With commercial citrus acreage on the rise in Georgia, producers should be aware of potential signs of citrus greening and the pests that carry the disease that has devastated the citrus industry in Florida.“Greening is the big gorilla in the room. It has been a bad problem in Florida since it was found there in 2005. The insect that spreads that bacteria is a tropical insect, but it has been living in Georgia coastal counties since 2009,” said Lowndes County University of Georgia Cooperative Extension Coordinator Jake Price who has helped producers with the growth of the industry in Lowndes County and surrounding areas.Since it launched in 2013 and 2014, Georgia’s citrus industry has grown to about 2,000 acres of commercial citrus planted in southern Georgia, primarily cold-hardy satsumas, Price said.The Asian citrus psyllid (Diaphorina citri) is the tiny pest that spreads the bacteria that causes citrus greening, a fatal vascular bacterial disease also known as huanglongbing (HLB). Originating in China, the disease was carried to Florida on infected trees. It destroys the root system first and the tree may not show foliar symptoms for up to a year.Surveys are being done to see where else in Georgia the insects and disease can be found.“It has not yet been found in commercial groves, but has been documented in homeowner sites along the coast and in non-commercial citrus in Lowndes County and Pierce County,” he said. “The psyllids are well-populated in coastal Georgia counties so it is probably only a matter of time before it shows up in commercial situations.”Infections in Georgia likely initiated from trees imported from Florida by homeowners, Price said.Once the Asian citrus psyllid feeds on a citrus tree, it spreads the bacteria, which will kill the tree in five years or less. Symptoms can be slow to show above ground, meanwhile the disease can spread between trees in an orchard.While cold climates can hamper the insects’ spread, increasingly warm winters are probably not helping the problem in Georgia, Price said. Even with temperatures below 20 degrees Fahrenheit, some citrus psyllids may survive, so growers should not depend on freezes to kill all the psyllids.Many commercial growers are treating trees prophylactically to prevent psyllid infestation but homeowner trees and wild or abandoned citrus can continue to be sources for psyllids and citrus greening.“We can’t dictate what people do, but we can tell homeowners what the situation is and let them know that what they have in their landscape could threaten this new industry,” Price said.If you suspect you have a tree with citrus greening and would like it tested, contact your local UGA Extension office. Limited funds are assigned to each county for free citrus testing through a Specialty Crop Grant obtained by UGA plant pathologist Johnathon Oliver.“If your trees are looking unhealthy, if you are on the coast of Georgia or if you bought trees from Florida, you could have greening in the tree without being aware of it. Some of the symptoms are leaves that are mottled with yellow, which some can confuse with nutrient deficiencies,” said Price.One way to determine if the yellowing is caused by a nutrient deficiency is to pick a leaf and fold it in half. If the yellow areas are symmetrical and match up, it is likely due to nutrient deficiency. If the yellowing is asymmetrical or spotty, it could be citrus greening.“If a tree is already infected, we suggest that you remove the tree, roots and all. You have to remove the roots because the disease gets in the roots and the tree may re-sprout. You have to clear it out the best you can, then preferably burn it,” Price said. “That’s pretty drastic, but really it is the only way to get rid of it.”Homeowners are not required to remove affected trees and some want to keep their trees as they are bearing fruit.“I have heard people say they are just going to leave diseased trees for as long as they can, but I don’t recommend that they try to do that,” Price said. “Millions of dollars are being pumped into trying to control greening around the world. It is hard to tell a homeowner they need to pull up a tree, but this presents a tough situation for the industry. More than 90% of new citrus growers in Georgia know that greening is out there, but they are willing to take that chance.”Research from the University of Florida suggests spraying commercial trees in Florida with a pesticide while trees are dormant and beneficial insect populations are low to eliminate the first generation of breeding citrus psyllids. Detailed information from UFL about citrus greening is available at http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/pdffiles/PP/PP32600.pdf“If you are in an area that has citrus psyllids, it is not a bad insurance policy to treat in the winter, but do not apply an insecticide if you don’t have a reason to spray,” said Price.Sticky traps are available to place in trees or orchards to monitor for psyllids and some UGA Extension agents are using traps to monitor trees in their counties. “If you start seeing psyllids, it is a definite concern because where you find the citrus psyllids, the disease follows,” he said.UGA Extension offers programming on citrus for those interested in growing. More information is available by visiting site.caes.uga.edu/citrus or contacting your local UGA Extension office.
