrative isn’t complicated. As Hess’ Steven Fretland notes in the first video, the Bakken is believed to hold between 8 billion and 40 billion barrels of oil reserves. Companies developing the energy resources need workers, and workers need places to live and services to support their lives. Fretland, who was raised in North Dakota, says Bakken energy is reversing historic trends:

“Younger kids, after they left, you know, you hated to see them go but then they come back and they decide … it’s where they’re going to have their home and raise a family and hopefully retire with the industry.”

In the second video, Hess’ Steve McNally says hydraulic fracturing that has revolutionized energy development is responsible for North Dakota’s jobs boom:

“The impact on the North Dakota area and the U.S. in the short term is numerous jobs. There’s a tremendous amount of employment opportunities here. For anyone who wants to work, you can get a job.”

The point, underscored in this new industry spot, is that fracking has made an old frontier state like North Dakota a new energy frontier. Previously unreachable shale resources are now available in abundance through responsible development. Learn more at Energy From Shale.org.

View the original article here

EPA’s Costly, Unnecessary Soot Proposal

EPA continues to act tone deaf to the real-world needs of U.S. businesses and regular Americans. Its particle standards proposal issued this week is a good example of the kind of investment-squelching overregulation that ultimately could hurt the country’s energy future.

With the country’s air continuing to improve under the existing fine-particle soot standard, EPA proposed tightening it. The rule is scheduled to be finalized in December. Howard Feldman, API’s directory of regulatory and scientific affairs, says the rule’s benefits aren’t worth its costs:

“Air quality will continue to improve dramatically under the current government standards, but EPA’s proposal could substantially increase costs to states, municipalities, businesses and ultimately consumers without justified benefits. We are concerned that it could come at a significant economic cost and lost investments and limit our ability to produce the energy our nation needs.”

Between 2000 and 2010 concentrations of fine-particle soot fell by 27 percent, according to EPA. Feldman says three-fourths of Americans today live in areas where air quality meets today’s standards, and that the trend will continue – which suggests the new standard is unnecessary.

Feldman also says EPA based its proposal on “faulty scientific analysis,” that important data have been ignored and some of its purported findings are actually misinterpretations. How tightly the standards are set is a policy judgment. Because there is no bright line to guide the standard setting, the impacts of the standards matter. Feldman:

“A more stringent rule will discourage economic investment in counties that fail to meet new federal standards.  It’s in our interest to have both clean air and a vibrant domestic economy. However, the new standards would put many regions out of attainment, and companies considering a place to build a plant or refinery could perceive non-attainment as non-investment.”

Again, in the context of an economy trying to regain its footing, EPA is tossing out banana peels – with potential costs on a number of fronts that ultimately will hit real people. This economic anti-stimulus also is an unnecessary energy impediment.

It illustrates why, if we’re serious about a secure energy future, a common-sense regulatory structure is needed. By that we mean a regulatory process that’s open to all and based on sound science and legitimate cost-benefit analysis. By that standard EPA’s proposal falls well short.

View the original article here

Collaboration, Not Confrontation with EPA

EPA’s big study of the impact of hydraulic fracturing on drinking water is due in 2014, but an interim report might surface as early as the end of the year. Needed is focused, scientifically solid research that that will advance public discussion of shale energy development that has so much potential for our economy and future energy security.

Unfortunately, EPA’s study plan has deficiencies that ultimately could sap the integrity of the study’s findings. That’s one of the conclusions in a new analysis by the Battelle Memorial Institute. Stephanie Meadows, API upstream senior policy advisor, shared some of the study findings in a conference call with reporters:

“Battelle’s analysis of the plan, which we are releasing today, reinforces many of our previously stated concerns and raises some new ones. It finds deficiencies in the rigor, funding, focus and stakeholder inclusiveness of EPA’s plan. … We’re not calling on EPA to stop its study. We’re calling on them to do it right.”

API and America’s Natural Gas Alliance (ANGA) commissioned the Battelle study after EPA declined to engage with industry in a collaborative review of hydraulic fracturing. Battelle’s Bernard Metzger said his broad-based multidisciplinary team of engineers, oil and natural gas experts, toxicologists and others examined EPA’s study plan to determine its soundness. The findings include:

EPA is reaching beyond the relationship between hydraulic fracturing and drinking water resources, which was its charge from Congress, to broader oil and natural gas industry production activities.The expanded scope suggests there will be added complexity, risk, and uncertainty in EPA’s study, raising the level of difficulty in ensuring a scientifically rigorous result.Site data collected from companies comes from the years 2006-2010, making it likely some data in the final 2014 report could be nearly 10 years old. Changes at company sites in the intervening years likely will “render the data obsolete for the purposes of the study.”Case studies were selected from a limited and statistically biased pool and lack necessary baseline information which may result in incorrect and flawed conclusions. The plan suffers from a lack of “significant” industry collaboration, given industry’s extensive experience and expertise in hydraulic fracturing and associated technologies.

Metzger said gaps in EPA’s study planning can impact data quality:

“Quality cannot be built into the back end of a project through rigorous review; it must be built into each step of a scientifically rigorous process to ensure that the end product is high quality data that is defensible and achieves the study goals.”

