text:
Choose update to view 22 Sep 2020 2 Dec 2019 19 Sep 2019 17 Jun 2019 3 Dec 2018 30 Apr 2018 6 Nov 2017 3 Nov 2016 30 Nov 2015 6 Dec 2014 20 Nov 2013 25 Jun 2012
Current policies overview
Contrary to the required peak and decline of emissions needed to achieve the Paris Agreement goal, emissions in the Russian Federation are expected to either flatline or continue growing from 2021, after the expected economic recovery-induced increase, until at least 2030.
However, Russia's emissions targets, which use 1990 as a reference, allow national emissions to continue an upward trend without missing its international commitments. According to our latest estimates, currently implemented policies will lead to emissions of between 2.0 and 2.2 GtCO2e in 2030 (excluding LULUCF), which is just 3-9% below 2018 emission levels. This represents a 32-37% decrease in emissions below 1990 levels, a level that is below the NDC targets which amount to a 19-24% decrease below 1990 levels (excluding LULUCF).
In March 2020, Russia released its draft long-term climate strategy, which contained emissions projections to 2050 (Russian Federation, 2020a). Both the "baseline" and more ambitious "intensive" emission projection scenarios fail to realise a reduction in emissions below 2017 levels by 2050, representing a severe lack of intent from the Russian government. According to the IPCC Special Report on 1.5°C, the world must achieve net-zero CO2 emissions by 2050 to limit warming to the 1.5°C long-term temperature goal of the Paris Agreement (IPCC, 2018). This demonstrates the extent to which Russia's projected emissions trajectories fail to live up to the level of ambition required, particularly from major emitters such as Russia.
Contained within Russia's draft long-term strategy are a list of policy actions required to achieve its stated priority of aligning Russia with the Paris Agreement (Russian Federation, 2020a). At present, there is little to no action being undertaken on any of these stated policy requirements. If Russia is to align itself with the goals of the Paris Agreement as it has stated it intends to, significant action in these areas and others will be required.
Following his re-election for a fourth term, in May 2018 President Putin pushed for the country achieving a technological, environmental and economic breakthrough. The Environment Ministry then drafted the "Ecology" (Экология) programme focusing on air pollution reduction, reforestation, and improving waste management (Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources, 2018). None of the ten directions in the Ecology programme relate directly to GHG emissions reductions, although the "clean air", "waste management" and "preservation of forest" could have important synergies with climate change mitigation. The budget that had been initially planned for the Plan was subsequently cut by 17%.
There has been little progress in climate action implementation in the Russian Federation. Yet, in late 2018, the Ministry of Economic Development proposed new draft legislation "On state regulation of emissions and the absorption of greenhouse gases" with a view to making Russian companies more competitive on emissions reductions and inspiring innovation in low-carbon industries (Ministry of Economic Development, 2019).
The legislation introduced in December 2018 was initially intended to establish a cap-and-trade system for major carbon emitters by 2025 and require companies to report their emissions. It would have allowed the government to introduce targets for GHG emissions and charge companies for excess emissions, which would feed into the Emissions Reduction Support Fund. However, due to fierce resistance from the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs, all of these measures except for the requirement of companies to report their emissions have been removed (Moscow Times, 2019b).
Two recent studies have shown the potential impact on Russia's economy under a scenario of concerted global climate action. Kahn et al. (2019) estimate that Russian per capita GDP could be up to 0.6% lower by 2050, while Makarov, Chen, and Paltsev (2020) project that such concerted action from the main importers of Russia's fossil fuels will reduce Russia's GDP growth rate by one half of a percentage point. Makarov, Chen, and Paltsev not only found that the Paris Agreement is expected to raise the risks of Russia facing market barriers to exporting its energy-intensive goods, but that redistribution of income from the energy sector would benefit the economy.
Russia's continued reliance on emissions-intensive forms of energy not only poses a challenge for the Russian economy in the future, it is also expected to exacerbate the impacts it faces from the changing climate. The 900-page report "On the status and protection Environment Russian Federation" produced by the Ministry of Natural Resources and Ecology breaks down the past and future consequences of climate change for the country (Ministry of Natural Resources and Ecology of the Russian Federation, 2017). It concludes that Russia is already being hit by the natural disasters and other impacts of climate change, and projects this trend to increase in the future (e.g. heatwaves, widespread forest fires, epidemics, drought, mass flooding, and food shortages). This was underscored by Russia's climate adaptation plan for the period to 2022, which was released in January 2020. In addition to the aforementioned impacts, it projects an increased risk to public health, degradation of permafrost in the northern regions with damage to buildings and communications, disruption of the ecological balance, including the displacement of some species by others, and the spread of infectious diseases and parasites (Russian Federation, 2019a).
Russia's energy sector accounted for 79% of all emissions without LULUCF in 2018 (the last year for which data is available). This is expected to fall to between 71% and 65% by 2030 as the share of renewable energy gradually increases and coal consumption begins to be displaced by natural gas (IEA, 2019).
Installed renewable power generation capacity sat at approximately 54 GW by the end of 2018, equivalent to 20% of the country's total power generation capacity, with hydropower representing the majority by far of the installed renewable energy capacity (52 GW).
A recent positive development is Russia's decision in late 2019 to extend the support programme for renewable energy beyond 2024, with 400 billion roubles (5.6 billion USD) allocated to construct 5.3 GW of renewable energy capacity between 2025 and 2035 (Lyrchikova, 2019). This is roughly double the 2024 renewable energy capacity target under the previous scheme of 5.6 GW. The funding split under the new programme is to be 60% towards wind energy projects, and 40% towards solar PV projects, resulting in 3 GW and 2.2 GW of new wind and solar PV capacity respectively.
Under current policy projections, there is a slight upward trend in the share of renewable sources in primary energy demand, from around 3.3% in 2017 to 4.5% by 2030. Russia has a 2.5% Renewable Energy Target for 2020 and a 4.5% target for 2024 (excluding large hydro) for the electricity sector, which we estimate would increase the share of RE sources slightly to 4.5% of primary energy demand by 2030. However, in 2019, just 0.16% of Russia's electricity came from non-hydro renewables compared to the global average of over 10%, indicating it is very unlikely Russia will meet even its modest short-term renewable energy targets (BP, 2020). The lack of projected progress on increasing uptake of renewable energy in Russia is shown below. This includes generation from large hydro.
Share of renewable electricity generation
In June 2020, Russia adopted its long-delayed Energy Strategy 2035, which confirms Russia's intention to heavily support its fossil fuel energy sectors beyond the next decade. The strategy suggests that Russia will continue to sell oil, coal, and gas to the rest of the world, while everything that hinders this goal is considered to be a threat and a challenge (Zhelenin, 2020).
Indeed the strategy assumes that "until 2035 fossil fuels will continue to form the basis of the global energy sector with a gradual increase in the share of energy based on the use of renewable sources" (Russian Federation, 2020b). These assumptions underpin both scenarios outlined in the document, and accordingly, there is little focus on renewable energy technologies, and no long-term targeted increase in generation from this sector. Instead the strategy advocates for the development of clean-coal technology and for minimising the flaring of natural gas as key measures to address climate change in the energy sector.
Despite this stated goal of minimising flaring, and the introduction in 2012 of a 5% limit on flaring of gas as a proportion of total production, the figure in 2016 remained close to 11% (Korppoo, 2018). In 2019, Russia saw its second consecutive year of increasing flaring volumes, maintaining its position as the world's largest flaring nation (Global Gas Flaring Reduction Partnership, 2020). At 23.21 billion cubic metres, Russia flared almost 30% more gas in 2019 than the next highest country, Iraq.
Natural gas made up 54% of Russia's total primary energy demand (TPED) in 2018, and this is projected to increase slightly to 55% by 2030 under current policies, mostly at the expense of coal. This high share of gas is problematic, as gas does not have a place in 1.5°C compatible scenarios and still produces significant GHG emissions in both its production and consumption (Masson-Delmotte et al., 2018).
Gas share
The current and projected future high reliance of the Russian economy on the fossil fuel sector is not without risk. Even before the massive decline in global oil demand caused by the COVID-19 related economic slowdown in early 2020, Russia and Saudi Arabia were already fighting an oil price war (S&P Global Platts, 2020). Russia refused to reduce oil output to keep global prices afloat, and in response, Saudi Arabia drastically increased supply, sending oil prices plummeting. This large oil price shock and the numerous others before it demonstrate the potential volatility inherent to Russia's strategy of relying on fossil fuel export revenues for economic growth and fiscal stability. Even prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, Russian energy exports and budget revenues were projected by one study to decrease by 15% and 17% below 2019 levels respectively by 2040 under its "energy transition" scenario (Mitrova, Khokhlov, Melnikov, & Perdereau, 2020). Conversely, the latest projections from the Russian government show oil, gas and coal exports all increasing to 2030 (Russian Federation, 2019b).
In addition, there are increasing signs of reticence from the banking sector to finance projects seen as contributing to climate change. A number of Western commercial banks have recently announced policies against providing financing for oil and gas projects in the Arctic, while in late 2019, the European Investment Bank announced a total ban on funding fossil fuel projects by the end of 2021 (Associated Press, 2020; Ekblom, 2019). A continuation of this trend will increase the risk that the envisaged expansion of Russia's fossil fuel exports fails to eventuate, with substantial negative implications for Russia's public finances.
In a sign that environmental concerns of investors may also be affecting corporate behaviour in Russia, Enel Russia, a large Italian-owned energy retailer, sold off its largest coal power station in 2019 (Moscow Times, 2019a). Enel Russia is a leading investor in renewable energy and has been attempting to divest itself of coal-fired power assets in order to make its portfolio of power plants greener.
Coal share in energy supply in Primary Energy
In contrast, Russian state development bank VEB said in November 2019 that it would provide financing of 34 billion roubles (USD32 million) together with VTB Bank for the construction of a new coal port in the east of Russia (Reuters, 2019). The terminal's initial capacity is expected to be 12 million tonnes of coal per year, eventually doubling to 24 million tonnes per year. Operations are scheduled to commence at the port in 2020.
Russia's agricultural sector in 2018 only amounted to 5.7% of total emissions without LULUCF. In the agriculture and forestry sectors, Russia's approach is primarily based on adaptation instead of mitigation. The government has implemented a series of measures to address the negative effects of extreme weather events and disasters, including drought and fires, and is currently working on expanding the scope of its agricultural climate policies to include the use of new technologies, including new forms of nitrogen fertilisers (Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources, 2017).
Negative emissions from Russia's forestry sector in 2018 equalled 27% of the country's total emissions excluding LULUCF. The Federal Forestry Agency developed the State Program of forestry development for 2020 (Rosleskhoz, 2013), which includes optimisation practices for afforestation and an improved methodology for risk calculation to minimise the effects of forest and peat fires.
Despite these policies, according to the most recent projections to 2050, included in the Third Biennial Report, instead of increasing, the current forestry net sink will drop to zero over the next 40 years mostly due to the reduction in the absorbing capacity of aging forests (Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources, 2017). This decline can be halted only by radical changes in forestry practices and by protecting significant amounts of primary forests from commercial clear-cutting (Kokorin & Korppoo, 2017).
In the national project "Ecology" (Экология) 151 billion roubles (2.11 billion USD) has been allocated for the "Preservation of Forests" for the period 2019-2024. The main focus of the policy is on the restoration of deforested land, with an aim to achieve 619 kha of reforestation and afforestation (Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources, 2020). The impact of these plans on emissions is unclear and has not been included in our current policy projections.
The waste sector contributed 4.4% to Russia's total emissions excluding LULUCF in 2018 (the last year for which data is available). Measures to curb emissions in the waste sector included in our projections are in line with the integrated management strategies for municipal solid waste, adopted through strategic legal documents between 2014 and 2017 (Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources, 2017).
In the national project "Ecology" (Экология) 457 billion RUB (6.4 billion USD) have been allocated for "waste management", of which 296 billion RUB (4.1 billion USD) has been designated for the creation of an integrated waste management system. Other areas include the reclamation of 191 landfills and the creation of infrastructure for hazardous waste management. The impact of these plans on emissions in unclear and has not been included in our current policy projections.