Get live updates, news and analysis from the long-awaited showdown between the 49ers and Raiders on Thurday at 5:20 p.m. as the rivals battle at Levi’s Stadium.In the 14th and final Bay Area meeting between the teams, mostly pride is at stake as both teams come into the nationally televised contest with just one victory. In fact, of the NFL’s previous 784 prime-time games played on Nov. 1 or later this is the worst matchup. Both teams’ combined .133 winning percentage is the lowest …
Share Facebook Twitter Google + LinkedIn Pinterest Growing plants in a liquid nutrient solution without soil in controlled environments, i.e. hydroponics, has been successfully used for greenhouse production of lettuce, tomatoes, herbs, and other crops. Hydroponic production is an agricultural production practice that optimizes energy consumption and water use; effectively employs chemical-free integrated pest management controls (IPM); permits agricultural production independent of season; and can generate higher crop yields with improved quality, consistency, and predictability, while exploiting less land. Hydroponics provides year round continuous production and crop yields that exceed field production by as much as 10-fold, all while optimizing resources including water, energy, space, capital, and labor. Hydroponics is an important agriculture practice commonly represented in greenhouse food crop production. However, hydroponic systems have a higher initial investment than soil-based crop production and require technical skills and careful management. Learn more from the expertsOn Feb. 8 and 9, 2018 greenhouse growers will have the opportunity to learn about best practices for growing crops in hydroponic systems. The Ohio State University Greenhouse Management Workshop, which is held annually, provides opportunities to learn from the experts in industry and academia. Below is a small sample of topics that will be addressed.The fundamentals of hydroponics production, including controlling the greenhouse environment and lighting needs, will be discussed by Chieri Kubota with Ohio State University (OSU). Peter Ling, OSU, will cover the importance of managing humidity and how to ensure it is optimal. Controlling plant diseases and using Integrated Pest Management practices will be presented by Sally Miller and Luis Canas, respectively, both with OSU.Glen and Lois Smuckers, hydroponic growers near Orrville will share their experiences, from why they chose hydroponics to how their system works. Chieri Kubota, OSU, will provide specific management recommendations for growing lettuce and tomatoes hydroponically, and Mark Kroggel, OSU, will do the same for strawberries. Other topics will address food safety, business plans, and more.The workshop will also feature a tour of the OARDC research greenhouses on day 1 and a tour of a commercial greenhouse using hydroponics on day two.For program and registration details, visit our website: http://fabe.osu.edu/greenhouse. Dr. Peter Ling and Mary H. Wicks, Department of Food, Agricultural and Biological Engineering. Phone: 330-263-3857; 330-202-3533. E-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] This column is provided by the OSU Department of Food, Agricultural and Biological Engineering, OSU Extension, Ohio Agricultural Research & Development Center, and the College of Food, Agricultural and Environmental Sciences.