ANGA’s Amy Farrell:

“We continue to believe a well-designed, scientifically rigorous study of hydraulic fracturing will confirm our industry’s ongoing commitment to safe and responsible development and that communities don’t have to trade the protection of the environment for the many economic, energy security and clean air benefits natural gas offers. We hope (EPA) will not only consider additional efforts to collaborate with the industry and other key stakeholders moving forward, but that they will carefully review the (Battelle) report and consider the critiques and recommendations for improvement and make adjustments as appropriate.”

View the original article here

Made in America: For a Sustainable Energy Future

Access, common-sense regulation and a governmental approach that encourages energy investments: Each one is integral to an American-made, more secure energy future. Getting there will require continued improvements in efficiency and investments in renewable energy – two areas where the oil and natural gas industry has been a leader. This is the fourth recommendation in API’s recent report to the two political parties’ platform committees.

Today, the U.S. uses about half as much energy for every dollar of GDP as it did in 1980, according to the Energy Information Administration:

Efficiency helps energy companies manage costs, which in turn makes them more competitive and allows them to bring more affordable energy products to consumers.  Efficiency also helps reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Industry is committed to technologies that help the environment, investing $71 billion in developments that reduce greenhouse gas emissions between 2000 and 2010 – far more than the federal government ($43 billion) and nearly as much as the rest of domestic private industry combined ($74 billion).

This is what energy companies do. They produce the oil and natural gas that run our economy now and which will continue to fuel it in the future. They work on efficiencies that will make our energy go further. They look to the future for additional resource options that will be necessary to complete the energy picture.

The question is whether governmental policies will or hinder these efforts. Some think the path to our energy future should be selected by Washington, using the tax code to preordain winners and losers. They think an industry sector that contributed nearly a half-trillion dollars to the economy in 2010, which already sends $86 million a day to the U.S. Treasury, should be taxed more.

The wrongheadedness of this path was detailed in a Wood Mackenzie study last fall, which compared the likely results of pro-energy development policies with policies leading to higher energy taxes:

With a pro-development approach, America’s oil and natural gas companies can add jobs, increase energy supply and generate more tax revenue for government. Higher taxes on our industry will likely lose jobs, decrease tax revenue and result in less energy production.

The United States has tremendous energy resources to support and grow our economy and meet the challenges of the future. With the right vision and leadership we can stride into the future confidently – as befits an energy-rich nation.

View the original article here

Another Study ‘Showing’ No Contamination from Fracking

Where to begin in a review of Pro Publica’s article on new research into the migration of subterranean brine to shallow water above? The inflammatory, overreaching headline? The leap from Duke University’s study to conclusions suggesting to the public that hydraulic fracturing is polluting drinking water?

Let’s start there. On that point the article is self-rebutting. See the fourth paragraph:

"No drilling chemicals were detected in the (shallow) water, and there was no correlation between where the natural brine was detected and where drilling takes place."

Then, near the end of the article:

"Nevertheless, (Robert) Jackson, one of the study's authors, said he still considers it unlikely that frack fluids and injected man-made waste are migrating into drinking water supplies. If that were happening, those contaminants would be more likely to appear in his groundwater samples, he said. His group is continuing its research into how the natural brine might have travelled, and how long it took to rise to the surface. 'There is a real time uncertainty,' he said. 'We don't know if this happens over a couple of years, or over millennia.'"

As for the study itself, Jackson and his team say they found that naturally occurring brine migrates upward to shallower depths. They say the risk of the migration could be greater in areas that have undergone hydraulic fracturing. Yet, there’s this from the study’s introductory summary:

“The occurrences of saline water do not correlate with the location of shale-gas wells and are consistent with reported data before rapid shale-gas development in the region …”

Energy In Depth has solid analysis on the study, here. Highlights:

The study fails (as Jackson notes above) to establish whether the migration occurs over 10 years or 10 million years. Without that, it’s impossible to determine whether the phenomenon is cause for concern.If brine is traveling up from thousands of feet below the surface, why haven’t the pathways Duke’s researchers identify allowed natural gas in the Marcellus region to leak out and disappear over time?There’s no discussion of whether the Marcellus Shale – which is largely a dry region with “virtually no free water,” according to Penn State’s Terry Engelder – even contains enough brinewater to leak.

Engelder, a Marcellus expert who was asked by the researchers to review their work, notes a number of questions the study leaves unanswered, reducing its usefulness. He writes:

"My review is predicated on the objective of your paper which is stated as a search for '...specific areas of shale-gas development in northeastern Pennsylvania that are at increased risk for contamination of shallow drinking water resources with deeper formation brines...' (the last sentence of your abstract). The term, risk, suggests that your paper veers from a conventional geology paper and enters into the realm of science-based advocacy or if you like, science policy."

Engelder is on target there. Unfortunately, the academics, wittingly or unwittingly, produced a study that is easily morphed into a siren call by opponents of natural gas production. Pro Publica’s article is Exhibit A. Exhibit B is a Bloomberg News story under this headline: “Pennsylvania Fracking Can Put Water at Risk, Study Finds” – despite the fact the study found no evidence of such a risk.

Words like “can,” “may” and “might” camouflage the point that the study didn’t find a correlation between the location of shale-gas wells and occurrences of saline water. To suggest otherwise in a news article is disingenuous and counterproductive in the national discussion of energy from shale.

As Engelder notes, the study is a platform from which advocates can mislead. On this story, The Associated Press got it right, focusing its report on what the study showed: “Gas drilling in northeastern Pennsylvania did not contaminate nearby drinking water wells with salty water, which is a byproduct of the drilling.”

View the original article here