text:
Garden State Journal
BOTB
Catwoman in Batman Returns: Roaring Still, Thirty Years Later
Post author:Doug Strassler
Post category:Feature
In 1989, Tim Burton's Batman was a shock to the cinematic ecosystem: a comic book adaptation directed by an oddball filmmaker whose previous two at-bats had featured Pee-Wee Herman and an undead horndog that was exceptionally, groundbreakingly dark in appearance. In a summer full of "sure-thing" blockbuster sequels – Ghostbusters II, Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, Lethal Weapon 2 – the unproven Batman bested all of them, becoming the year's highest domestic grosser, and forever setting the stage for how Hollywood would pitch and market product in the future.
And one of the first test cases would be Batman's own sequel, Batman Returns, which celebrates the thirtieth anniversary of its release next month. Burton was back, and though the original film's scribe, Sam Hamm, gets a story credit, much of the screenplay was likely the brainchild of Daniel Waters, who Burton opted to bring in. Waters had also written Heathers, an arch black comedy that examined the complex world of women, and the damage they do both to themselves and others.
Batman Returns fights against itself in some ways, stylistically. A summer movie set during Christmastime, it's both cold and kinetic. Michael Keaton returned as the titular hero, but he needed new villains, so Hamm and Waters gave him two: The Penguin (Danny DeVito), an oddly deformed baby left for dead in the Gotham City sewers by his parents, who, after being rescued and raised by penguins beneath the city zoo, eventually emerges with designs on vengeance, and Max Schreck (Christopher Walken), a maniacal millionaire with a scheme to take over the entire city.
Actually, make that three villains – or, perhaps, two and a half. For Batman Returns also gave us Catwoman, certainly a known baddie in the Batman universe. Comic fans first met her in 1940, when she was introduced as "The Cat," as well as her alter ego, Selina Kyle. Over the years, both have been portrayed as a variation of an elusive antagonist and sometime love interest for Batman/Bruce Wayne. Witness the parade of Catwomen we've seen on celluloid: Lee Meriwether, Julie Newmar, Eartha Kitt. Halle Berry, Anne Hathaway, Zoë Kravitz, Camren Bicondova. Like many a Bond girl, these iterations are flirtatious and enigmatic, sometimes benevolent, sometimes self-serving, and sometimes both. Their crimes, usually larcenous, are not necessarily victimless but are rarely hurtful.
In Batman Returns, however, Catwoman steals the show.
Now is probably a good time to mention who plays Catwoman/Selina in the film: Michelle Pfeiffer, at the height of her career (the year of the film's release would mark the final of her three Oscar nominations), never met a character that she couldn't further deepen when bringing to life. So it's no surprise how easily she embraces the doubleness of the roles she was brought in to play (as a replacement for Annette Bening, who backed out of the film when she became pregnant with her second child). Beneath the latex, this is quite an emotionally honest performance. In finding the animalistic side of Selina and the humanity of Catwoman, she makes them iconic.
Here, Catwoman is a feminist icon precisely because this part doesn't adhere to anyone's existing script of what that could look like. Clearly, Batman Returns isn't exactly a realistic movie, but Selina Kyle's (Catwoman's, too) predicament is. She represents the boxed-in feeling of third wave feminism, when "having it all" could also turn out to mean taking hits on all sides. Of being told you are of equal status, only to learn that isn't so. Of not making good on your potential and being neglected, dismissed, even abused.
When we first meet Selina in Batman Returns, she's a meek milquetoast assistant to the abusive Schreck, and, well, what we've come to refer to as a cat lady in her personal life. Aside from her pet cat, she lives alone and comes home to answering machine messages from her mother, an unknown beau canceling their holiday plans, and a saleslady condescending to her singlehood. Selina walks through the door, calling out the kitschy phrase "Honey, I'm home!", then adding – to herself, to us, to anyone who'd listen – "Oh, I forgot. I'm not married."
Ever dutiful, Selina returns to Schreck's office late at night when she realizes she's neglected something. It's then that she stumbles upon Schreck's plot to use his new plant to drain the city of power, which would put all of Gotham City under his control. After a tense confrontation with Schreck, who is also in the office, he silences her for good, shoving her out his high office window. What happens next is either a rescue or a resurrection, depending on how one looks at it. A pack of feral cats lick the dead Selina and bring her back to life. Selina emerges a new woman, and us viewers have the privilege of watching her transform her life and her look (more on that later).
Selina has a new lease on life, and she pays for it by burning the candle at both ends, leading a double one. She returns to work (a surprise to Schreck, to say the least) by day, and patrols the streets of Gotham City by night as Catwoman (the costume, by the way, credited to the team of Bob Ringwood, Mary E. Vogt, and Vin Burnham, was brushed with liquid silicone, giving it a special sheen that enhances Catwoman's aura). But she's an equal opportunity offender. In her first appearance as Catwoman, she rescues a woman from being assaulted by one of the Penguin's goons, only then to reprimand the woman for relying on someone else, a (Bat)man, to come to her aid. "You make it so easy, don't you? Always waiting for some Batman to save you. I am Catwoman, hear me roar."
She embodies the film's ongoing theme of doubleness. Catwoman is encouraging this woman – all women – to figure out how to rescue themselves, to discover their own power and arm themselves with it. But it's tough love; she won't be warm or sisterly about it. She now represents the duality imposed on women in a patriarchal world, caught between the way she "ought" to be and the way she wants to be. What Catwoman craves is anomie, a major disturbance to the status quo, and if doesn't summon the devil, she certainly gives in to her id.
She's also certainly no angel. She joins forces with the Penguin to help further her blood vendetta against Schreck, causing further chaos, and even leading to the death of an innocent woman. She gets romantically involved with Bruce Wayne just as Batman and Catwoman begin facing off around town (Keaton and Pfeiffer, who had dated earlier in real life, have excellent chemistry as both of their respective alter egos). The two have a warring ethos when it comes to dealing with their darkness – she wants to harm, and he wants to help – but they're inextricably linked. Again, the two sides of Catwoman/Selina fight each other: "He makes me feel the way I hope I really am," Selina says of Bruce in the first half of the film. As Catwoman comes into her own, though, she says to him, "It seems that every woman you save ends up dead or deeply resentful. Maybe you should retire." She thinks that she doesn't need him to rescue her. But maybe she does still need him? Between their own personal wounds and messy intentions, the two have far more in common than they can ever realize – until, of course, they do (more on that later, too). It's complicated.
But what's clear is that being Catwoman sets her free. Breaking and vandalizing Schreck's department store, yelling at the security guards (male, of course), setting it to explode – there's an unbridled danger to her. But Catwoman sees this as empowerment. After being on the other side of danger, she's able to get off on being on the causal side of destruction. For her, there's order in this disorder.
It isn't all fun and games, though. Revisit the movie, and you may find you're actually remembering it wrong. Catwoman doesn't just bound around town, causing mayhem against the patriarchy. She actually only appears in a handful of scenes, and even though seemingly indestructible in her new guise, she repeatedly gets brought down by her male counterparts. Just like Schreck shoving her out into the night air, she literally falls to the ground again after a scuffle with Batman and with the Penguin, each time effectively ending one of her nine lives. Put another way, each man "kills" her. She may bounce back each time, but considerably worse for wear – the Catwoman costume and mask coming further and further apart at the seams.. If Selina is a woman on the verge of a nervous breakdown at the film's beginning, the rest is a film-length snapshot of a woman in the middle of that breakdown.
And it wouldn't be nearly as convincing without Pfeiffer's complete physical commitment to the role, which didn't just include the martial arts lessons and whip practice that were part of her pre-filming repertoire. She probably displays about eight or nine different kinds of posture throughout the film, based on just how close to the edge Catwoman and/or Selina are. And there's a mind-body meld throughout the film, where psychology meets physicality. There is gravitas in her madcappery. There is fury in her fragility. Scene for scene, Pfeiffer leans into the comedy and sexiness and the pathos, but she never lets us forget that she is a whirling dervish. And she is dancing as fast as she can.
There's also the curious case of the bird! At one point, Catwoman plots with Penguin against Batman in his lair, but the scene is push-pull. She's seducing him to get what she wants, and then she makes a power move by putting his bird in her mouth.
Reader, Pfeiffer really did this. The early 1990s were still an era of practical effects as opposed to CGI. Which means that Pfeiffer actually put the live bird in her mouth. Burton himself said "She had a live bird in her mouth while the camera was rolling. It was four or five seconds, and then she let it fly out. "I don't think I've ever been so impressed." Talk about fearlessness.
Vocally, the performance is also a marvel as well. Pfeiffer begins the film with Selina speaking softly, reflecting her lack of self-confidence. Why speak louder, if no one will listen? Once she becomes Catwoman, the voice drops. It's deeper and richer, and she luxuriates in every line delivery. I haven't seen another example of an actress, well, lapping up each line of dialogue apart of Kim Cattrall as Sex and the City's Samantha Jones, which of course came after this film. "Who's the maaaaaan behind the baaaaaat?" she purrs. "Maybe he can help me find the [voice deepens] woooooman…behind the cat." Later in the film, the voice begins to break as her grip becomes increasingly tenuous. (All the more impressive considering this film was likely filmed wildly out of sequence.)
Then, of course, there's her laugh, which continues to become louder, more histrionic, an ever-growing plea for help. Pfeiffer never shies away from the character's darkness. Throughout every encounter she has, Selina and Catwoman are never not full of hurt. Beneath every flirtatious line, there are tell-tale signs that she is about to combust. Will she explode or implode? Or both?
As Batman Returns hurtles towards its climax, Catwoman/Selina emerge as the movie's true joint protagonist. The Penguin and Schreck are true, unredeemable villains (even if the Penguin has an inevitably sad backstory of his own), and Batman is (seemingly unintentionally) relegated to the sidelines. Selina finally gets what she wants – a rematch with Schreck. We worry that she won't make it, especially after he takes out a gun. Is this an intentional callback to her earlier line at Schreck's? "You poor guys. Always confusing your pistols with your privates?" It could be. Either way, the phallic symbolism is there. Schreck shoots, but doesn't score – each bullet takes another one of Catwoman's lives, but remember she has nine of them! (This is the only example of science fantasy over realism in Burton's Batman universe. The other villains, all men, were ultimately mortal.)
Unmasked, untethered, and chanting "all good girls go to heaven" with each new bullet wound, Catwoman seems to have lost her last grasp on reality just as she and Selina finally merge personalities. But she finds the redemption she needs. As Batman/Bruce pleads with her from the perimeter of the action, she kisses Schreck using a taser that electrocutes them both, leading to his and the Penguin's deaths.