As California’s policymakers celebrate SB100, a landmark bill that requires utilities to deliver carbon-free electricity by 2045, the details on how this will be delivered are yet to be disclosed. Buildings in California currently use electricity for approximately 48% of their total energy demand. The remaining 52% leans heavily on carbon-intensive sources such as propane and natural gas. Organizations such as the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) have noted that California “must go big on energy efficiency to be carbon-free by 2045.” This means that despite a building energy code that is widely admired and stricter than many other states, we’ll need to wring much more efficiency out of our buildings. But can this be done? And how much room for improvement is there? In February of 2018, the City of Palo Alto released a ground-breaking report, innocuously titled: “Buildings Baseline Study and Roadmap for Zero Net Energy Buildings.” This report, while attempting to adhere to the state’s previously mandated zero net energy (ZNE) goals, inadvertently exposed a more urgent priority for buildings.RELATED ARTICLESOur All-Renewable Energy FutureThe California ModelIn Defense of the Passive House StandardA Practical Approach to Passive HouseMeasuring Passive House Energy Performance The release of Palo Alto’s report arrived barely a month prior to the California Energy Commissions’ (CEC) announcement of its proposed updates to the 2019 Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards. This CEC announcement made headlines nationally due to a new requirement to include solar panels for all residential buildings by 2020. However, more significant than the bling of the required PV was a careful walk-back from an earlier push towards zero net energy buildings. The CEC’s deft side-stepping of its previous ZNE targets was easy to miss as it was mentioned only at the very end of the FAQ, camouflaged under the subtitle “Do the 2019 residential standards get us to zero net energy?” There’s much to unpack in these two documents, which serendipitously serve to reinforce and clarify each other. In order to further clarify them, we’ll measure them against the energy models of a cluster of seven recent Palo Alto projects. These will be used to explore where the CEC could potentially take residential code updates in the future and illustrate just how much wiggle room remains to increase residential building efficiency. We’ll close with the sobering reality of the measured performance data for a project similar to those we’ll review in Palo Alto. Our goal is to support the CEC’s pivot towards building decarbonization and point out where they could potentially take California’s energy codes in the near future. Learning from Palo Alto Palo Alto enjoys the good fortune of having a municipally owned utility, which was able to provide energy use data for this study. Its report begins with a great Sankey diagram (below) illustrating overall source energy use that aligns with much of the State of California. It leans heavily on natural gas and accounts for just over half of total energy use. 2016 Palo Alto building energy use breakdown, disaggregated by type, source, and end use. (Source: Residential Appliance State Survey and California End User Survey. Graphic courtesy DNV-GL) The next pie graph shows a total energy use breakdown similar to some of California’s larger cities. Commercial buildings consume the lion’s share of Palo Alto’s energy. At the third level of energy use disaggregation, the information gets interesting: this is where we can start to identify exactly how and where building energy in Palo Alto is being spent. This granular view allows a better perspective on what needs fixing, and where the best opportunities may lie for achieving deep carbon emissions reductions. This report is notable in that it provides a comprehensive overview of the energy use of one of California’s mid-sized cities. While it’s hard to define Palo Alto as average, we could be forgiven for calling its built environment typical. For this reason, we’re using this report to provide generalized insight into the energy use of ‘every town’ California. Palo Alto Utilities Data 2016 with Residential Appliance Saturation Study 2009 and California Commercial End-Use Survey 2006 used to determine end use breakdown by building sector. (Source: DNV-GL) Shifting our policy focus By far the most eye-opening information exposed in this report is an innocent-looking set of bar-chart graphs, comparing the results of annual energy use through the three frameworks of zero net carbon, zero net energy, and zero net electricity. These simple bar graphs reveal a stark divergence of weighted priorities, when looking at energy use through these three specific lenses, prompting the question: What is the target we’re really aiming for with our buildings? Summary of building energy usage (Total BTU). (Source: Data compiled from RASS and CEUS data by DNV-GL.) This is where the CEC’s recent leap-frog over zero