But what of Selina? She's nowhere to be found in the wreckage. Bruce sees and pursues the silhouette of a crouching cat through the snow, only coming across Selina's own pet in an empty alleyway. He'll take that cat home to protect it in a way he never could for Selina. Meanwhile, the last shot of the film is a pan up to reveal that Catwoman is indeed alive, looking out toward the Bat-Signal. We mourn Selina (I mean, we do know that she has a mom who will never see her again), but cheer for whatever changes Catwoman has wrought in the corrupt city of Gotham (And there were likely to be more changes – Warner Bros. had planned to spin Catwoman off into her own franchise, which, due to a variety of reasons, never came to be.)
In a sense, Catwoman has now proven to be the most powerful superhero the two Batman movies have heretofore seen. The other villains have died, and even Batman is powerless to help her or reign her in; he is, essentially, castrated. Only Catwoman fulfills her mission to the end, as disastrous as it may be. She's both femme fatale and Christlike figure, a mother to her martyred self, her own personal pieta.
And Pfeiffer was often singled out for her work in Batman Returns. From Janet Maslin's review in The New York Times: "Fully inhabiting this vixenish character, she turns Catwoman into a fierce, seductive embodiment of her earlier dissatisfaction. 'Life's a bitch,' she slyly declares. 'Now so am I'… there is at least as much personality to the performance as there is visual appeal, as evidenced by the bored, feline drawl with which she delivers her best lines. 'Oh, please,' she yawns later, when propositioned by the eager, Humpty Dumpty-shaped Penguin (Danny DeVito). 'I wouldn't touch you to scratch you.'
From Owen Gleiberman's review in Entertainment Weekly: "The runaway star here is Pfeiffer, whose performance is a sexy, comic triumph. Neither crime fighter nor villain but something in between, her Catwoman is a post-Madonna feminist: She finds emotional liberation in acting salacious. Pfeiffer has perfected a slinky-predatory walk, and she speaks in the honeyed tones of a phone-sex vixen but with an undertow of dark knowledge, as if she had secrets that scared her."
But not everyone was so immediately enamored of the performance.
The Oscar ceremony that celebrated 1992 is (somewhat) fairly maligned for dubbing itself "The Year of the Woman," as though only one year should be allotted to salute their achievement. But it's fair to say that the year was blessed by a plethora of fascinating performances by actresses: Judy Davis in Husbands and Wives, Gong Li in The Story of Qiu Ju, Helena Bonham-Carter, Vanessa Redgrave, and Emma Thompson in Howards End, Mary McDonnell and Alfre Woodard in Passion Fish, Susan Sarandon in Lorenzo's Oil, Marisa Tomei in My Cousin Vinny, a Miranda Richardson trifecta (The Crying Game, Damage, Enchanted April).
And Pfeiffer was indeed nominated that year – but for Love Field, a more conventional period drama with which her representation had an easier time pushing her into the Best Actress race. So why wasn't her Catwoman received with even more open arms when first released? There are a couple of reasons. First, to many it was unclear whether this film should be categorized as lead or supporting. If votes were cast for her, they may have been split between the two categories. (And since this happened in pre-internet times, there has been very little visibility into whether her team took out any trade ads or other campaign tactics one way or the other.)
Secondly? Probably a predictable snobbery. Batman Returns was a comic book movie and a commercial blockbuster. Until recently, those films rarely entered into the Oscar conversation – and if they did, it would be even rarer that they were included in the acting categories. (Sigourney Weaver's well-deserved nomination for 1986's Aliens was the rare welcome exception.)
Yes, eventually both Heath Ledger would win Best Supporting Actor for playing The Joker in Christopher Nolan's grim The Dark Knight, but the zeitgeist had already begun to embrace the aesthetic value of these films. And in his case, the award also was a way to honor his career following his tragic death prior to the movie's release. Joaquin Phoenix's subsequent Best Actor win for Joker also falls within what the Academy has traditionally considered acceptable Oscar fare, as it is more of a bleak origin story about a dangerous incel than a typical action-oriented comic book adaptation.
It wasn't until years later that a fandom (pfan-dom?) was built around the role with the respect it deserved, and one that continues to grow, as witnessed by the recent media maelstrom that occurred when new footage of Pfeiffer decapitating Schreck's store mannequins in rehearsal emerged. Newly embraced as a postmodern hero, the love for Catwoman seems ceaseless now – but it was late to start.
And perhaps there is another reason why many in the industry overlooked Pfeiffer at Oscar time for Batman Returns – one that might even have to do with the very glass ceiling Catwoman herself tried to shatter with her whip. Is it just possible that many just didn't Pfeiffer seriously enough? It may seem hard to believe since she's such a pro, but even after two Oscar nominations for Dangerous Liaisons and The Fabulous Baker Boys, she still belonged to a generation of actresses who were well-regarded and successful but considered lesser than their more properly trained and decorated contemporaries, like Glenn Close, Sally Field, Diane Keaton, Jessica Lange, and Meryl Streep.
Some of Hollywood's most promising leading actresses faced an uphill battle getting their due: Ellen Barkin, Bridget Fonda, Darryl Hannah, Jennifer Jason Leigh, Andie Macdowell, Demi Moore, Meg Ryan, Sharon Stone, and Kathleen Turner, to name a few. And when their movies did make loads of money or earn critical acclaim, credit often went to their male co-stars or directors. (Similar fates befell even the biggest stars of the era – Oscar winners like Geena Davis and Jodie Foster and the biggest star of all, Julia Roberts – whose careers all suffered when their films lost money, while their male counterparts continued to flourish and get additional chances.) The age-old gender barrier had yet to fade away. It still does.
Perhaps that's why the only compliment The Washington Post paid Pfeiffer in Batman Returns was "delightfully purry." Or why, when Pfeiffer received her Lead Actress Oscar nomination for Baker Boys after the rarest of hat tricks, a clean sweep of the four major critics' awards (Los Angeles Film Critics Circle, National Board of Review, National Society of Film Critics, and New York Film Critics Circle), The Boston Herald's James Verniere attributed her success by saying: "I think we can write off the enthusiasm for her as the Testosterone Vote," signifying that these significant accolades were more for looks than talent. Misogyny, folks. As Max Schreck could tell you, it runs rampant.
So let's dig in a bit further to re-focus on the skill on display in this movie. Because beyond the fascinating, sexy strengths of Catwoman, it's Pfeiffer's work as Selina that makes it a performance for the ages. To prove it, let's explicate two scenes from Batman Returns.
The first one is the scene in which Selina transforms herself into Catwoman following her life-saving cat bath. This is where Burton's direction, Hamm's and Waters' script, and Elfman's score go into overdrive. Selina returns home, like we saw her do earlier that same night, but in a fugue state. She repeats the "Honey, I'm home" line like an automaton, chugs milk from her fridge and spills it everywhere, and bumps absentmindedly into her furniture.
It's when she hears a new message from a woman advertising perfume that she ultimately loses it: "One whiff of this in the office and your boss will be asking you to stay after work for a candlelight staff meeting for two." That's enough to send anyone with your average passive-aggressive relationship with your boss into a tailspin, so given that her own boss has just pushed Selina to her "death," it certainly sets her off. She ransacks her own home, shoving her stuffed animals into her garbage disposal and destroying her dollhouse, effectively "killing" any element of her life that represents girlhood. But she's also rejecting the paradigm of domesticity and security that she has heretofore held onto.
What is the first step she takes now that she has chosen to run towards the danger? She grabs a black latex jacket and gets to work at her sewing machine, transforming it into a slinky, body-hugging outfit. This sequence is a silent aria, abetted considerably by editor Chris Lebenson's rapid editing and Stefan Czapsky's cinematography, using more and more frantic angles as Selina gets more and more intense. Again, her physicality is unmatched here. The truest sign of verisimilitude? You can see snot.
Having taken an aerosol can to the neon sign that once read "Hello There," she emerges with a new slogan in the background. "Hell here," it now reads. Because really, that's all Selina Kyle had ever known. Has Catwoman taken control in a way Selina never was able to? Can she "win?" This scene makes us believe that's a possibility. Of course, by film's end, we know this this outcome is likely not so good, making her predicament even more palpable.
By the time of Pfeiffer's other key scene, Catwoman has indeed begun to come apart, and we see the results in the guise of Selina at Schreck's holiday masquerade party. Decked in a blue sequined gown, hair up and off to the side, Siouxsie and the Banshees' "Face to Face" (a perfect choice) playing, she descends the staircase. She sees Bruce, clad in a tuxedo. Ironically, neither of the two who spend half of the film in costume are wearing masks.
In a previous scene, Batman and Catwoman had been fighting on a rooftop when Batman had seen mistletoe hanging. If the fighting is essentially coded sex for the two of them, the ensuing dialogue continues their congress. "Mistletoe can be deadly if you eat it," he says. "A kiss can be even deadlier…if you mean it," she purrs. Now, on the dance floor, Selina, seemingly more emboldened as Catwoman becomes more adrift, intimates that she would like to go to bed with him. She's tired of wearing masks, she says. With every breath, Pfeiffer's getting at the hunger, the longing Selina feels. She's been sublimating her entire life and is getting ready to blow.
The tension continues. She looks up and sees mistletoe at the party. "A kiss under the mistletoe," she says. "You know, mistletoe can be deadly if you eat it," it's her turn to say. "But a kiss can be even deadlier if you mean it –" it's Bruce's turn to repeat, only he doesn't even need to finish the sentence. Finally they're onto each other. Not only are they not in costume, they are now completely exposed to each other.
Oh! My! God!
This scene. This scene. This scene is everything. It is the height of intensity. It's all crashing down at once on Selina. And it gets even better. They stare at each other. Pfeiffer has Selina in tears, makeup everywhere. Bruce pulls Selina back into an embrace to keep dancing. "Does this mean we have to start fighting?" she says. After all she's been through, Selina no longer knows who she is, nor does she believe she has any agency left.
I said it then, and I maintain it now: had she lucked out at the Oscars that year, this would have been her clip. It is Shakespearean in depth. This is dazzling, non-judgmental, visceral acting.
In a performance that towers over so many, these two sequences alone make Michelle Pfeiffer's Catwoman immortal. But the secret to the character's success isn't her fierce strength; it's her vulnerability. Because that's what's universal. That's what is most relatable. And that's why Catwoman in Tim Burton's Batman Returns doesn't have nine mortal lives – instead, she will live on forever.
The Why of the Gun
"The Mighty Ducks" Turns 30 Today!
Romesh Ranganathan brings down the house at Town Hall
He Is…He Said: "A Beautiful Noise" is Diamond in the rough
Happy 30th Anniversary, "Matinee!"
Push Rewind: Looking Back at the Movie Music of 1992, Part 1

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


The Indian Army is planning to shift the headquarters of the Rashtriya Rifles, which oversees the thrust against terrorists in Kashmir, from New Delhi to Srinagar. A key cog in the anti-terror operations of the Indian Army, Rashtriya Rifles might soon find its head, the Director-General, in Srinagar. The Army is conducting its biggest ever restructuring exercise to make it more lethal by improving efficiency and plug the gaps in personnel distribution. The change in the headquarters will accelerate the decision making and the execution of operations against terrorism. For example, the Assam Rifles, which has 45 Battalions and maintains the internal security in the Northeast and along the Myanmar Borders, has its headquarters in Shillong. The Rashtriya Rifles is a counterinsurgency force having 65 battalions and is comprised soldiers deputed from other army units. "It is logical that the head of the force is closer to the formation for quick decision making," said an officer on the condition of anonymity. The study is all-encompassing with its mandate covering every department and setup which includes the important Directorate Military Operations and the Military Intelligence. The Army Chief, General Bipin Rawat, has stated that although there is adequate personnel deployed at each headquarter, a scarcity of troops arises in the battalions. In an attempt to counter this shortcoming, the army is planning to do away with the headquarters at the Brigades level. The Indian Army is organised into Units, Brigades, which are comprised of three units, Division - having three Brigades under them, and Corps - which are comprised of three Divisions. The Army Chief also mentioned restructuring the Directorates that handle the Information Warfare (IW) and the Public Information (PI), with plans being discussed about merging the two. The IW comes under the ADG Military Operations and the PI Comes under the ADG PI. Speaking at a seminar on Social Media in Delhi the Army Chief said, "As was rightly brought out, do we need a directorate general of information warfare or can we (do it) within our own organisation, that is we have the ADGMO-IW, we have the ADGPI, can we amalgamate some of our existing resources and ensure that social media becomes part and parcel of our life in the army?" Sources told ANI that the Army is also studying the possibilities of merging Director General of Military Training (DGMT) and the Army Training Command. The DGMT in Sena Bhawan, New Delhi, functions under the Deputy Chief of Army Staff and handles the policy formation for the Army, while the Army Training Command, which is mandated to execute these policies, is headquartered in Shimla. Both oversee training. This is the biggest every restructuring study being conducted in the Indian Army which is going to complete by December this year as the Army Chief wants its execution to start at the beginning of 2019.


text:
Sorting...
SNL Knowledge Center
Email Questions and Comments
Phone Support (US & Canada):
Phone Support (Europe, Middle East & Africa):
Phone Support (Asia-Pacific):
Phone Support (Latin America):
Phone Support (Australia):
Phone Support (India):
Phone Support (Brazil):
"" has been set as your landing page. This page will load on login to SNL.
Thursday, June 18, 2015 5:42 PM ET
Finally over $50B, First Republic grows wealth management through deal
To receive real-time alerts for this regular feature, click here.
By Kiah Lau Haslett and Muhammad Umer Shahid
First Republic Bank (FRC-US) $ 153.71
Acertus Capital Management LLC Morristown, New Jersey
Andorra Banc Agrícol Reig SA Les Escaldes, Andorra
Data feature produced by S&P Global Market Intelligence research groups in cooperation with the news department to highlight emerging trends and topics of interest.
First Republic Bank's latest wealth management acquisition offers the company a more attractive and higher-earning asset base in the wake of the bank's first quarter above $50 billion in assets.
First Republic's First Republic Investment Management Inc. announced it would acquire Constellation Wealth Advisors LLC for approximately $115 million. Constellation had wealth management assets of $6.1 billion as of March 31. The six partners at the firm signed long-term employment contracts as part of the deal. The acquisition is expected to be modestly accretive to earnings in 2015 and close in the third quarter.
The deal is a "win-win" for First Republic, which can grow the steady fee income from the wealth management stream and take advantage of cross-selling opportunities to Constellation's existing customer base, said FBR Capital Markets managing director Paul Miller. The transaction was valued at 25.4x earnings and had a price to assets under management of 2.68%. Although Miller said the valuation seemed "a little bit expensive," the bank has excess amounts of capital and a stock that he pointed out trades at 227.0% of tangible book.
In addition to the fee income, wealth management acquisitions are attractive to banks because they feature low-risk weightings and loyal clients. First Republic is in an opportunistic position to make acquisitions, but has also been successful at growing the business line organically, said Sean Stannard-Stockton, president and CIO of Ensemble Capital Management. Ensemble Capital had about 257,000 shares in First Republic, valued around $16.3 million, according to SNL's institutional ownership data. He said while there were scant disclosures around Constellation's financials, the price seemed reasonable. He added that Constellation has offices in Menlo Park, where many of First Republic's customers reside. The Constellation deal is the bank's second since 2012, when it purchased Luminous Capital Holdings LLC, which had an announced price to assets under management of 2.27%.
Wealth management remains an attractive business line for many banks. The noninterest income streams have only grown in importance in the wake of muted demand for loans, although Miller pointed out that First Republic competitors such as money centers Wells Fargo & Co. and JPMorgan Chase & Co. have also tried to grow their wealth management arms in recent years. The success and reception of this deal, as well as its strategic fit into the company, means there could be more in store.
"[First Republic is] a good bank … and I wouldn't be shocked if you see them do something very similar in the next couple of months," Miller said.
The deal is in line with First Republic's desire to gain scale in the wealth management space, wrote Evercore analyst John Pancari in a June 18 report. The business line is "still a relatively small" contributor to the top line at the bank, accounting for about 9% of First Republic's revenue in 2014. He believes the Constellation deal could push wealth management revenue up to 11% to 12%, underlining the importance of acquisitions in increasing scale.
The fact that First Republic is doing deals also dampens industry rumors that the bank could be in play, he added. First Republic had been the target of speculation following the City National Corp./Royal Bank of Canada deal. The Wall Street Journal reported that RBC had expressed interest in First Republic, and it was rumored that other Canadian banks could have similar intentions. Pancari noted that the bank's stock has outperformed peers by 640 basis points since the announcement, but this deal could indicate management's commitment to remaining independent.
"In our view, the Constellation acquisition represents First Republic's continued efforts to refine its business model, and more important, likely removes speculation that [First Republic] is a seller" in the near term, he wrote.
The acquisition comes as First Republic closes its first quarter above $50 billion in assets, making it subject to heightened regulatory scrutiny. The bank announced in the second quarter of 2014 that it would book unexpectedly high expenses associated with the regulatory build, which would increase its efficiency ratio to a range of 59% to 62%. Since then, management has worked to control costs and bring the ratio down.
"The market in our opinion dramatically overacted to the downside. The stock was down toward $47 and it's $64 today. We thought it was a tremendous bargain at that time," Stannard-Stockton said. "And we think that the company is doing all the right things to grow. The regulatory costs going along with that is part of the cost of being a large bank. They are the first bank to cross the $50 billion threshold organically, and we think they have a tremendous long-term growth runway."
Salman KHAN contributed to this article.
Article amended at 2:24 p.m. ET on June 19, 2015, to add a chart displaying acquisitions of wealth management firms by banks.
Article Feedback Email this Story Display Printable View Tweet
SNL Editors' Picks
Rio Tinto/BHP Arizona copper JV land exchange cleared by Trump administration
Gold development acquisitions to pick up, Osisko Gold Royalties CEO says
A 'smoking hole in the ground': Blackjewel's coal bankruptcy plan raises concern
Data Dispatch: Most-shorted S&P 500 stock of 2020 surges, putting squeeze on short sellers
Health monitoring drives US market for smartwatches, fitness trackers
Cyber insurance claims rising for small, medium-sized businesses
Medicare adviser weighs up post-pandemic telehealth coverage vs. fraud risks
Plaid still a takeout target thanks to bank connection platform – analysts
Data Dispatch: Hong Kong healthcare IPOs finish 2020 on strong note amid COVID-19 disruptions
Usage of this product is governed by the SNL Master Subscription Agreement or separate S&P Agreement, as applicable.
Site content and design Copyright © 2021, S&P Global Market Intelligence
SNL Interactive is an offering of S&P Global Market Intelligence.
S&P Global Market Intelligence, 55 Water Street, New York, NY 10041