net energy, in favor of a carbon reduction focus, starts to make more sense. This comparison graph reveals that if we look only through the zero net electricity lens, we’d be led toward heavily promoting daylighting and lighting efficiency measures, likely with minimal outcomes for carbon emissions reductions. Similarly, the zero net energy lens offers a broader distribution of possible policy incentives. Some positive impact on carbon emissions reduction could be expected, but it’s clearly the zero net carbon lens that we simply cannot ignore. Even in the bucolic and supposedly mild climate enjoyed by Palo Alto, the highest building carbon emissions come from energy used for space heating. Water heating follows closely behind, offering policymakers two unassailable choices: space heating and water heating. If policy is focused on only these two things, we’ll have a much higher chance of significantly reducing our carbon emissions from buildings. So, how do we achieve this most effectively? Fortunately for us, the CEC’s FAQ already has much of this covered. Special mention is made of the new residential standards encouraging “demand responsive technologies including battery storage and heat pump water heaters.” This is big. It signals a clear move towards the electrification of buildings — a big step for California, where gas has been the fuel of choice for many years. With this combination of electrification, storage, and heat pump technology, hot water energy use will mostly be covered by renewable energy. Less clear in the CEC’s FAQ is a clear plan for how they’ll be reducing building space heating demand. Fortunately, space heating demand happens to be a particular specialty of the Passive House standard. For this reason, the modeled data from a cluster of buildings, all located in and around Palo Alto, provides a helpful comparison. Palo Alto’s (mostly) Passive House cluster The population of Palo Alto is known for its innovation and willingness to explore new technologies. This pioneering spirit extends to the built environment where the largest cluster of (mostly) Passive House projects in California is located. The projects we’re looking at here are not all certified Passive House buildings, but all of them used the Passive House Planning Package (PHPP) energy model to guide the design and construction. Two of these projects are certified: the multi-generational home and the larger SFR-Luxury home. Their teams were kind enough to share the energy models for their projects with us and we’ve been able to generate a few simple comparisons of their assembly R-values and U-factors. The modeled performance metrics of these diverse buildings is instructional and provides insight on where the code may have room to move towards high performance targets such as those required by the Passive House standard. Treated floor area (interior conditioned space) of buildings in Palo Alto’s Passive approximation. Diverse building types and sizes These projects represent a diverse range of sizes and use-types, ranging from a 252-square-foot tiny house (1 in the above chart) to two luxury homes of 4,687 square feet (4) and 5,341 square feet (7) respectively. They include a multi-generational single-family home (3), where an aging grandparent occupies an attached accessory dwelling unit (ADU), and an intentional community (6) housing a small commercial kitchen, full basement of shared community space, and eight dormitory-style bedrooms. Project five (5) in this cluster is a small commercial office building. One of the smaller residential projects (2) is a retrofit of an old 1920s holiday cottage. With the exception of the larger office buildings, this mix of buildings offers reasonable representation of Palo Alto’s diverse building types. Wall assembly insulation values all include a framing factor reduction and are shown as ‘effective,’ as opposed to ‘nominal.’ (e.g. R-19 ‘nominal’ – 15% ff = R-16 effective.) When comparing the R-values of the primary building envelope assemblies it is interesting to note the remarkable similarity in wall and roof insulation values for all seven projects. (Note: they were all designed and modeled by completely separate teams.) While the code-compliant wall insulation does not lag too far behind the PHPP-compliant projects, the fact that exterior walls are always the largest surface area of any building, makes this a key issue. Roof insulation levels shown as ‘effective.’ (See note for the chart above) While walls still offer room for improved insulation, roof insulation levels are clearly well aligned. (Nothing to see here!) Window U-factors converted to R-values for simplicity. PHPP projects show average window performance values. The Title 24 code value is a “worst allowable” performance value. A larger divergence starts to emerge in the average window R-value comparison. The design team for Project 4 was the only one that opted for double-glazed windows. All other projects selected triple-glazed windows, indicating that, while it is possible to meet PHPP targets with double-glazing, triple-glazing may offer other advantages in this borderline climate. The Title 24 compliant windows in this comparison are represented as the “worst allowable” compliance value. We could reasonably assume that a code-compliant project with these windows should meet PHPP performance targets. Caveat emptor: This particular comparison is somewhat complicated. Without going too far into the weeds here, it’s enough to say that a significant difference exists in how window performance is calculated via the PHPP compared to most other energy models. NFRC and the ISO 10077 testing protocols used by the PHPP have been shown to further muddy this comparison, so it may be safest to not draw any solid conclusions from this particularly simplistic comparison. (Windows are complicated and this graph isn’t.) Floor/slab values all shown for slab-on-grade, except for project #1 – Tiny House It’s at the floor/slab comparison where the largest differences appear. All but one of the PHPP-modeled projects employed a slab-on-grade floor assembly. The exception was (1), the tiny house, which required almost double the floor insulation of its peers. This is due to both its diminutive size and more vulnerable exposure to ambient temperature. Notably, the hypothetical Title-24 project shows no sub-slab insulation is required to meet code. Shifting code compliance Airtightness metrics compared with 2016 Title 24 Residential Code Compliance. A final, glaring omission in the code compliance option shows up in a comparison of the airtightness testing for all these projects. They all met the required threshold for Passive House certification, including the retrofit, which is allowed slightly more leakage than its new-build counterparts (up to 1ACH/n50.) This indicates requiring airtightness is not an impossible task. Passive House projects delivered by experienced teams now routinely achieve airtightness testing results between 0.2 and 0.3ACH so we know that meeting airtightness targets is not difficult. Code enforcement agencies across the country  are increasingly recognizing tightened envelopes as an easy, cost-effective measure to drastically improve the performance of our buildings. Measured performance Unfortunately, we don’t yet have the measured performance metrics for this set of projects to enable a full comparison of their predicted and measured performance. We hope to extend this study in future to include that information. Targeting loads We do have a robust set of performance data for another Passive House project located just across the Bay in Alamo, California (and pictured at the top of this column). Despite being outside Palo Alto, this ~3,000-square-foot project shares many of the same features and assemblies as the multi-generational single-family home project (3) in the Palo Alto cluster. It has a treated floor area of 2,342 square feet, wall assembly of R-28, roof assembly of R-46, windows of R-3.3, floor/slab insulation of R-14 and a slightly better airtightness reading of 0.3 ach50. This is an all-electric home, utilizing heat pump-technology for both hot water and space conditioning. It boasts a 7.5-kW photovoltaic array installed on the south-facing roof that powers both the house and an electric vehicle. While not certified, we’re reasonably confident this building meets the requirements of the Passive House standard. Time of use matters Monitoring of energy use of this building began in earnest by May 1, 2016. The daily energy use of the building since then has been remarkably stable, but it’s the bigger picture overview of energy use vs. generation that provides the most insight here (and reaffirms our conclusions drawn from the three framework comparison graphs generated in the Palo Alto report.) Alamo Passive House total energy demand vs. energy production, courtesy of One Sky Homes. When we look at the graph plotting a full year of daily outdoor temperature (red line) against electric usage (green line) overlaid with energy production (blue line), we start to identify crucially important information. Even in our sunny California climate, in a house with incredibly low overall demand (including an electric vehicle), a 7.5 kW PV array is unable to meet all of its energy needs between the months of November and February. It shows that without battery storage, this house still requires a utility. This not only means that time of use matters, but that seasonal use matters and confirms that our most critical variable is, in fact, winter space heating demand – large portions of which cannot be covered by short-term battery storage. Refocusing on emissions reductions The information revealed by this monitored data, combined with the Palo Alto report, supports the new direction being taken by the CEC in its updates to our Title 24, Part 6 energy code. This direction was clearly outlined in the closing paragraph of their FAQ document: “Looking beyond the 2019 standards, the most important energy characteristic for a building will be that it