Whatever has happened in our past, no matter how painful, humiliating or frustrating the experience may have been, know that the only way that we can move forward and work towards creating our best life is to make peace with the past.
One of the main reasons why the past seems to haunt us is because whether it is done consciously or not, we are in denial of our past. We secretly hoped that if we do not acknowledge our past, then it never actually happened. This way, we don't have to deal with the pain, the hurt, and the disappointment of past experiences. Ironically, by denying the existence of our past, we ended up creating more pain rather than the peace and relief we so desperately crave.
As Pema Chödrön, a renowned spiritual teacher, said: "Nothing ever goes away until it teaches us what need to know". When we constantly try to distance ourselves from our past, we deprive ourselves of learning the valuable lessons that our past experience came to teach us. No matter how hard we try to escape our past until we come to acknowledge it and learn from it, we are likely to encounter similar experiences in our present and future.
Choose to own your story and shed a much-needed light on your past. No matter how painful and dark you believe your past has been, choose to appreciate it. Afterall, without it, you would not have become the strong individual you are today.
Admittedly, I've been guilty of playing the blame game when things don't exactly go as I had anticipated. There were moments where I would quickly point the fingers to others and/or external factors as soon as things go wrong. As far as I'm concerned, I was the victim and it was always everyone else's (or anything else's) fault but mine.
In order to create our best life, we must learn to let go of stories where we cast ourselves in the role of "poor me". While I am in no way dismissing our past pains and sorrows, we can not expect to grow and progress towards our best selves by dwelling on the past and blaming others for treating us badly.
As an adult, all the blame we have put on our parents, teachers etc. when we were in our youth are no longer valid. If you desire a better way of living and to create a better life for yourself, learn to cultivate mindfulness and stop blaming others or external circumstances for things that have gone awry.
However painful it may seem at first to accept that we are entirely responsible for our lives – both the good and the bad experiences. Know that it could be the very thing that will finally set us free.
Carrie Fisher, the late renowned actress who came to fame starring as 'Princess Leia' in the Star Wars film series, had so wittily said: "Holding on to anger is like drinking poison and expecting the other person to die". By holding on to anger, resentment, and grudges we have for those who had wronged us, we are actually causing more harm to ourselves than the person we wish to seek revenge on.
The reason why it is so difficult for some of us to forgive others is that we mistakenly equate forgiveness to acknowledging that "what you did is OK" when in fact forgiveness actually means "I may not agree with what you've done, but I'm willing to let it go". Forgiving others is not the same as creating justifications for the harmful actions others have done to you. Rather, it is a gift you give to yourself as it is a vital part of the healing process. In other words, you do not forgive someone so they can feel better. You forgive someone so YOU can feel better.
Last not but least, we must learn to wholeheartedly forgive ourselves. Understand that taking responsibility for our past does not mean that we should dwell on our mistakes and eternally beat ourselves up over it. There is nothing we can do now to change the past. No matter how catastrophic and shameful our past may seem, we can always make the conscious decision to find valuable life lessons to be learned from it and create ourselves a better and brighter future. As the great Maya Angelou eloquently advised: "when we know better, we do better".
Sometimes we have a hard time letting go of the past because we refuse to make a decision and/or take action in order to move forward. We let our fear of stepping out of our comfort zones or making wrong decision – paralyzes us. So, we procrastinate and succumbing to inaction. Ironically, by doing so, we often end up causing ourselves, even more, pain and disappointments.
Realize that in order for us to create and live our best life, growth, progress, and change are essential. Hence the next time you are tempted to resist change and take action, remember that while change may initially be risky and painful, nothing is as painful than being stuck where you don't belong.
When we constantly rehashing past events in our minds, it becomes all too easy to believe that it will repeat itself in the future. What we may not realize is that by obsessing over how bad the circumstances were, we are actually actively making that fear turn into reality. As the old saying goes "energy flows where your attention goes".
Whenever you find yourself dwelling in the unpleasantness of past situations, take a deep breath and remind yourself that feeling of being stuck is merely a state of mind. Make a conscious decision to shake off your negative thought patterns and replace them with positivity.
Decide right then and there that you are in charge of your future – that the past does not equal the future. Remember that you always have the power to remain positive and hopeful regardless of what has happened in the past!
Interested in learning more tips and gain access to professional support to let go of the past? Why not sign yourself up for a weekend meditation retreat? At BookMeditationRetreats.com, we have a vast selection located all over the globe!


Amid the neighborhoods of Chicago's North Side, rises a revitalized community rooted in a rich cultural past. Where the history of original 1938 architecture is infused with the modern touches of today's lifestyle. Where expansive rolling greens with the river next door are enhanced by thoughtful amenities designed for people from all walks of life.
Nestled between Bucktown, Lincoln Park, Roscoe Village and the Chicago River, Lathrop is next door to some of the city's favorite shopping, dining and social spots. Whether you prefer to walk, bike, take the "L," catch a bus or hop in the car, you'll find neighborhood amenities within easy reach.


text:
De AlphaTauri AT04 is een Formule 1-auto die gebruikt wordt door het Formule 1-team van AlphaTauri in het seizoen 2023. De auto is de opvolger van de AlphaTauri AT03. De AT04 rijdt met een motor van Red Bull Powertrains en werd onthuld op 11 februari 2023 in New York. De AT04 zal worden bestuurd door Nyck de Vries die aan zijn eerste voltijds seizoen gaat beginnen en Yuki Tsunoda die voor het derde seizoen op rij voor het team rijdt.

Resultaten

 * Seizoen loopt nog.

Formule 1-auto uit 2023
Formule 1-auto van AlphaTauri

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


text:
Troubadour International Poetry Prize 2016 #seanocarolan.com #Writing #Poetry
Troubadour International Poetry Prize 2016
judged by jane yeh & glyn maxwell
prizes: 1st £5,000; 2nd £1,000; 3rd £500
first prize sponsored by cegin productions
plus (new!) £100 troubadour restaurant gift voucher
plus (new!) bottle of troubadour champagne (to be collected at troubadour coffee-house)
(both for poems from London & South-East)
plus 20 prizes of £25 each
plus autumn 2016 coffee-house-poetry season-ticket
and a prize-winners' coffee-house poetry reading with jane yeh & glyn maxwell on mon 31 oct 2016
for all prize-winning poets
submissions, via e-mail or post, by tue 21 jun 2016
Glyn Maxwell (b. Welwyn Garden City) was named as a Poetry Book Society 'New Generation' poet in 1994 & has written novels, libretti, drama, radio drama, & prose including On Poetry (Oberon, 2012), as well as editing a collected edition of Derek Walcott's poetry. His nine collections of poetry include a 'selected poems', One Thousand Nights and Counting (2011) & his latest, Pluto (Picador,2013).
Jane Yeh (b. New Jersey, ed. Harvard University) holds master's degrees from Iowa Writers' Workshop & Manchester Metropolitan University. Her first collection Marabou (Carcanet, 2005), was shortlisted for Whitbread, Forward, & Aldeburgh prizes; her latest is The Ninjas, (Carcanet, 2012). She is Senior Researcher in Creative Writing at Kingston University & was named a 'Next Generation' poet by the Poetry Book Society in 2014.
judges will read all poems submitted
General: Entry implies acceptance of all rules; failure to comply with all rules results in disqualification; submissions accepted by post or e-mail from poets of any nationality, from any country, aged over 18 years; no poet may win more than one prize; judges' decision is final; no correspondence will be entered into.
Poems: Poems must be in English, must each be no longer than 45 lines, must fit on one side of one A4 or US-Letter-size page, must show title & poem only, must not show poet's name or any other identifying marks on submitted poems (whether submitted by post or as e-mail attachment), must be the original work of the entrant (no translations) & must not have been previously broadcast or published (in print or online); prize-winning poems may be published (in print or online) by Troubadour International Poetry Prize, & may not be published elsewhere for one year after Tue 21 Jun 2016 without permission; no limit on number of poems submitted; no limit on number of separate submissions any individual may make; poems may be submitted by post or e-mail (see below) but poems already submitted by e-mail should not then also be submitted by post; no text alterations accepted after submission.
Fees: Entries must be accompanied by submission fees of £5/€6/$8 per poem (Sterling/Euro/US-Dollars only); entries only included when payment received via EITHER PayPal(visit www.coffeehousepoetry.org/prizes, follow PayPal instructions at bottom of page, PayPal account not required, no additional details required, please note your PayPal Receipt No.) OR cheque/money-order payable to Coffee-House Poetry; NB: include PayPal name or cheque signatory name in submission details, only if different from Poet's Name.
By Post: No entry form required; two copies required of each poem submitted; please include the following details on a separate page: Poet's Name & Address, Phone No., E-Mail Address (if available), List of Titles, No. of Poems, Total Fees, & EITHER PayPal Receipt No. OR cheque/money-order/postal-payment enclosed; no paper-clips or staples; no Special Delivery, Recorded Delivery or Registered Post; entries are not returned.
By E-mail: No entry form required; poems must be e-mailed to CoffPoetry@aol.com as attachments (.doc, .docx, .pdf, .rtf only); please include the following details in your e-mail message: Poet's Name & Address, Phone No., List of Titles, No. of Poems, Total Fees, & EITHER PayPal Receipt No. OR send cheque/money-order/postal-payment by post, no Special Delivery, Recorded Delivery or Registered Post. (Do not submit via website contact page; do not submit by e-mail to info@coffeehousepoetry.org; submit by e-mail to CoffPoetry@aol.com ONLY.)
Timeline: All postal entries, & any cheque/money-order/postal-payments for e-mail entries, to arrive at Troubadour International Poetry Prize, Coffee-House Poetry, PO Box 16210, LONDON W4 1ZPpostmarked on or before Tue 21 Jun 2016. Prize-winners only will be contacted individually in week commencing Mon 8 Aug 2016. Prize-giving will take place on Mon 31 Oct 2016 at Coffee-House Poetry at the Troubadour in Earls Court, London.
Acknowledgement/Results: E-mail entries acknowledged within 14 days of receipt of both entry & payment; postal entrants may include stamped, addressed postcard or envelope marked Acknowledgement&/or stamped, addressed envelope marked Results; results will be posted on website (& mailed to all postal entrants who included a Results envelope) after Mon 8 Aug 2016; no correspondence will be entered into.
Labels: competition, Poet, poetry, Poetry Contest


text:
eUttaranchal - Uttarakhand Matrimonial - Contact Us
Welcome to Uttaranchal Villages - Discover the Real Uttarakhand
Uttaranchal Villages
Search for Villages
Villages Home
Uttaranchal Tehsils
Know your district
Uttaranchal Village Info
Bachchi Nagar No2 is located in the Haldwani tehsil of Nainital district.
Demographics : Bachchi Nagar No2
Photo Source: Census of India 2001
Town/ Village name : Bachchi Nagar No2
District : Nainital
Tehsil : Haldwani
Block :
Post office :
Pin code :
STD code :
No. of households : 16
Total population : 106
Population- Male : 58
Population- Female : 48
Sex ratio : 828 (females per 1000 males)
Literacy rate : 87.36%
Male Literacy rate : 96%
Female Literacy rate : 77.77%
Search for Boys and Girls from
Haldwani, Nainital
Search for Boys Girls
Age 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 to 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70
Community Any Community Brahaman Rajput Bhotia Shilpkars Other ST Other SC Others
Villages in Haldwani Tehsil
Deopur Devka
Muhan
Halduchaur Dauliya
Bachatpur
Dharampur
Manpur Uttar
Kuraiagaon
Laxampur Dheri
Motipur Khushal
Himmatpur Bailparao
Inderpur Garwal
Udaipuri Negi
Uttaranchal :: About Us :: Advertise :: Contact Us :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy
www.euttaranchal.com. All rights reserved


text:
HomeArticlesMagnetometry Measurements: Considerations for Magnetic and First-Order-Reversal-Curve Measurements
Magnetometry Measurements: Considerations for Magnetic and First-Order-Reversal-Curve Measurements
July 18, 2017 Editorial Staff Articles, Main Site Comments Off on Magnetometry Measurements: Considerations for Magnetic and First-Order-Reversal-Curve Measurements
Brad C. Dodrill, Lake Shore Cryotronics, Inc.
Magnetometers are used to characterize magnetic material properties. Magnetometry techniques can be broadly classified into two categories: inductive and force-based. Common inductive methods include vibrating sample magnetometry (VSM), extraction magnetometry, AC susceptometry and superconducting quantum interference device (SQUID) magnetometry. The two most commonly used inductive techniques are VSM and SQUID magnetometry. Alternating gradient magnetometry (AGM) is the most often used force-based technique. The measurement most commonly performed to characterize a material's magnetic properties is that of a major hysteresis loop. The hysteresis or M(H) loop is typically used to determine a material's saturation magnetization Ms (the magnetization at maximum applied field), remanence Mr (the magnetization at zero applied field after applying a saturating field) and coercivity Hc (the field required to demagnetize the material). More complex magnetization curves covering states with field and magnetization values located inside the major hysteresis loop, such as first-order-reversal-curves (FORCs), can provide additional information that can be used to characterize magnetic interactions and coercivity distributions in magnetic materials[1].
Three important considerations in determining which type of magnetometer is best suited to specific magnetic materials are; a) sensitivity as this determines the smallest magnetic moment that may be measured with acceptable signal-to-noise, b) measurement speed, e.g., the time required to measure a hysteresis loop, as this determines sample throughput, c) temperature and field range over which measurements are to be performed. Measurement speed is particularly important for FORC measurements because a typical series of FORCs can contain thousands to tens of thousands of data points. This article discusses some of the techniques currently used in the characterization of magnetic materials, and presents typical measurement results that demonstrate the sensitivity and measurement speed of an electromagnet-based VSM.
First-Order-Reversal-Curve
A FORC is measured by saturating a sample in a field Hsat, decreasing the field to a reversal field Ha, then sweeping the field back to Hsat in a series of regular field steps Hb. This process is repeated for many values of Ha yielding a series of FORCs. The measured magnetization at each step as a function of Ha and Hb gives M(Ha,Hb). The FORC distribution ρ(Ha,Hb) is the mixed second derivative, that is, ρ(Ha,Hb) = –(1/2)∂2 M(Ha,Hb)/∂Ha∂Hb. A FORC diagram is a 2D or 3D contour plot of ρ(Ha,Hb) with the axis rotated by changing coordinates from (Ha,Hb) to Hc=(Hb–Ha)/2 and Hu=(Hb+Ha)/2 where Hu corresponds to the distribution of interaction or reversal fields and Hc the distribution of switching or coercive fields.
FORC has been extensively used by earth and planetary scientists studying the magnetic properties of natural samples because FORC can distinguish between single-domain (SD), multi-domain (MD), and pseudo single-domain (PSD) behavior, and because it can distinguish between different magnetic mineral species[2]. It has also been used to characterize interactions and coercivity distributions in magnetic recording media[3,4], nanowire arrays[5], exchange coupled permanent magnets[6] and exchanged biased magnetic multilayers[7]. Finally, while it is very difficult to unravel the complex magnetic signatures of multiphase magnetic materials from a hysteresis loop measurement alone, FORC can differentiate between phases in such materials[8, 9, 10].
Magnetic Measurement Techniques
Vibrating Sample Magnetometry
In vibrating sample magnetometry, originally developed by Simon Foner[11] of MIT's Lincoln Laboratory, a magnetic material is vibrated within a uniform magnetic field H, inducing an electric current in suitably placed sensing coils. The resulting voltage induced in the sensing coils is proportional to the magnetic moment of the sample. The magnetic field may be generated by an electromagnet or a superconducting magnet. VSM measurements can be performed from <2 K to 1,273 K using integrated cryostats or furnaces.
Commercial VSM systems provide measurements to field strengths of ~3.4 T (34,000 Oe) using conventional electromagnets [12,13], as well as systems employing superconducting magnets to produce fields to 16 T [14,15]. When used with electromagnets, very small step changes in field can be made (i.e., ~1 mOe) and the measurement is very fast. A typical hysteresis loop measurement can take as little as a few seconds to a few minutes.
When used with superconducting magnets, higher field strengths are possible; however, this limits the field setting resolution, and the measurement speed is inherently slower due to the speed at which the magnetic field can be varied using superconducting magnets. A typical hysteresis M(H) loop measurement can take one hour or more. Additionally, magnetometers employing superconducting magnets are more costly to operate since they require liquid helium. Cryogen-free systems employing closed cycle refrigerators, and also liquefiers that recover helium in liquid helium based systems are available, but these represent an expensive capital equipment investment. An advantage of superconducting magnet systems is that they reach higher magnetic fields than air- or water-cooled electromagnets, which is necessary to saturate some magnetic materials, such as rare earth permanent magnet materials. The noise floor of commercially available VSMs is 10–7 to 10-8 emu.
Superconducting Quantum Interference Device Magnetometry
Quantum mechanical effects in conjunction with superconducting detection coil circuitry are used in superconducting quantum interference device (SQUID) based magnetometers to measure the magnetic properties of materials. Theoretically, SQUIDs are capable of achieving sensitivities of 10–12 emu, but practically, they are limited to sensitivities of 10–8 emu because the SQUID also picks up environmental noise. As in a VSM, SQUIDs may be used to perform measurements from low to high temperatures (from <2 K to 1,000 K). Superconducting magnets with field strengths up to 7 T are employed in SQUIDs[14,15]; therefore, the measurement is inherently slow due to the speed at which the magnetic field can be varied, as is the case for superconducting magnet-based VSM systems. A typical hysteresis M(H) loop measurement can take one hour or more.
Alternating Gradient Magnetometry (AGM)
Force methods involve determination of the apparent change in weight for a material when placed in an inhomogeneous magnetic field. The sample experiences a force f along the axis of the field gradient (dH/dz), which is given by f = m(dH/dz) where m is the magnetic moment. The equipment required for such force methods are either an electro- or superconducting magnet, and a balance for force measurements. A commercial variant of these methods is the alternating gradient magnetometer[12]. AGMs are capable of achieving sensitivities in the 10–8 to 10–9 emu range, and like the VSM, the AGM is a very fast measurement; a typical hysteresis loop takes seconds to minutes. Commercial AGM systems can be used for ambient temperature measurements to the moderate 2 to 3 T fields achievable with electromagnets.
Since a series of FORCs contain many data points the measurement can be very time consuming when using superconducting magnet based systems (days to weeks), whereas electromagnet based systems can acquire the data much more quickly (minutes to hours). In the FORC measurement it is necessary to fully saturate a material after each reversal field excursion, thus superconducting magnet systems must be used for some materials.
Electromagnet Based VSM: Sensitivity and Speed
A VSM's sensitivity depends on a number of factors:
• Electronic sensitivity.
• Noise rejection through signal conditioning.
• Amplitude and frequency of mechanical drive.
• Thermal noise of sensing coils.
• Optimized design and coupling (proximity) of sensing coils to the sample under test.
• Vibration isolation of the mechanical head assembly from the electromagnet and
VSM sensing coils.
• Minimization of environmental mechanical and electrical noise sources which can
deleteriously effect VSM sensitivity.
The voltage induced in the VSM sensing coils is given by:
Vemf = mAfS
m = magnetic moment
A = amplitude of vibration
f = frequency of vibration
S = sensitivity function of VSM sense coils.
It's clear from this equation that increasing A, f or S, will improve moment sensitivity. S may be increased by either increasing the coupling between the sense coils and the sample under test (i.e., minimize gap spacing), or by optimizing the design of the sense coils (i.e., number of windings, coil geometry, etc.) And, of course, signal averaging also improves sensitivity. The data shown in this article were recorded using a Lake Shore Model 8600 VSM.
Figure 1 shows typical noise measurement results at 100 ms/point (left) and 10 s/point (right) averaging. Note that the vertical axis is expressed in nemu (10–9 emu). The RMS noise values are noted in the figure caption.
Figure 1. Noise at 100 ms/point (left) and 10 s/point (right) averaging. The observed noise is 119.5 nemu and 13 nemu RMS respectively.
As an illustration of the sensitivity of the VSM, typical low moment measurement results are presented for a CoPt thin film with saturation moment msat = 20 µemu.
Figure 2 shows hysteresis loops as a function of signal averaging. Note that the vertical axis is expressed in μemu (10-6 emu). These loops were recorded for ±5 kOe in 25 Oe steps at signal averages of 100 ms/point (left) and 1 s/point (right), which equates to total loop measurement times of 1 minute 25 seconds and 13 minutes 30 seconds, respectively. The peak-to-peak noise in the saturated region of the hysteresis loops are completely consistent with the measured RMS noise values at the same signal averages.
Figure 2. A 1 minute 25 second at 100 ms/point (left) and 13 minutes and 30 second at 1 s/point (right) hysteresis loops for a 20 µemu CoPt thin film.
The VSM has been designed for fast measurements, providing field ramp rates to 10 kOe/s, and data acquisition as fast as 10 ms/point. Figure 3 shows typical hysteresis loop measurement results for a magnetic stripe (left) with saturation moment of 14 memu (10–3 emu), and CoPt thin film (right) with saturation moment of 80 µemu. The magnetic stripe loop was recorded for ±10 kOe in 50 Oe steps at 10 ms/point in 13 seconds, and the loop for the CoPt thin film was recorded for ±4 kOe in 25 Oe steps at 100 ms/point in only 69 seconds.
Figure 3. A 13 second hysteresis loop at 10 ms/point for a 14 memu magnetic stripe (left) and 69 second hysteresis loop at 100 ms/point for a 80 μemu CoPt thin film (right).
As noted previously, the first-order-reversal-curve (FORC) technique is becoming increasingly important in characterizing magnetic material properties because it provides information regarding magnetic interactions and coercivity distributions, information that cannot be obtained from a hysteresis loop measurement alone. A typical series of FORCs can contain thousands of data points and thus the measurement can be very time consuming if the measurement speed of the magnetometer is slow. Figure 4 shows 46 FORCs (2,012 data points) recorded at 30 ms/point in 4 minutes 32 seconds for the same magnetic stripe sample shown in figure 3 (left), and 100 FORCs (8,818 data points) recorded at 500 ms/point in 1 hour and 20 minutes for the same CoPt thin film shown in Figure 3 (right).
Figure 4. A 4 minute 32 second measurement of 46 FORCs for a 14 memu magnetic stripe (left) and a 1 hour and 20 minute measurement of 100 FORCs for a 80 µemu CoPt thin film (right).
In this article we have discussed the advantages and disadvantages of the most commonly used inductive and force based magnetometry methods. We've presented measured RMS noise data for an electromagnet based VSM[12] as function of signal averaging, and also typical results for a CoPt thin film with saturation moment of only 20 µemu. Results of fast hysteresis loop and FORC measurements have been presented as well demonstrating the measurement speed of the VSM, which is particularly important in acquiring FORC data.
Brad C. Dodrill graduated from The Ohio State University in 1982 with a BSc degree in Physics and a minor in Mathematics. He completed 2 years of graduate studies in Physics and Electrical Engineering and took a position with Lake Shore Cryotronics in 1984 as a Research Scientist. He is currently the Vice President of Sales and a Senior Scientist at Lake Shore. In his technical capacity, he is active in applications and product development initiatives in the areas of magnetic and electronic measurements and materials. He has 40 paper publications to his credit, holds three US patents, and has lectured at numerous universities and technical conferences in the US, Europe and Asia.
For more information, visit lakeshore.com.
[1] C. R. Pike, A. P. Roberts, K. L. Verosub, "Characterizing Interactions in Fine Particle Systems Using First-Order-Reversal-Curves", J. Appl. Phys., 85, 6660, 1999.
[2] A. P. Roberts, C. R. Pike, K. L. Verosub, "First-Order Reversal-Curve Diagrams: A New Tool for Characterizing the Magnetic Properties of Natural Samples", J. Geophys. Res., 105, 461, 2000.
[3] B. F. Valcu, D. A. Gilbert, K. Liu, "Fingerprinting Inhomogeneities in Recording Media Using the First Order Reversal Curve Method", IEEE Trans. Mag., 47, 2988, 2011.
[4] M. Winklhofer, R. K. Dumas, K. Liu, "Identifying Reversible and Irreversible Magnetization Changes in Prototype Patterned Media Using First- and Second-Order Reversal Curves", J. Appl. Phys, 103, 07C518, 2008.
[5] B. C. Dodrill, L. Spinu, "First Order Reversal Curve Analysis of Nanoscale Magnetic Materials", Technical Proceedings of the 2014 NSTI Nanotechnology Conference and Expo, CRC Press, 2014.
[6] Y. Cao, M. Ahmadzadeh, K. Xe, B. Dodrill, J. McCloy, "Simulation and Quantitative Analysis of FORC Diagrams for Single Phase and Multiphase System Using Preisach Hysteron Distribution Pattern", submitted to J. Mag. Mag. Mat., 2017.
[7] B. C. Dodrill, "First Order Reversal Curve (FORC) Studies of Nanoscale Magnetic Materials", Technical Proceedings of the 2017 TechConnect World Innovation Conference and Expo, CRC Press, 2017
[8] B. C. Dodrill, "First-Order-Reversal-Curve Analysis of Nanocomposite Permanent Magnets", Technical Proceedings of the 2015 TechConnect World Innovation Conference and Expo, CRC Press, 2015.
[9] B. C. Dodrill, "First-Order-Reversal-Curve Analysis of Multi-phase Ferrite Magnets", Magnetics Business and Technology, Spring 2015.
[10] C. Carvallo, A. R. Muxworthy, D. J. Dunlop, "First-Order-Reversal-Curve (FORC) Diagrams of Magnetic Mixtures: Micromagnetic Models and Measurements", Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors, 154, 308, 2006.
[11] S. Foner, "Versatile and Sensitive Vibrating Sample Magnetometer", Rev. Sci. Inst., 30, 548, 1959.
[12] Lake Shore Cryotronics, USA; www.lakeshore.com
[13] Microsense, USA; www.microsense.net
[14] Quantum Design, USA; www.qdusa.com
[15] Cryogenic Limited, UK; www.cryogenic.co.uk
Brad Dodrill
lake shore cryotronics
Magnetometry
Magnet Applications, Inc. Expands Online Tech Center and Launched Calculator Apps
Lake Shore IMS Exhibit to Feature High-Frequency Probing and Characterization Technology
May 28, 2014 Editorial Staff Main Site, News Comments Off on Lake Shore IMS Exhibit to Feature High-Frequency Probing and Characterization Technology
Hall Effect Gaussmeters for Manufacturing and Research Environments
August 18, 2014 Editorial Staff Test and Measurement Comments Off on Hall Effect Gaussmeters for Manufacturing and Research Environments
Software and Design
Lake Shore Cryotronics 8600 Series VSM winner of R&D 100 Award
November 21, 2017 Editorial Staff Software and Design Comments Off on Lake Shore Cryotronics 8600 Series VSM winner of R&D 100 Award