produces and consumes energy at times that are appropriate and responds to the needs of the grid, which reduces the building’s emissions.” Passive House California is in full support of this revised focus on building emissions reductions. However, the information we have shared here provides evidence that there is still plenty of room (and opportunity) to improve building envelope efficiency and to focus particularly on space-heating energy use reduction. We’re pleased to support the California Energy Commission’s efforts pointing our State in the right direction. PHCA is grateful to the owners and project teams who contributed their PHPP files to support this study. To find out more about the work of Passive House California, visit our website. To learn more about the Passive House standard, join us at the 2018 North American Passive House Network Conference (#NAPHN18) in Pittsburgh on October 17-21st. Bronwyn Barry is a registered architect and a certified Passive House designer. She is board president of Passive House California. Footnotes:  http://aceee.org/blog/2018/09/california-must-go-big-energy  https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/63492  http://www.energy.ca.gov/title24/2019standards/documents/2018_Title_24_2019_Building_Standards_FAQ.pdf  http://www.energy.ca.gov/title24/2019standards/documents/2018_Title_24_2019_Building_Standards_FAQ.pdf  Space Heating demand is also the highest energy user in commercial buildings, challenging the commonly held notion that commercial buildings in this region are ‘cooling load dominated.’  Early projections indicate this same approach applies equally to our warmer, southern Californian climates where summer peak load reduction offers the same opportunities for full electrification. (More on this in future articles.)  http://www.energy.ca.gov/title24/2019standards/documents/2018_Title_24_2019_Building_Standards_FAQ.pdf  To clarify, we refer here to the targets of the international standard set by the Passive House Institute as these are universal for all seven projects and were the targets aimed for by these project teams.  It’s not clear why project (6) required so much more insulation than the other PHPP-modeled projects. (We’d hazard a guess that this anomaly may be due to other factors, and was not necessary to meet a performance target, given that this project has a basement slab.)  Not included in this graph is the perimeter slab insulation required for all these projects, including the code compliant building.  https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.nibs.org/resource/resmgr/BEST/BEST2_022_WB6-5.pdf  http://www.energy.ca.gov/title24/2019standards/documents/2018_Title_24_2019_Building_Standards_FAQ.pdf
Having missed out on the 2015 Asian Cup, India captain Sunil Chhetri is determined to prove himself at the 2019 edition of the continent’s premier football tournament.India qualified for the 2019 Asian Cup after thrashing Macau 4-1 in their qualifier at the Sree Kanteerava Stadium on Wednesday evening.India had failed to qualify for the 2014 AFC Challenge Cup and thus also failed to qualify for the 2015 AFC Asian Cup. Earned our right to battle against Asias best and what better place to do it than at the Fortress. Happy,proud,relieved and more. pic.twitter.com/a4DkDJCCNK- Sunil Chhetri (@chetrisunil11) October 11, 2017″I was there when we missed out in 2015 and that still hurts me,” Chhetri said after the match.”This is the tournament we play for. We get to rub our shoulders against best in Asia which we don’t get many times,” he added.Rowllin Borges (28th minute) put India ahead in the first half before Sunil Chhetri (60th) and Jeje Lalpekhlua (90+2) found the net after the break.After a gap of 8 years, we’re back in @afcasiancup. UAE, here we come. #BackTheBlue #AsianDream pic.twitter.com/IU5Zwj9K8G- Indian Football Team (@IndianFootball) October 11, 2017Macau defender Man Fai Ho scored an own goal in the 70th minute while trying to clear a pass into the penalty box by India’s Halicharan Narzary.Nicholas Mario de Almeida Torrao scored the lone goal for the visitors in the 37th minute.The Indians have been in impressive form, winning all the four group matches they have played so far to ensure qualification in style.advertisementThe scenes after India qualified for the AFC Asian Cup 2019. #BackTheBlue #AsianDream pic.twitter.com/mWuhE5Upll- Indian Football Team (@IndianFootball) October 11, 2017Chhetri praised his teammates for their performance, but admitted that the Indians will have to be at the top of their game and cut out the mistakes when they travel to the United Arab Emirates in 2019 for the tournament proper.”Amazing feeling. We have worked hard for this. Quite a group. Good last 3 points. great feeling. Happy with the way we bounced back,” the striker said.”Just four teams qualified. It shows our hard work. We will keep working hard.”We can’t lose our cool. The goal we conceded was against the run of play. Balwant had great pace and set it up for me to finish,” he added.
NEW YORK — Aqueduct has called off Monday’s racing card because of a forecast calling for high winds. This is the first cancellation of the winter meet.The $150,0000 Toboggan Stakes, the holiday feature, has been rescheduled for Sunday.The track remained open for simulcast betting on out-of-state tracks.Racing will resume Friday.TweetPinShare0 Shares
About the authorPaul VegasShare the loveHave your say Arsenal hero Merson says Ozil should be playing againby Paul Vegas13 days agoSend to a friendShare the loveArsenal hero Paul Merson says Mesut Ozil should be playing again.Ozil has been linked with a loan move in January, with Arsenal reportedly prepared to pay some of the 30-year-old’s mammoth £350-a-week wages in order to offload him.”He’s a luxury player, and the manager has obviously decided he can’t carry a player like that in a team that’s already one of the worst around without the ball,” former midfielder Merson wrote in his column for the Daily Star.”With these games coming up, Arsenal are going to have 70% of the possession. He thrives in those situations.”Unai Emery should bring him in from the cold. But he won’t.”If he plays Ozil and they win, he has to keep playing him, and the manager doesn’t want that. The manager wants him out.”And if that’s the plan then they are going to have to swallow a pill and get rid of him in January come what may.”
Liverpool goalkeeper coach Achterberg leaves door open for Lonergan stayby Paul Vegas12 days agoSend to a friendShare the loveLiverpool goalkeeper coach John Achterberg has lifted the lid on signing Andy Lonergan.A goalkeeping shortage ahead of a tour of the United States brought Lonergan, a long-serving goalkeeper of the second tier, on board, literally, with the Premier League title hopefuls as they jetted across the Atlantic.Lonergan’s professionalism was understood to have impressed Reds officials, who handed him a short-term contract to keep him on.”Lonergan has come in to do this job because of the injury [to Alisson],” Achterberg told the Liverpool Echo. “He has done a good job and he works really hard every day. That is a good step for us this year. We will have to look at the end of the season to decide what we will do.”But just how has a soon-to-be 36-year-old journeyman of the lower leagues ended up signing for a team who collected 97 Premier League points the season previous?Achterberg adds: “We had, at that time, agents dropping names and then actually someone came to Michael Edwards (sporting director) with his name.”We were not thinking about signing another goalkeeper but we were short because Kamil Grabara went to Huddersfield and then I think Ali was on holiday and Caoimhin Kelleher broke his wrist, so we were really short.”Then, Andy had said to the club he would come in on non-contract terms and train to stay fit and that was a winning situation for us and him. Then he worked hard, got fit and he was waiting for something to happen somewhere, he had a few shouts to move and that didn’t come off so he stayed training with us.”Then Ali got injured and Simon Mignolet was leaving quickly, it was all done in a week so we were really short. Then we were looking at what was available as the [transfer] deadline had gone and Andy had done really well.”He played some games and had done well. If we were bringing in someone who hadn’t trained with us, then they would have to get up to speed really well. Andy had been training with us and was up to speed. So it made sense to keep him on and he has helped us. He is a good guy and he has fitted in well.” TagsTransfersAbout the authorPaul VegasShare the loveHave your say
About the authorPaul VegasShare the loveHave your say Man Utd keeper David De Gea won’t make Liverpool clashby Paul Vegas9 days agoSend to a friendShare the loveManchester United goalkeeper David De Gea’s groin injury suffered with Spain is understood not to be serious.But it is still likely to keep him out of the clash with Liverpool this weekend, says the Mirror.De Gea suffered the injury in the second-half of Spain’s 1-1 draw with Sweden in a Euro 2020 qualifier on Tuesday night, forcing him out of the game.The United goalkeeper will undergo a scan and full assessment in Manchester on Wednesday, but the early indication from those close to the 29-year-old is that it is not a serious issue.However, a groin strain, rather than a full muscle tear, could see De Gea sidelined for several weeks, ruling him out of Sunday’s visit of league leaders Liverpool, as well as next week’s Europa League tie away to Partizan Belgrade, the Premier League trio to Norwich and United’s EFL Cup tie away to Chelsea.