text:
Q: A canonical way to implement move semantics in a class I am looking for a good example of how to implement a derived and a base class with move semantics.  The more I have thought about it, the more it seems that the default move constructor and assignment move operator will normally do the job because most standard (STL) types and smart pointers are default moveable.
Anyway, in the case we have a class hierarchy, which requires an explicit move implementation, how should I do it - at least as a first cut?
In this example, I am using a raw pointer which I would normally wrap in a std::unique_ptr but I needed an example of something to move which is not default moveable.
Any help would be much appreciated. :)
Currently, I have made the following attempt:
struct BlobA
{
    char data[0xaa];
};

struct BlobB
{
    char data[0xbb];
};

//----------------------------------------

class Base
{
public:

    //Default construct the Base class
    //C++11 allows the data members to initialised, where declared. Otherwise you would do it here.
    Base()
    {

    }

    //Define the destructor as virtual to ensure that the derived destructor gets called. (In case it is necessary. It's not in this example but still good practice.)
    virtual ~Base()
    {
        delete m_moveableDataInBase; //this is a contrived example to show non-default moveable data, in practice RAII should be used rather than deletes like this
    }

    //Copy constructor, needs to accept a const ref to another Base class with which it copies the data members
    Base(const Base& other) :
    m_moveableDataInBase(new BlobA(*other.m_moveableDataInBase)), // copy the other's moveable data
    m_pNonMoveableDataInBase(other.m_pNonMoveableDataInBase)        // copy the other's non-moveable data
    {

    }

    //Assignment operator uses the canonical copy then swap idiom. It returns a reference to allow chaining: a = b = c
    //This is thus implemented in terms of the copy constructor.
    Base& operator=(const Base& rhs)
    {
        Base temp(rhs);
        Swap(temp);
        return *this;
    }

    //The move construtor is declared as throwing no exceptions so that it will be called by STL algorithms
    //It accepts an rvalue and moves the Base part.
    Base(Base&& other) noexcept :
    m_moveableDataInBase(nullptr) // don't bother allocating our own resources to moveable data because we are about to move (steal) the other's resource
    {
        Swap(other);
    }

    //The move assignment operator is declared as throwing no exceptions so that it will be called by STL algorithms
    //It accepts an rvalue and moves (steals) the data resources from the rhs using swap and copies the non moveable data from the rhs
    Base& operator=(Base&& rhs) noexcept
    {
        //move (steal) the moveable contents from rhs
        std::swap(m_moveableDataInBase, rhs.m_moveableDataInBase);

        //copy the non-moveable contents from rhs
        m_pNonMoveableDataInBase = rhs.m_pNonMoveableDataInBase;

        return *this;
    }

private:
    //this private member swaps the data members' contents.
    //It is private because it isn't virtual and only swaps the base contents and is thus not safe as a public interface
    void Swap(Base& other)
    {
        std::swap(m_moveableDataInBase, other.m_moveableDataInBase);
        std::swap(m_pNonMoveableDataInBase, other.m_pNonMoveableDataInBase);
    }

    //an example of some large blob of data which we would like to move instead of copy for performance reasons.
    //normally, I would have used a unique_ptr but this is default moveable and I need an example of something that isn't
    BlobA* m_moveableDataInBase{ new BlobA };

    //an example of some data that we can't or don't want to move
    int m_pNonMoveableDataInBase = 123;
};

//----------------------------------------

class Derived : public Base
{
public:

    //Default construct the Derived class, this is called after the base class constructor
    //C++11 allows the data members to initialised, where declared. Otherwise you would do it here.
    Derived()
    {

    }

    //Default virtual destructor, to clean up stuff that can't be done automatically through RAII
    virtual ~Derived()
    {
        delete m_pMoveableDataInDerived; //this is a contrived example to show non-default moveable data, in practice RAII should be used rather than deletes like this
    }

    //Copy constructor, needs to accept a const ref to another derived class with which it
    //first copy constructs the base and then copies the derived data members
    Derived(const Derived& other) :
    Base(other),  // forward to the base copy constructor
    m_pMoveableDataInDerived(new BlobB(*other.m_pMoveableDataInDerived)),  // copy the other's moveable data
    m_pNonMoveableDataInDerived(other.m_pNonMoveableDataInDerived)         // copy the other's non-moveable data
    {

    }

    //Assignment operator uses the canonical copy then swap idiom. It returns a reference to allow chaining: a = b = c
    //Because it uses the derived copy constructor, which in turn copy constructs the base, we don't forward to the base assignment operator.
    Derived& operator=(const Derived& rhs)
    {
        Derived temp(rhs);
        Swap(temp);
        return *this;
    }

    //The move construtor is declared as throwing no eceptions so that it will be called by STL algorithms
    //It accepts an rvalue and first moves the Base part and then the Derived part.
    //There is no point in allocating any resource before moving so in this example, m_pBlobB is set to nullptr
    Derived(Derived&& other) noexcept
    : Base(std::move(other)), // forward to base move constructor
    m_pMoveableDataInDerived(nullptr) // don't bother allocating our own resources to moveable data because we are about to move (steal) the other's resource
    {
        Swap(other);
    }

    //The move assignment operator is declared as throwing no exceptions so that it will be called by STL algorithms
    //It accepts an rvalue and first calls the base assignment operator and then moves the data resources from the rhs using swap
    Derived& operator=(Derived&& rhs) noexcept
    {
        //forward to the base move operator=
        Base::operator=(std::move(rhs));

        //move (steal) the moveable contents from rhs
        std::swap(m_pMoveableDataInDerived, rhs.m_pMoveableDataInDerived);

        //copy the non-moveable contents from rhs
        m_pNonMoveableDataInDerived = rhs.m_pNonMoveableDataInDerived;
    }

private:
    //this member swaps the Derived data members contents.
    //It is private because it doesn't swap the base contents and is thus not safe as a public interface
    void Swap(Derived& other) noexcept
    {
        std::swap(m_pMoveableDataInDerived, other.m_pMoveableDataInDerived);
        std::swap(m_pNonMoveableDataInDerived, other.m_pNonMoveableDataInDerived);
    }

    //an example of some large blob of data which we would like to move instead of copy for performance reasons.
    //normally, I would have used a unique_ptr but this is default moveable and I need an example of something that isn't
    BlobB* m_pMoveableDataInDerived{ new BlobB };

    //an example of some data that we can't or don't want to move
    int m_pNonMoveableDataInDerived = 456;
};

A: You have to start out knowing what your class invariants are.  A class invariant is something or some relationship that is always true among your data members.  And then you want to make sure that your special members can operate with any value which satisfies your class invariants.  Special members should not have preconditions (except that all class invariants must be true).
Let's take your example as an example case to discuss.  First lets just concentrate on Base.  I like to put my private data members up front so that they are close to the special members.  This way I can more easily see what defaulted or implicitly declared special members actually do.
Base
class Base
{
    //an example of some large blob of data which we would like to move
    //  instead of copy for performance reasons.
    //normally, I would have used a unique_ptr but this is default moveable
    //   and I need an example of something that isn't
    BlobA* m_moveableDataInBase{ new BlobA };

    //an example of some data that we can't or don't want to move
    int m_pNonMoveableDataInBase = 123;

So far so good, but there is a slight ambiguity here:  Can m_moveableDataInBase == nullptr?  There is no one right or wrong answer.  This is a question that the author of Base must answer, and then write code to enforce.
Also, outline your member functions.  Even if you decide you want to inline them, do so outside the declaration.  Otherwise your class declaration becomes difficult to read:
class Base
{
    BlobA* m_moveableDataInBase{ new BlobA };
    int m_pNonMoveableDataInBase = 123;

public:
    virtual ~Base();
    Base() = default;
    Base(const Base& other);
    Base& operator=(const Base& rhs);
    Base(Base&& other) noexcept;
    Base& operator=(Base&& rhs) noexcept;
};

The destructor is the most telling special member.  I like to get it declared/defined first:
Base::~Base()
{
    delete m_moveableDataInBase;
}

This looks good.  But this does not yet answer the question as to whether m_moveableDataInBase can be nullptr.  Next, if it exists, the default constructor.  Prefer = default definitions when practical.
Now the copy constructor:
Base::Base(const Base& other)
    : m_moveableDataInBase(new BlobA(*other.m_moveableDataInBase))
    , m_pNonMoveableDataInBase(other.m_pNonMoveableDataInBase)
{
}

Ok, this says something significant:
other.m_moveableDataInBase != nullptr  // ever

I glanced ahead and looked at your move constructor, and that leaves the moved-from value with m_moveableDataInBase == nullptr.  So we have a problem:

*

*Either there is a bug in your copy constructor, and you should check for the case other.m_moveableDataInBase == nullptr, or

*There is a bug in your move constructor and it should not leave the moved-from state with m_moveableDataInBase == nullptr.
Neither solution is the correct one.  The Base author has to make this design decision.  If he choses 2, there really is no reasonable way to implement the move constructor such that it is any faster than the copy constructor.  In that case the thing to do is not write a move constructor and just let the copy constructor do the job.  So I'll choose 1 so that there is still a move constructor to talk about.  Corrected copy constructor:
Base::Base(const Base& other)
    : m_moveableDataInBase(other.m_moveableDataInBase ?
                           new BlobA(*other.m_moveableDataInBase) :
                           nullptr)
    , m_pNonMoveableDataInBase(other.m_pNonMoveableDataInBase)
{
}

Also, since we chose this invariant, it might not be a bad idea to revisit the default constructor and instead say:
    BlobA* m_moveableDataInBase = nullptr;

Now we have a noexcept default constructor.
Next comes the copy assignment operator.  Do not fall into the trap of selecting the copy/swap idiom by default.  Sometimes this idiom is fine.  But it is often poorly performing.  And performance is more important than code reuse.  Consider this alternative to copy/swap:
Base&
Base::operator=(const Base& rhs)
{
    if (this != &rhs)
    {
        if (m_moveableDataInBase == nullptr)
        {
            if (rhs.m_moveableDataInBase != nullptr)
                m_moveableDataInBase = new BlobA(*rhs.m_moveableDataInBase);
        }
        else  // m_moveableDataInBase != nullptr
        {
            if (rhs.m_moveableDataInBase != nullptr)
                *m_moveableDataInBase = *rhs.m_moveableDataInBase;
            else
            {
                delete m_moveableDataInBase;
                m_moveableDataInBase = nullptr;
            }
        }
        m_pNonMoveableDataInBase = rhs.m_pNonMoveableDataInBase;
    }
    return *this;
}

If it is common for values of Base to have m_moveableDataInBase != nullptr, then this rewrite is significantly faster than copy/swap.  In this common case, copy/swap always does 1 new and 1 delete.  This version does 0 news and 0 deletes.  It just copies 170 bytes.
And if we had chosen the design where it is an invariant that m_moveableDataInBase != nullptr, then the copy assignment gets even simpler:
Base&
Base::operator=(const Base& rhs)
{
    *m_moveableDataInBase = *rhs.m_moveableDataInBase;
    m_pNonMoveableDataInBase = rhs.m_pNonMoveableDataInBase;
    return *this;
}

Minimizing calls to the heap is not premature optimization.  It is engineering.  It is what move semantics is made out of.  This is precisely why std::vector and std::string copy assignment do not use the copy/swap idiom.  It would be too slow.
Move constructor:  I would code it like this:
Base::Base(Base&& other) noexcept
    : m_moveableDataInBase(std::move(other.m_moveableDataInBase))
    , m_pNonMoveableDataInBase(std::move(other.m_pNonMoveableDataInBase))
{
    other.m_moveableDataInBase = nullptr;
}

This saves a few loads and stores.  I didn't bother inspecting the generated assembly.  I urge you to do so before choosing your implementation over this one.  In a noexcept move constructor, count loads and stores.
As a style-guide, I like to move the members even when I know they are scalars and the move has no impact.  This saves the reader of the code from having to ensure that all non-moved members are scalars.
Your move assignment looks fine to me:
Base&
Base::operator=(Base&& rhs) noexcept
{
    //move (steal) the moveable contents from rhs
    std::swap(m_moveableDataInBase, rhs.m_moveableDataInBase);
    //copy the non-moveable contents from rhs
    m_pNonMoveableDataInBase = rhs.m_pNonMoveableDataInBase;
    return *this;
}

The one time when you don't want to do this is when you have non-memory resources on the lhs that need to be destructed immediately, as opposed to swapped to the rhs.  But your example is only swapping memory.
Derived
For Derived I would write it exactly as I've shown for Base, except for first copying/moving the Base exactly as you show in your code.  For example here is the move constructor:
Derived::Derived(Derived&& other) noexcept
    : Base(std::move(other))
    , m_pMoveableDataInDerived(std::move(other.m_pMoveableDataInDerived))
    , m_pNonMoveableDataInDerived(std::move(other.m_pNonMoveableDataInDerived))
{
    other.m_pMoveableDataInDerived = nullptr;
}

Also tag ~Dervied() with override instead of virtual.  You want the compiler to tell you if you've accidentally somehow not overridden ~Base() with ~Derived().
class Derived : public Base
{
    BlobB* m_pMoveableDataInDerived = nullptr;
    int m_pNonMoveableDataInDerived = 456;

public:
    ~Derived() override;
    Derived() = default;
    Derived(const Derived& other);
    Derived& operator=(const Derived& rhs);
    Derived(Derived&& other) noexcept;
    Derived& operator=(Derived&& rhs) noexcept;
};

Test
Also test all six special members (whether you have them or not) with static_assert and type-traits:
static_assert(std::is_nothrow_destructible<Base>{}, "");
static_assert(std::is_nothrow_default_constructible<Base>{}, "");
static_assert(std::is_copy_constructible<Base>{}, "");
static_assert(std::is_copy_assignable<Base>{}, "");
static_assert(std::is_nothrow_move_constructible<Base>{}, "");
static_assert(std::is_nothrow_move_assignable<Base>{}, "");

static_assert(std::is_nothrow_destructible<Derived>{}, "");
static_assert(std::is_nothrow_default_constructible<Derived>{}, "");
static_assert(std::is_copy_constructible<Derived>{}, "");
static_assert(std::is_copy_assignable<Derived>{}, "");
static_assert(std::is_nothrow_move_constructible<Derived>{}, "");
static_assert(std::is_nothrow_move_assignable<Derived>{}, "");

You can even test these for your Blob types:
static_assert(std::is_trivially_destructible<BlobA>{}, "");
static_assert(std::is_trivially_default_constructible<BlobA>{}, "");
static_assert(std::is_trivially_copy_constructible<BlobA>{}, "");
static_assert(std::is_trivially_copy_assignable<BlobA>{}, "");
static_assert(std::is_trivially_move_constructible<BlobA>{}, "");
static_assert(std::is_trivially_move_assignable<BlobA>{}, "");

static_assert(std::is_trivially_destructible<BlobB>{}, "");
static_assert(std::is_trivially_default_constructible<BlobB>{}, "");
static_assert(std::is_trivially_copy_constructible<BlobB>{}, "");
static_assert(std::is_trivially_copy_assignable<BlobB>{}, "");
static_assert(std::is_trivially_move_constructible<BlobB>{}, "");
static_assert(std::is_trivially_move_assignable<BlobB>{}, "");

Summary
In summary, give each of the six special members all the loving care they deserve, even if the result is to inhibit them, implicitly declare them, or explicitly default or delete them.  The complier-generated move members will move each base, then move each non-static data member.  Prefer that recipe, default it when you can, and simply augment it when it is necessary.
Highlight your class API by moving member function definitions out of the class declaration.
Test.  At the very least test that you do or do not have all 6 special members, and if you have them, if they are noexcept or trivial (or not).
Use copy/swap with caution.  It can be a performance killer.

A:
Anyway, in the case we have a class hierarchy, which requires an
  explicit move implementation, how should I do it - at least as a first
  cut?

Don't.
You don't move the base class. You move the pointer to the base class. For the derived class, you can move it but then you know what the derived class is so you can just write the move constructor/assignment operator accordingly.
Also, raw pointers are completely movable. How do you think unique_ptr is implemented?

A: I would ditch the "swap with other" approach which doesn't help with the readablity and go with simple assignments instead.
class A{
   int * dataA;
   public:
   A() { dataA = new int(); }
   virtual ~A() {delete dataA; }
   A(A&& rhs) noexcept { dataA = rhs.dataA; rhs.dataA = nullptr; }
   A& operator = (A&& rhs) noexcept {
      if (this != &rhs){
       if (dataA) delete  dataA;
       dataA = rhs.dataA;
       rhs.dataA = nullptr;
      }
      return *this;
   }
}

class B: public A{
   int* dataB;
   public:
       B(){ dataB = new int(); }
       virtual ~B() {delete dataB; }
       B(B&& rhs) noexcept : A(std::move(rhs)) { dataB = rhs.dataB; rhs.dataB = nullptr; }

   B& operator = (B&& rhs) noexcept {
      A::operator == (std::move(rhs));
      if (this != &rhs){
      if (dataB) delete  dataB;
      dataB = rhs.dataB;
      rhs.dataB = nullptr;
      }
      return *this;
   }
}

call the parent move constructor to move the parent-part of the object. do the rest in the move constructor.
the same goes for the assignment operator.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange