India began its space program with the establishment of The Space Commission and Department of Space in 1972. Since then India has made steady progress in the development of launch vehicles and satellites. The first Indian satellite was Aryabhata, which was launched by a Soviet rocket on 19th April 1975. With the successful launch of the SLV-3 on 18th July 1980 when a 35kg satellite called Rohini was placed in LEO, India became only the seventh nation in the world to achieve space orbit capability.
Space technology in India is primarily geared towards improving telecommunications, meteorological forecasting, providing advanced natural disaster warning, distance education and remote sensing for agriculture, soil, mineral and water resources management.
India's first operational Earth Observation satellite IRS-1A, a 850 kg satellite was launched into a 900 Km polar orbit on 17th March 1988 by a Soviet rocket. In 1997, India used its own rocket PSLV to place IRS-1D into polar orbit. With the development of PSLV, India has the capability to place upto 1,200 kg satellites into polar orbit.
India's first operational telecommunications satellite was INSAT-1A, which was launched by a NASA Delta rocket on 10th April 1982. Since then, India relies on European Space Agency's Ariane rockets to launch its INSAT series satellites into geostationary orbit. With the development of GSLV, India is expected to be able to put INSAT series satellites into GEO by itself.
India launched its first sub-orbital sounding rocket on Nov. 21, 1963.
SLV. The first experimental launch of a Satellite Launch Vehicle (SLV) rocket took place on August 10, 1979.
Eleven months later, on July 18, 1980, India launched its first satellite, Rohini-1, to orbit on an SLV from the Sriharikota Island launch site.
Since then, India has invested a great deal of development work in more powerful rockets.
ASLV. The first developmental launch of a larger Augmented Satellite Launch Vehicle (ASLV) rocket took place on March 24, 1987. Although an ASLV could lift a 300-lb. satellite to an orbit 250 miles above Earth, it was unsuccessful in its first try. The second developmental launch of an ASLV in July 1988 also failed. Later, the third and fourth attempts were successful.
PSLV. The even larger Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV) debuted in September 1993, but failed to attain orbit. Its individual elements were successful. PSLV could lift a one-ton satellite to a Sun-synchronous polar orbit.
GSLV. The first attempt to launch a still larger Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV) rocket on March 28, 2001, failed on the pad when four strap-on boosters failed to reach the required thrust.
A GSLV was launched on April 18, 2001, from the Sriharikota Island launch site in the southern state of Andhra Pradesh. It successfully placed a 1.5-ton experimental satellite called GSAT-1 into geosynchronous orbit 22,300 miles above Earth.
A GSLV has three rocket stages, is 161 feet tall, and could boost a 2.5-ton satellite, such as large communications and weather satellites, to high stationary orbits. India also plans to use GSLV rockets to send probes away from Earth to explore the planets. Missions to Mercury, Venus and Mars are under consideration.
With a Russian engine. For the first GSLV flight in 2001, India purchased a Russian RD56M upper stage rocket engine and mounted it as the upper stage of the GSLV. The RD56M had been developed by Russia for its Proton-M rocket. A Russian RD56M upper stage also was to be used on the second GSLV flight in Summer 2002.
After that, five RD56Ms would remain for India's use as the South Asia nation had purchased seven RD56Ms from the Russians.
Without a Russian engine. Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO) is developing its own cryogenic upper stage and plans to equip a GSLV with it for a launch of a 4,400-lb. satellite in 2003.
An even more powerful engine could be available for flight testing in 2004 or 2005. A powerful upgraded version III of the GSLV could be ready to fly in 2007.
Commercial launches. India hopes to tap into the commercial launcher market. The first commercial GSLV launch is set for 2002-03, to be followed by two launches per year through 2006-07.
Thursday, June 24, 2004
Saturday, June 19, 2004
Languages of India
There are around 18 languages recognized by the Indian Constitution. These languages are
Assamese
Bengali
Gujarati
Hindi
Kannada
Kashmiri
Konkani
Malayalam
Manipuri
Marathi
Nepali
Oriya
Punjabi
Sanskrit
Sindhi
Tamil
Telugu
Urdu
Hindi is the official and main link language of India. Its homeland is mainly in the north of India, but it is spoken and widely understood in all urban centers of India. It is written in the Devanagri script, which is phonetic and, unlike English, is pronounced as it is written. Hindi is a direct descendant of Sanskrit through Prakrit and Apabhramsha. It has been influenced and enriched by Dravidian, Turkish, Farsi, Arabic, Portugese and English. It is a very expressive language. In poetry and songs, it can convey emotions using simple and gentle words. It can also be used for exact and rational reasoning.
Assamese
Bengali
Gujarati
Hindi
Kannada
Kashmiri
Konkani
Malayalam
Manipuri
Marathi
Nepali
Oriya
Punjabi
Sanskrit
Sindhi
Tamil
Telugu
Urdu
Hindi is the official and main link language of India. Its homeland is mainly in the north of India, but it is spoken and widely understood in all urban centers of India. It is written in the Devanagri script, which is phonetic and, unlike English, is pronounced as it is written. Hindi is a direct descendant of Sanskrit through Prakrit and Apabhramsha. It has been influenced and enriched by Dravidian, Turkish, Farsi, Arabic, Portugese and English. It is a very expressive language. In poetry and songs, it can convey emotions using simple and gentle words. It can also be used for exact and rational reasoning.
Thursday, June 10, 2004
The Saraswati River: India's miracle river
The legend of the mighty Saraswati river has lived on in India since time immemorial. Ancient Hindu scriptures called the Vedas, recorded thousands of years ago, are full of tantalising hymns about it being the life-stream of the people.
In a new radio programme, Madhur Jaffrey recounts the legend of the Saraswati river - and explores startling new evidence that it may not have been a myth after all.
Vast and awesome, the Saraswati's holy waters are supposed to have flowed from the Himalayas into the sea, nourishing the land along the way. But as the centuries passed and no one could find it, myth, belief and religion came together and the Saraswati passed into the realm of folklore.
Now most people in India think of it as a mythical river. Some even believe that it is an invisible river or that it still flows underground. Another commonly held perception is that the Saraswati once flowed through the north Indian city of Allahabad, meeting there with two other rivers, the Ganges and the Jamuna.
The confluence of these three rivers - one of which is not visible to the eye - is considered one of India's holiest spots.
For most of the country, the name Saraswati is better known for its divine namesake - the goddess Saraswati, Hindu goddess of Learning. Worshipped particularly by students and school children, her festival falls in February, and the city of Calcutta is famous for celebrating her in style.
Makeshift shrines are erected in every street and after the festival is over, thousands of the images are taken to the banks of the river Hooghly and pitched into the water where they are forever carried away by the river.
The goddess' connection to water is part of the enigma that surrounds the river. But that mystery could be set to be dispelled forever, as startling scientific evidence has come to light.
Through satellite photography, scientists have mapped the course of an enormous river that once flowed through the north western region of India. The images show that it was 8 km wide in places and that it dried up 4,000 years ago.
Dr JR Sharma who heads the Remote Sensing Services Centre in Jodhpur which is mapping the images, believes a major earthquake may have played a part in the demise of the Saraswati. There was, he says, a big tectonic activity that stopped the water supply to the river.
Sharma and his team believe they have found the Saraswati and are excited about what this discovery could mean for India. The idea is to tap its potential as a water source. They are working with India¿s leading water experts who are using the satellite images as clues.
Deep in the western Rajasthan desert, not far from the security-conscious border with Pakistan, an extraordinary programme is underway. Giant drilling rigs probe deep into the dry, arid earth pulling out undisturbed layers of soil and sediment for scientists to study and test.
Water engineers are exploring the region's ancient riverbeds for what they call groundwater - underground reservoirs that contain perfectly drinkable water. If they are successful, their discovery could transform the lives of thousands of locals who currently experience harsh water shortages.
Mr KS Sriwastawa of the Rajasthan State Groundwater Board believes one of these ancient buried channels may be the Saraswati.
He knows the stories refer to the ancient river flowing through this area and says excitedly that carbon dating has revealed that the water they are finding is 4000 years old. That would date it to the time of the Saraswati.
The modern search for the Saraswati was first sparked by an English engineer called CF Oldham in 1893 when he was riding his horse along the dry bed of a seasonal Rajasthani river called the Ghaggar.
As he rode on, he was struck by a sudden thought. The Ghaggar when it flowed, was a small, puny river and there was no reason for its bed to be up to 3km wide in places unless it occupied the former course of a much larger river - the Saraswati.
The discovery of a vast prehistoric civilisation that lived along the banks of a major river, has added impetus to the growing modern belief that the Saraswati has been found.
Over 1000 archaeological sites have been found on the course of this river and they date from 3000 BC. One of these sites is the prehistoric town of Kalibangan in northern Rajasthan.
The town has proved a treasure trove of information about the Bronze Age people who actually lived on the banks of the Saraswati. Archaeologists have discovered that there were priests, farmers, merchants and very advanced artists and craftsmen living there.
Highly sophisticated seals on which there is evidence of writing have also been found, indicating that these people were literate, but unfortunately the seals have never been deciphered.
They may well hold the clue to the mystery of what happened to the Saraswati and whether it has really been found again
In a new radio programme, Madhur Jaffrey recounts the legend of the Saraswati river - and explores startling new evidence that it may not have been a myth after all.
Vast and awesome, the Saraswati's holy waters are supposed to have flowed from the Himalayas into the sea, nourishing the land along the way. But as the centuries passed and no one could find it, myth, belief and religion came together and the Saraswati passed into the realm of folklore.
Now most people in India think of it as a mythical river. Some even believe that it is an invisible river or that it still flows underground. Another commonly held perception is that the Saraswati once flowed through the north Indian city of Allahabad, meeting there with two other rivers, the Ganges and the Jamuna.
The confluence of these three rivers - one of which is not visible to the eye - is considered one of India's holiest spots.
For most of the country, the name Saraswati is better known for its divine namesake - the goddess Saraswati, Hindu goddess of Learning. Worshipped particularly by students and school children, her festival falls in February, and the city of Calcutta is famous for celebrating her in style.
Makeshift shrines are erected in every street and after the festival is over, thousands of the images are taken to the banks of the river Hooghly and pitched into the water where they are forever carried away by the river.
The goddess' connection to water is part of the enigma that surrounds the river. But that mystery could be set to be dispelled forever, as startling scientific evidence has come to light.
Through satellite photography, scientists have mapped the course of an enormous river that once flowed through the north western region of India. The images show that it was 8 km wide in places and that it dried up 4,000 years ago.
Dr JR Sharma who heads the Remote Sensing Services Centre in Jodhpur which is mapping the images, believes a major earthquake may have played a part in the demise of the Saraswati. There was, he says, a big tectonic activity that stopped the water supply to the river.
Sharma and his team believe they have found the Saraswati and are excited about what this discovery could mean for India. The idea is to tap its potential as a water source. They are working with India¿s leading water experts who are using the satellite images as clues.
Deep in the western Rajasthan desert, not far from the security-conscious border with Pakistan, an extraordinary programme is underway. Giant drilling rigs probe deep into the dry, arid earth pulling out undisturbed layers of soil and sediment for scientists to study and test.
Water engineers are exploring the region's ancient riverbeds for what they call groundwater - underground reservoirs that contain perfectly drinkable water. If they are successful, their discovery could transform the lives of thousands of locals who currently experience harsh water shortages.
Mr KS Sriwastawa of the Rajasthan State Groundwater Board believes one of these ancient buried channels may be the Saraswati.
He knows the stories refer to the ancient river flowing through this area and says excitedly that carbon dating has revealed that the water they are finding is 4000 years old. That would date it to the time of the Saraswati.
The modern search for the Saraswati was first sparked by an English engineer called CF Oldham in 1893 when he was riding his horse along the dry bed of a seasonal Rajasthani river called the Ghaggar.
As he rode on, he was struck by a sudden thought. The Ghaggar when it flowed, was a small, puny river and there was no reason for its bed to be up to 3km wide in places unless it occupied the former course of a much larger river - the Saraswati.
The discovery of a vast prehistoric civilisation that lived along the banks of a major river, has added impetus to the growing modern belief that the Saraswati has been found.
Over 1000 archaeological sites have been found on the course of this river and they date from 3000 BC. One of these sites is the prehistoric town of Kalibangan in northern Rajasthan.
The town has proved a treasure trove of information about the Bronze Age people who actually lived on the banks of the Saraswati. Archaeologists have discovered that there were priests, farmers, merchants and very advanced artists and craftsmen living there.
Highly sophisticated seals on which there is evidence of writing have also been found, indicating that these people were literate, but unfortunately the seals have never been deciphered.
They may well hold the clue to the mystery of what happened to the Saraswati and whether it has really been found again
Tuesday, June 08, 2004
Brief History of Andhra Pradesh
The Andhras are originally an Aryan race, believed to have migrated to the south of the Vindhyas where they mingled with the non-Aryans. The earliest accounts of Andhra Pradesh date back to the time of Ashoka the Great Mauriyan king ( 3rd century B.C.) during whose reign it became an important Buddhist center. Even today there still are good evidences of the early Buddhist influence in Amaravathi and Nagarjunakonda, one of the greatest archaeological sites in the India.
The Satavahana dynasty ( 2nd century BC 2nd century A.D), also known as the Andhras, took control of much of central and southern India. They had their capital at Amravati on the Krishna. They enjoyed extensive international trade with both eastern Asia and Europe. The Satavahanas too were great patrons of Buddhism. Subsequently, the Pallavas from Tamil Nadu, the Chalukyas from Karnataka, and the Cholas all held sway. In the 13th century, the Kakatiyas, with their capital at Warrangal, dominated Andhra Desa. They were under the constant threat from Muslim incursions, while later on, after the fall of their city at Hampi, the Hindu Vijayanagars transferred operations to Chandragiri near Tirupati.
In 1323, the Tughlak Sultan of Delhi captured the Kakatiya ruler and ended the dynasty. The Tuglaks never cared to annex the Kakatiyan dominions and four local kingdoms arose out of the old Kakatiyan empire. One of these kingdoms was Vijayanagar. The Vijayanagar empire stood as a bulwark against Muslim expansionism for more than 200 years. Vijayanagar had to contend with Muslim sultanates in the north time and again. Sometimes Vijayanagar joined on sultan against another. These tactics finally led to a grand alliance of the sultanates of Ahmadnagar, Bijapur, Golconda and Bihar against Vijayanagar. On 23rd January, 1565 the Deccan sultans humbled the mighty Vijayanagar army at the battle of Talikota.
The next significant development was in the mid 16th century, with the advent of the Muslim Qutb Shahi dynasty. The Qutb Shahis of Golconda laid the foundations of the modern city of Hyderabad. In 1687, the son of the Moghal emperor Aurangzeb routed the Qutub Shahis and seized Golconda. He appointed Asaf Jah the governor of Deccan. As the Mughal Empire tottered under Aurangzeb's successors, the Asaf Jahis made themselves independent rulers under the title of Nizam. Five years after Aurangzeb died in 1707, the Viceroy of Hyderabad declared independence and established the Asaf Jahi dynasty of Nizams. In return for allying with the British against Tipu Sultan of Mysore, the Nizam was allowed to retain a certain degree of autonomy even after the British had come to dominate all India. The Nizams became involved in the Anglo-French wars in the Deccan and had finally to enter into a subsidiary alliance with the British in 1800.
Andhra Pradesh is the first state in India that has been formed on a purely linguistic basis. When India became independent, the Andhras, that is, the Telugu-speaking people (although Urdu is widely spoken in Hyderabad) were distributed in about 21 districts, 9 of them in the Nizam's Dominions and 12 in the Madras Presidency. On the basis of an agitation, on Oct. 1, 1953, 11 districts of the Madras State were put together to form a new Andhra State with Kurnool as capital. On Nov. 1, 1956 in accordance with the recommendations of the State Reorganization Commission, the Andhra State was enlarged by the addition of nine districts formerly in the Nizam's Dominion. Hyderabad, the former capital of the Nizam, was made the capital of the enlarged Andhra State.
AP thus consists of three distinct regions
From 1969 to 1972 AP was rocked by riots, first in Telengana, then in Andhra on the question of bifurcation of the state. The central Government refused to consider the question of bifurcation. A six-point formula was put forward by the then Prime Minister Mrs. Indira Gandhi as a compromise. The formula was generally accepted and peace was restored in the state. The six-point formula has been incorporated into the Constitution as the Thirty-second Amendment in 1973.
Some Historical Events from in the Post Historical Era:
The Satavahana dynasty ( 2nd century BC 2nd century A.D), also known as the Andhras, took control of much of central and southern India. They had their capital at Amravati on the Krishna. They enjoyed extensive international trade with both eastern Asia and Europe. The Satavahanas too were great patrons of Buddhism. Subsequently, the Pallavas from Tamil Nadu, the Chalukyas from Karnataka, and the Cholas all held sway. In the 13th century, the Kakatiyas, with their capital at Warrangal, dominated Andhra Desa. They were under the constant threat from Muslim incursions, while later on, after the fall of their city at Hampi, the Hindu Vijayanagars transferred operations to Chandragiri near Tirupati.
In 1323, the Tughlak Sultan of Delhi captured the Kakatiya ruler and ended the dynasty. The Tuglaks never cared to annex the Kakatiyan dominions and four local kingdoms arose out of the old Kakatiyan empire. One of these kingdoms was Vijayanagar. The Vijayanagar empire stood as a bulwark against Muslim expansionism for more than 200 years. Vijayanagar had to contend with Muslim sultanates in the north time and again. Sometimes Vijayanagar joined on sultan against another. These tactics finally led to a grand alliance of the sultanates of Ahmadnagar, Bijapur, Golconda and Bihar against Vijayanagar. On 23rd January, 1565 the Deccan sultans humbled the mighty Vijayanagar army at the battle of Talikota.
The next significant development was in the mid 16th century, with the advent of the Muslim Qutb Shahi dynasty. The Qutb Shahis of Golconda laid the foundations of the modern city of Hyderabad. In 1687, the son of the Moghal emperor Aurangzeb routed the Qutub Shahis and seized Golconda. He appointed Asaf Jah the governor of Deccan. As the Mughal Empire tottered under Aurangzeb's successors, the Asaf Jahis made themselves independent rulers under the title of Nizam. Five years after Aurangzeb died in 1707, the Viceroy of Hyderabad declared independence and established the Asaf Jahi dynasty of Nizams. In return for allying with the British against Tipu Sultan of Mysore, the Nizam was allowed to retain a certain degree of autonomy even after the British had come to dominate all India. The Nizams became involved in the Anglo-French wars in the Deccan and had finally to enter into a subsidiary alliance with the British in 1800.
Andhra Pradesh is the first state in India that has been formed on a purely linguistic basis. When India became independent, the Andhras, that is, the Telugu-speaking people (although Urdu is widely spoken in Hyderabad) were distributed in about 21 districts, 9 of them in the Nizam's Dominions and 12 in the Madras Presidency. On the basis of an agitation, on Oct. 1, 1953, 11 districts of the Madras State were put together to form a new Andhra State with Kurnool as capital. On Nov. 1, 1956 in accordance with the recommendations of the State Reorganization Commission, the Andhra State was enlarged by the addition of nine districts formerly in the Nizam's Dominion. Hyderabad, the former capital of the Nizam, was made the capital of the enlarged Andhra State.
AP thus consists of three distinct regions
- coastal region, comprising of nine districts, generally called Andhra,
- the interior region, consisting of four districts collectively known as Rayalaseema and
- Telengana region, consisting of the capital Hyderabad and nine adjoining districts.
From 1969 to 1972 AP was rocked by riots, first in Telengana, then in Andhra on the question of bifurcation of the state. The central Government refused to consider the question of bifurcation. A six-point formula was put forward by the then Prime Minister Mrs. Indira Gandhi as a compromise. The formula was generally accepted and peace was restored in the state. The six-point formula has been incorporated into the Constitution as the Thirty-second Amendment in 1973.
Some Historical Events from in the Post Historical Era:
- 1947, Jaipur Session - A committee was set up with Jawaharlal Nehru, Vallabhai Patel and Pattabhi Sitaramaiah (JVP) by the All India Congress Committee to look into the demand for a separate Andhra State.
- The JVP Committee approves reorganisation of states on linguistic basis but suggests delay in implementation.
- August 15, 1950 - Government of India's non-chalance results in peoples' restlessness. Goparaju Sitarama Sastry commences fast unto death.
- September 25, 1950 - Goparaju Sitarama Sastry calls off his fast after assurances from Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru about formation of a separate Andhra state.
- October 19, 1952 - Andhra stalwart Potti Sreeramulu begins fast unto death when no initiative towards their demands is undertaken.
- December 15, 1952 - Sreeramulu takes his last breath, making a supreme sacrifice for the cause of the Andhras.
- Bowed down by pressures and angry threats, Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru makes a surprise announcement in the Lok Sabha that steps are being taken to form a separate state of Andhra Pradesh.
- January 1953 - The Government of India appoints Justice K.N.Wanchoo to look into the matter.
- March 1953 - Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru announces the ushering in of the first linguistic state in the country on October 1, 1953.
- October 1, 1953 - Andhra Kesari Tanguturi Prakasam takes charge as Chief Minister of Andhra state with Neelam Sanjeeva Reddy as the deputy.
- December 1953 - Government of India appoints the States Reorganisation Commission headed by Justice Fazal Ali to decide on the demand for the formation of linguistic states in other parts of the country
Monday, June 07, 2004
2003 National Geographic Bee.
Here are the answers to some of the questions asked of nearly 5 million students who took part in the preliminary round of the 2003 National Geographic Bee.
United States Geography
• The Mississippi River separates Tennessee from which state—Arkansas or Oklahoma? Arkansas Which state is north of the Ohio River—Virginia or Indiana? Indiana
• Which state, known as the Centennial State, joined the Union in 1876—Colorado or Vermont? Colorado
• Which river forms most of the border between Georgia and South Carolina—the Potomac River or the Savannah River? Savannah River
• Which city lies near the junction of the Missouri and Mississippi Rivers—Memphis or St. Louis? St. Louis
• Which agricultural state is the geographical center of North America—New Jersey or North Dakota? North Dakota
• Farmers in which state use water from the Ogallala Aquifer for irrigation—Nebraska or Maine? Nebraska
• Which city is located at the junction of the Allegheny and Monongahela Rivers—Minneapolis or Pittsburgh? Pittsburgh
• Which city is Oregon's largest city—Portland or Helena? Portland
• The Sea Island chain, including Hilton Head and Cumberland Island, runs along the coast of which state—Michigan or South Carolina? South Carolina
U.S. Cities
• Which city is located on the Cumberland River and is known for its many country music recording centers—Nashville or Little Rock? Nashville
• Which city is known for its extensive freeway system and is located in the most populous county in the United States—Dallas or Los Angeles? Los Angeles
• Which city was founded as a fort between Lake Erie and Lake Huron and developed into one of the country's leading manufacturing centers—Detroit or Milwaukee? Detroit
• Which city is located on a river delta—New Orleans or Austin? New Orleans
• Which city was named after the founder of a famous stagecoach line that once crisscrossed the West—Fargo or Boston? Fargo
• Which city is the westernmost point on the Erie Canal—Cincinnati or Buffalo? Buffalo
• Which major city is located in North Carolina and was near the site of the first important gold discovery in the United States—Columbia or Charlotte? Charlotte
• The world's largest naval base is located at the mouth of the Chesapeake Bay in which city—Norfolk or Washington, D.C.? Norfolk
• Which city is located on the western tip of Lake Superior and is an important port for shipping grain and iron ore—Des Moines or Duluth? Duluth
• Which city was badly damaged during an earthquake in 1964 and is now the most populous city in Alaska—Anchorage or Barrow? Anchorage
Odd Item Out
• Which state is not a major producer of wheat—Connecticut, North Dakota, or Montana? Connecticut
• Which of the following states is not crossed by the Colorado River—Arizona, Colorado, or New Mexico? New Mexico
• Which state does not border Tennessee—North Carolina, Mississippi, or West Virginia? West Virginia
• Which of the following is not a Great Plains state—Ohio, Oklahoma, or Kansas? Ohio
• Which state's capital is not named after a President of the United States—Mississippi, Nebraska, or South Dakota? South Dakota
• Which state does not include part of Yellowstone National Park—Idaho, Oregon, or Wyoming? Oregon
• Which state does not have a continental climate—Iowa, Minnesota, or Mississippi? Mississippi
• Which state does not border Saskatchewan—Montana, North Dakota, or Wisconsin? Wisconsin
• Which state is not part of New England—Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, or Connecticut? Pennsylvania
• Which state does not have a panhandle—Colorado, Florida, or Oklahoma? Colorado
Continents
• The archipelago Islas Malvinas , also called the Falkland Islands, lies off the southeastern edge of which continent? South America
• Name the continent on which the Olympic Games originated. Europe
• Amundsen, Scott, and Byrd all explored which continent? Antarctica
• Brisbane and Adelaide are ports on which continent? Australia
• Öland , Corsica, and Malta are islands that are part of which continent? Europe
• Which continent includes the Atlas Mountains and the Kalahari Desert? Africa
• Borneo, one of the largest islands in the world, is considered part of which continent? Asia
• Which continent contains the largest number of landlocked countries? Africa
• The Ural Mountains form the western boundary for which continent? Asia
• The country with the longest coastline is located on which continent? North America
World Geography
• One of the world's largest potash deposits is located in Saskatchewan in which country? Canada
• Yekaterinburg lies on the eastern side of the Ural Mountains in which country? Russia
• The Tyrrhenian Sea separates the island of Sardinia [sar-DIH-nee-uh] from the mainland of which country? Italy
• Which country located southeast of Australia is one of the world's leading producers of wool? New Zealand
• Oil pipelines cross the Isthmus of Tehuantepec to the port at Salina Cruz in which country? Mexico
• The confluence of the Blue Nile and the White Nile Rivers lies near Khartoum in which African country? Sudan
• What Asian country traditionally organized its citizens into a strict caste system related to Hinduism? India
• The Gobi Desert is the main physical feature in the southern half of a country known also as the homeland of Genghis Khan. Name this country. Mongolia
• Since 1960, thousands of people have migrated across the Straits of Florida to the United States from which country? Cuba
• Large reserves of phosphates are found in which North African country that borders the Atlantic Ocean and the Mediterranean Sea? Morocco
The Geography of Culturally Important Places and Issues
• What is the primary religion of Mali, a landlocked country located in West Africa? Islam
• The Festival of San Fermin at Pamplona is an important festival in which European country? Spain
• Impressionist painting was developed by painters such as Monet and Renoir in which European country? France
• What religion originated in India and spread across Asia via trade routes such as the Silk Road? Buddhism
• What country is famous for its harmonious gardens that provide sanctuary for people living in large cities like Kyoto? Japan
• The oracle of Zeus at Dodona is located in which European country? Greece
• The Manchu are an ethnic group of what Asian country? China
• The Temple of Queen Hatshepsut at Deir el-Bahri is on the west bank of which African river? Nile
• Maharashtra borders the Arabian Sea and is one of the most urbanized states of which Asian country? India
• Name the politically divided island in northwestern Europe that has a Protestant majority in the north and a Catholic majority in the south. Ireland
Physical Geography
• The Great Circle, at zero degrees latitude, is known by what name? Equator
• What is the term for the sudden vibrations caused by the movement of rock along a fault? earthquake
• Name the belt of volcanic and seismic activity that borders most of the Pacific Rim. Ring of Fire
• What is the name of the solid fossil fuel found in sedimentary rock? coal
• In the Northern Hemisphere, what season begins when the noonday sun is directly overhead at the Tropic of Capricorn? winter
• What resource is trapped between layers of rock in an aquifer? water
• Earthquakes can sometimes create unusually large waves that cause destruction when they reach land. What Japanese term is used for this kind of wave? tsunami
• In Florida and the West Indies, a small low-lying island usually made up of coral or sand is known by what term? key
• What is the term for the flat area that stretches beyond the banks of a river? floodplain
• What is the term for a hot spring through which jets of heated water and steam erupt? geyser
United States Geography
• The Mississippi River separates Tennessee from which state—Arkansas or Oklahoma? Arkansas Which state is north of the Ohio River—Virginia or Indiana? Indiana
• Which state, known as the Centennial State, joined the Union in 1876—Colorado or Vermont? Colorado
• Which river forms most of the border between Georgia and South Carolina—the Potomac River or the Savannah River? Savannah River
• Which city lies near the junction of the Missouri and Mississippi Rivers—Memphis or St. Louis? St. Louis
• Which agricultural state is the geographical center of North America—New Jersey or North Dakota? North Dakota
• Farmers in which state use water from the Ogallala Aquifer for irrigation—Nebraska or Maine? Nebraska
• Which city is located at the junction of the Allegheny and Monongahela Rivers—Minneapolis or Pittsburgh? Pittsburgh
• Which city is Oregon's largest city—Portland or Helena? Portland
• The Sea Island chain, including Hilton Head and Cumberland Island, runs along the coast of which state—Michigan or South Carolina? South Carolina
U.S. Cities
• Which city is located on the Cumberland River and is known for its many country music recording centers—Nashville or Little Rock? Nashville
• Which city is known for its extensive freeway system and is located in the most populous county in the United States—Dallas or Los Angeles? Los Angeles
• Which city was founded as a fort between Lake Erie and Lake Huron and developed into one of the country's leading manufacturing centers—Detroit or Milwaukee? Detroit
• Which city is located on a river delta—New Orleans or Austin? New Orleans
• Which city was named after the founder of a famous stagecoach line that once crisscrossed the West—Fargo or Boston? Fargo
• Which city is the westernmost point on the Erie Canal—Cincinnati or Buffalo? Buffalo
• Which major city is located in North Carolina and was near the site of the first important gold discovery in the United States—Columbia or Charlotte? Charlotte
• The world's largest naval base is located at the mouth of the Chesapeake Bay in which city—Norfolk or Washington, D.C.? Norfolk
• Which city is located on the western tip of Lake Superior and is an important port for shipping grain and iron ore—Des Moines or Duluth? Duluth
• Which city was badly damaged during an earthquake in 1964 and is now the most populous city in Alaska—Anchorage or Barrow? Anchorage
Odd Item Out
• Which state is not a major producer of wheat—Connecticut, North Dakota, or Montana? Connecticut
• Which of the following states is not crossed by the Colorado River—Arizona, Colorado, or New Mexico? New Mexico
• Which state does not border Tennessee—North Carolina, Mississippi, or West Virginia? West Virginia
• Which of the following is not a Great Plains state—Ohio, Oklahoma, or Kansas? Ohio
• Which state's capital is not named after a President of the United States—Mississippi, Nebraska, or South Dakota? South Dakota
• Which state does not include part of Yellowstone National Park—Idaho, Oregon, or Wyoming? Oregon
• Which state does not have a continental climate—Iowa, Minnesota, or Mississippi? Mississippi
• Which state does not border Saskatchewan—Montana, North Dakota, or Wisconsin? Wisconsin
• Which state is not part of New England—Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, or Connecticut? Pennsylvania
• Which state does not have a panhandle—Colorado, Florida, or Oklahoma? Colorado
Continents
• The archipelago Islas Malvinas , also called the Falkland Islands, lies off the southeastern edge of which continent? South America
• Name the continent on which the Olympic Games originated. Europe
• Amundsen, Scott, and Byrd all explored which continent? Antarctica
• Brisbane and Adelaide are ports on which continent? Australia
• Öland , Corsica, and Malta are islands that are part of which continent? Europe
• Which continent includes the Atlas Mountains and the Kalahari Desert? Africa
• Borneo, one of the largest islands in the world, is considered part of which continent? Asia
• Which continent contains the largest number of landlocked countries? Africa
• The Ural Mountains form the western boundary for which continent? Asia
• The country with the longest coastline is located on which continent? North America
World Geography
• One of the world's largest potash deposits is located in Saskatchewan in which country? Canada
• Yekaterinburg lies on the eastern side of the Ural Mountains in which country? Russia
• The Tyrrhenian Sea separates the island of Sardinia [sar-DIH-nee-uh] from the mainland of which country? Italy
• Which country located southeast of Australia is one of the world's leading producers of wool? New Zealand
• Oil pipelines cross the Isthmus of Tehuantepec to the port at Salina Cruz in which country? Mexico
• The confluence of the Blue Nile and the White Nile Rivers lies near Khartoum in which African country? Sudan
• What Asian country traditionally organized its citizens into a strict caste system related to Hinduism? India
• The Gobi Desert is the main physical feature in the southern half of a country known also as the homeland of Genghis Khan. Name this country. Mongolia
• Since 1960, thousands of people have migrated across the Straits of Florida to the United States from which country? Cuba
• Large reserves of phosphates are found in which North African country that borders the Atlantic Ocean and the Mediterranean Sea? Morocco
The Geography of Culturally Important Places and Issues
• What is the primary religion of Mali, a landlocked country located in West Africa? Islam
• The Festival of San Fermin at Pamplona is an important festival in which European country? Spain
• Impressionist painting was developed by painters such as Monet and Renoir in which European country? France
• What religion originated in India and spread across Asia via trade routes such as the Silk Road? Buddhism
• What country is famous for its harmonious gardens that provide sanctuary for people living in large cities like Kyoto? Japan
• The oracle of Zeus at Dodona is located in which European country? Greece
• The Manchu are an ethnic group of what Asian country? China
• The Temple of Queen Hatshepsut at Deir el-Bahri is on the west bank of which African river? Nile
• Maharashtra borders the Arabian Sea and is one of the most urbanized states of which Asian country? India
• Name the politically divided island in northwestern Europe that has a Protestant majority in the north and a Catholic majority in the south. Ireland
Physical Geography
• The Great Circle, at zero degrees latitude, is known by what name? Equator
• What is the term for the sudden vibrations caused by the movement of rock along a fault? earthquake
• Name the belt of volcanic and seismic activity that borders most of the Pacific Rim. Ring of Fire
• What is the name of the solid fossil fuel found in sedimentary rock? coal
• In the Northern Hemisphere, what season begins when the noonday sun is directly overhead at the Tropic of Capricorn? winter
• What resource is trapped between layers of rock in an aquifer? water
• Earthquakes can sometimes create unusually large waves that cause destruction when they reach land. What Japanese term is used for this kind of wave? tsunami
• In Florida and the West Indies, a small low-lying island usually made up of coral or sand is known by what term? key
• What is the term for the flat area that stretches beyond the banks of a river? floodplain
• What is the term for a hot spring through which jets of heated water and steam erupt? geyser
Lord of the Rings Inspired by an Ancient Epic
Brian Handwerk
Generations of readers have cherished Middle-earth, the fantasy universe sprung from the mind of storyteller J.R.R. Tolkien. His magical world has been brought to life in the Lord of the Rings movie trilogy, the third of which, The Return of the King, swept every category it was nominated for at the Academy Awards ceremony last night. The movie most notably won Oscars for Best Picture and Directing, among 9 others.
While the author's imagination was vast, Tolkien's world and its cast of characters do have roots in real-world history and geography, from the world wars that dominated Tolkien's lifetime to the ancient language and legends of Finland.
Anthropologist and ethnobotanist Wade Davis traveled to a remote corner of Finland to uncover Tolkien influences that stretch back into the misty past of northern Europe.
Ancient Saga
Davis, a National Geographic Society explorer-in-residence, journeyed to what was once Finland's Viena Karelia region, along the Russian border, to study Finnish. By the 19th century this area was a last refuge for a unique dialect of the Finnish language.
Nearly all Finns at that time were speaking Finnish, Swedish, or even Russian, the region's established written languages. But a dialect still existed in this isolated region as it always had—in oral form, passed down through the ages from one generation to the next in songs and verses, or runes.
A collection of these runes, comparable to India's Ramayana, or the Greek Odyssey, is known in Finland as the Kalevala, and those who sing its lyrical verses from memory are known as rune singers. These elders long carried in their minds the entire record of the Finnish language.
"In an oral tradition, the total richness of the language is no more than the vocabulary of the best storyteller," Davis explains. "In other words, at any one point in time the boundaries of the language are being stretched according to the memory of the best storyteller."
In what was the Viena Karelia region, the oral tradition of the Finnish language is still alive, but now contained in the memory of just a single storyteller. His name is Jussi Houvinen, and he is Finland's last great rune singer. This elderly man is a living link to myths and languages that have passed mouth-to-ear over the ages in an unbroken chain.
"It's an amazing thing to be in the presence of a man singing even a snippet of the poem," says Davis of his meeting with Houvinen, "because it's so powerful that even if you don't speak Finnish it's profoundly moving just to listen to it, just the cadence of the sounds.
"Being in his presence, and knowing how few people can today recite the poem, you felt you were in the presence of history that was about to be snuffed out." When Houvinen dies the ancient succession of rune singers will end. No one from a younger generation has been able to learn the vast breadth of the saga.
However, the Kalevala itself will not die with Jussi, due to the efforts of a country doctor named Elias Lönnrot.
In the early 19th century, Lönnrot became enamored of the Finnish songs and runes he found in Viena Karelia. He devoted himself to traveling the district, listening to the rune singers and committing the oral poetry to the written word. This was the genesis not only of the modern Finnish language but of the Finnish nation as an entity, creating what Davis calls "this wonderful idea of a … bardic poem inspiring a modern nation."
Inspiration for Middle-Earth
The Kalevala inspired not only Finnish nationalism but also a young English scholar and writer named J.R.R. Tolkien, in whose mind was already taking shape a magical universe that was about to be transformed by Finnish language and legend.
In a letter to W.H. Auden, on June 7, 1955, he remembered his excitement upon discovering a Finnish grammar in Exeter College Library. "It was like discovering a complete wine-cellar filled with bottles of an amazing wine of a kind and flavour never tasted before. It quite intoxicated me; and I gave up the attempt to invent an 'unrecorded' Germanic language, and my 'own language'—or series of invented languages—became heavily Finnicized [sic] in phonetic pattern and structure."
The Finnish language that so delighted the young student became the inspiration for the lyrical tongue of Middle-earth's elves. Tolkien taught himself the ancient and newly codified Finnish to develop his elfin language, and so that he could read the Kalevala in its original Finnish. This achievement opened the door to many further influences from Finnish mythology. Parallels abound between the Kalevala and Tolkien's own saga, in terms of both the characters themselves and the idea of the hero's journey.
The Kalevala features "all the themes of pre-Christian traditions, shape-shifting, mythical demons, magical plants, animals becoming human beings," says Davis, while the story itself "is fundamentally a story of a sacred object which has power, and the pursuit of the mythic heroes who seek that power, to seek a way of understanding what that power means." Davis describes the Kalevala as "a journey of the soul and a journey of the spirit—and that's obviously what drew Tolkien to it."
Tolkien readers have long seen Tolkien's bucolic vision of rural England represented in Middle-earth's Shire, and recognized English farmers in characters such as the hobbit Sam. But those who explore the Kalevala may discover much of the land of the elves, and their language, in the vast snowy spruce forests of Finnish legend.
Generations of readers have cherished Middle-earth, the fantasy universe sprung from the mind of storyteller J.R.R. Tolkien. His magical world has been brought to life in the Lord of the Rings movie trilogy, the third of which, The Return of the King, swept every category it was nominated for at the Academy Awards ceremony last night. The movie most notably won Oscars for Best Picture and Directing, among 9 others.
While the author's imagination was vast, Tolkien's world and its cast of characters do have roots in real-world history and geography, from the world wars that dominated Tolkien's lifetime to the ancient language and legends of Finland.
Anthropologist and ethnobotanist Wade Davis traveled to a remote corner of Finland to uncover Tolkien influences that stretch back into the misty past of northern Europe.
Ancient Saga
Davis, a National Geographic Society explorer-in-residence, journeyed to what was once Finland's Viena Karelia region, along the Russian border, to study Finnish. By the 19th century this area was a last refuge for a unique dialect of the Finnish language.
Nearly all Finns at that time were speaking Finnish, Swedish, or even Russian, the region's established written languages. But a dialect still existed in this isolated region as it always had—in oral form, passed down through the ages from one generation to the next in songs and verses, or runes.
A collection of these runes, comparable to India's Ramayana, or the Greek Odyssey, is known in Finland as the Kalevala, and those who sing its lyrical verses from memory are known as rune singers. These elders long carried in their minds the entire record of the Finnish language.
"In an oral tradition, the total richness of the language is no more than the vocabulary of the best storyteller," Davis explains. "In other words, at any one point in time the boundaries of the language are being stretched according to the memory of the best storyteller."
In what was the Viena Karelia region, the oral tradition of the Finnish language is still alive, but now contained in the memory of just a single storyteller. His name is Jussi Houvinen, and he is Finland's last great rune singer. This elderly man is a living link to myths and languages that have passed mouth-to-ear over the ages in an unbroken chain.
"It's an amazing thing to be in the presence of a man singing even a snippet of the poem," says Davis of his meeting with Houvinen, "because it's so powerful that even if you don't speak Finnish it's profoundly moving just to listen to it, just the cadence of the sounds.
"Being in his presence, and knowing how few people can today recite the poem, you felt you were in the presence of history that was about to be snuffed out." When Houvinen dies the ancient succession of rune singers will end. No one from a younger generation has been able to learn the vast breadth of the saga.
However, the Kalevala itself will not die with Jussi, due to the efforts of a country doctor named Elias Lönnrot.
In the early 19th century, Lönnrot became enamored of the Finnish songs and runes he found in Viena Karelia. He devoted himself to traveling the district, listening to the rune singers and committing the oral poetry to the written word. This was the genesis not only of the modern Finnish language but of the Finnish nation as an entity, creating what Davis calls "this wonderful idea of a … bardic poem inspiring a modern nation."
Inspiration for Middle-Earth
The Kalevala inspired not only Finnish nationalism but also a young English scholar and writer named J.R.R. Tolkien, in whose mind was already taking shape a magical universe that was about to be transformed by Finnish language and legend.
In a letter to W.H. Auden, on June 7, 1955, he remembered his excitement upon discovering a Finnish grammar in Exeter College Library. "It was like discovering a complete wine-cellar filled with bottles of an amazing wine of a kind and flavour never tasted before. It quite intoxicated me; and I gave up the attempt to invent an 'unrecorded' Germanic language, and my 'own language'—or series of invented languages—became heavily Finnicized [sic] in phonetic pattern and structure."
The Finnish language that so delighted the young student became the inspiration for the lyrical tongue of Middle-earth's elves. Tolkien taught himself the ancient and newly codified Finnish to develop his elfin language, and so that he could read the Kalevala in its original Finnish. This achievement opened the door to many further influences from Finnish mythology. Parallels abound between the Kalevala and Tolkien's own saga, in terms of both the characters themselves and the idea of the hero's journey.
The Kalevala features "all the themes of pre-Christian traditions, shape-shifting, mythical demons, magical plants, animals becoming human beings," says Davis, while the story itself "is fundamentally a story of a sacred object which has power, and the pursuit of the mythic heroes who seek that power, to seek a way of understanding what that power means." Davis describes the Kalevala as "a journey of the soul and a journey of the spirit—and that's obviously what drew Tolkien to it."
Tolkien readers have long seen Tolkien's bucolic vision of rural England represented in Middle-earth's Shire, and recognized English farmers in characters such as the hobbit Sam. But those who explore the Kalevala may discover much of the land of the elves, and their language, in the vast snowy spruce forests of Finnish legend.
Nuclear proliferation: A Brief History
Nuclear proliferation was born with the first set of nuclear weapons. Its a half century long saga of strategic maneuvering, clashes of ideologies, espionage, love, hate, deceit, back stabbing and personal greed.
History bears witness to the fact that there is nothing extraordinary, new or unique about Pakistan proliferating nuclear know-how, if at all. The United States started the tradition by gifting it to the UK and France. The rogue
(socialist) elements in the UK and US exported the same technology to the Soviet Union, who in turn gave it away to countries like China and India.
China in kind, passed it to Pakistan who is said to have kept the tradition alive by trying to pass it on to the Iran, Libya and N. Korea. India and Israel did their part by bringing South Africa and Brazil onboard.
For their share of proliferation the French passed the nuclear technology to Israel. Despite De Gaulle's opposition and direct orders to shut the technology pipeline built by Shimon Peres, his atomic energy minister Jacques Soustelle kept the transfer going on. Was Soustelle punished for going rogue and breaking the laws against the proliferation? Not that the world knows of.
If anything, it is the United States, which unintentionally, or otherwise, initiated the nuclear proliferation. The US was the first to let the nuclear genie out of the bottle, the rest merely followed in its footprints.
The US proliferation started even before the first nuclear device was ever detonated. It began when the US started to train the foreign scientists from Britain, Canada and France in the art of “Atomic Bomb” making during the Manhattan project. The fear of expansion of communism right after the WWII was so intense, that the US started to pass the nuclear technology willy-nilly to its friends under the garb of a program called “Atoms for Peace”. To this day the world has not been able to recover from this massive US proliferation.
At times the US looked the other way when its friends were building the nuclear network, and even pretended like nothing happened when its spy satellites detected an atmospheric nuclear explosion over the Indian Ocean on September 22, 1979. The episode was swept under the rug because there was a strong possibility that it was one of the American allies who conducted the test, namely Israel.
The recent transfer of simulation software to France enabled it to check the health of its nuclear weapons without detonating one is an example of American proliferation. A pledge to cooperate with India in the dual use nuclear and space technology is only the latest example the American proliferation.
Though the United States merits the dubious distinction of being the original proliferator, it was soon joined by a host of other wannabes. Following is a brief history of international proliferation, the actors involved and the end results.
Soviet Union/Russia: Despite the fact that great Soviet minds such as Yakov Zel'dovich and Yuli Khariton were already tinkering with the nuclear technology even before the WWII started, the Russians were still far from crossing the threshold. It took no less than complete design and data of American nuclear weapon supplied by the “Atom Spies” like Klaus Fuchs and Rosenbergs to detonate its first nuclear device four years after the United States.
Outcome of proliferation: The Soviets detonated their first nuclear device on August 29, 1949.
Britain: The British program directly benefited from the American “Manhattan Project” when its first rank scientists like Geoffrey I. Taylor and William G.
Penney were sent to Los Alamos under the cover of 1943 Quebec Agreement. These American trained British scientists provided the nucleus for British post-war atomic weapons development efforts.
Thanks to the Quebec Agreement, Canada supplied plutonium was incorporated into the core of first British nuclear device, code-named Hurricane.
Outcome of proliferation: Britain detonated its first device on September 15, 1952.
France: Just like the British scientist, the French scientists like Dr.
Bertrand Goldschmitt also worked with the Anglo-Canadian team on the Manhattan Project. After the war, he continued the weapons work in France and gave it its nuclear weapon.
Outcome of proliferation: The first French nuclear test, code-named Gerboise Bleue, was conducted on February 13, 1960 at Reggane in Algeria.
China: China was never a direct beneficiary of American proliferation, but it made tremendous gains from the blatant Soviet proliferation. In 1951 Peking signed a secret agreement with Moscow through which China received massive Soviet nuclear assistance in exchange uranium ores.
In 1957, China and USSR signed an agreement on new technology for national defense, which included additional Soviet nuclear assistance. The Soviets also provided China with a major gaseous diffusion facility for production of enriched uranium.
Outcome of proliferation: China's first nuclear test was conducted at Lop Nor on October 16, 1964.
India: India is a prime example of American initiated nuclear proliferation under the cover of “Atoms for Peace” program. During the 1950s and then in 1960s the United States and Canada helped India to lay the foundation for its nuclear weapons technology.
In 1956, Canada built 40 megawatt Canadian-Indian Reactor in India. The United States supplied the heavy water for it. This reactor will later become the source of plutonium for India's first nuclear device.
In 1963, India ordered two 210-megawatt boiling-water reactors for the Tarapur Atomic Power Station from General Electric.
India received its first heavy water production plant from Germany in 1962 and then built additional seven heavy water plants with help of France and Switzerland.
The United States continued to display a total disregard for all of non-proliferation conventions. In 1964, its assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs John McNaughton proposed to initiate a program to train and equip Indian forces to use nuclear weapons, and create a stockpile to disperse to India in times of crisis.
In 70s, the Soviet Union assumed the role of India's main supplier of heavy water, and covert and overt nuclear proliferation. During the 80s, India clandestinely acquired and developed centrifuge technology from the USSR and built uranium enrichment plants at Trombay and Mysore.
During the same decade, a German exporter and a former Nazi, Alfred Hempel shipped tons of heavy water via Dubai to India. This clandestine supply enabled the Indians to use its reactors like Dhruva to create plutonium for its atomic weapons program. The suppliers of heavy water included China, Norway and Soviet Union.
In January 1996, in a barefaced show of defiance of a “Nuclear Suppliers Group ” ban, Moscow and New Delhi, reached an agreement to build two Russian light-water nuclear reactors at Kudankalam in Tamil Nadu.
Outcome of proliferation: India conducted its first so-called “peaceful nuclear explosion,” on May 18 1974.
Israel: France laid the foundation of Israeli nuclear program on October 3, 1957, when it signed an agreement to build a 24 MWt reactor (although the cooling systems and waste facilities were designed to handle three times that power), and a chemical reprocessing plant in Israel. A secret nuclear complex was constructed outside the IAEA inspection regime, at Dimona, in the Negev desert under the leadership of Col. Manes Pratt of the IDF Ordinance Corps.
France not only built a nuclear and reprocessing plant for Israel, it also supplied the heavy water and delivered Uranium for the Israeli plant. The plant went critical in 1964.
Since 1958, the United States had been well aware of the Israel nuclear program, but it did nothing to stop it. Walworth Barbour, US ambassador to Israel from 1961-73, allegedly said at one point that “The President did not send me there to give him problems. He does not want to be told any bad news.”
After the 1967 war, Barbour even put a stop to military attachés' intelligence collection efforts around Dimona. When in 1966, the US embassy staff sent a warning message to Washington upon learning that Israel was beginning to put nuclear warheads on its missiles, the message disappeared in thin air and was never acted upon.
Outcome of proliferation: Israel is speculated to be in possession of between 100 to 200 nuclear weapons, and in 1979 is suspected to have conducted a nuclear explosion over the southern Indian Ocean in collaboration with South Africa.
South Africa: Israel introduced South Africa to the exclusive nuclear weapons club. Israel provided South Africa with technical assistance on its weapons program, in exchange for S. Africa's 300 tons of uranium. “Oppenheimer of Israel” Ernst David Bergmann and several other Israeli nuclear scientists visited South Africa in 1967.
In 1974, Moshe Dayan is reported to have made a secret visit to South Africa and discussed nuclear weapon cooperation, including the possibility of nuclear tests.
Between 1977 and 1978 Israel received 50 tons of natural uranium from South Africa and in return supplied 30 grams of tritium, in 12 separate shipments.
Israel is also believed to have provided the bomb design.
Outcome of proliferation: Till July 1990, South Africa was in possession of six nuclear devices as well as the partially completed seventh device.
Argentina: Argentina's nuclear program was supported by a number of countries.
Canada and West Germany supplied the power reactors, while China and Switzerland supplied a heavy water plant. The Soviet Union supplied other nuclear equipment. In the absence of international safeguards, hot cells were operated from 1969-1972.
Outcome of proliferation: Argentina came stones throw away from building a nuclear device, as a number of sites and facilities were developed for uranium mining, milling, and conversion, and for fuel fabrication. A missile development program was also pursued for some years.
Brazil: The US proliferation to Brazil goes way back to the 1940s when it signed an agreement to transfer the nuclear technology in exchange for cooperative mining of uranium and monazite. In 1965, the US provided Brazil with medium-grade enriched uranium for its first nuclear reactor.
In 1975, Brazil signed a technology transfer agreement with Germany (not covered under the IAEA safeguards) for a complete nuclear fuel cycle, including enrichment and reprocessing plants. The agreement called for West Germany to transfer eight nuclear reactors, uranium enrichment facility, plutonium reprocessing plant, and Becker “jet nozzle” enrichment technology.
Outcome of proliferation: Brazilian nuclear weapons program code-named “Solimões” was exposed by the members of CPI (Comissão Parlamentar de Inquérito). In its report it was revealed that the IEAV (Instituto de Estudos
Avançados) had designed two atomic bomb devices, one with a yield of twenty to thirty kilotons and a second with a yield of twelve kilotons. In September 1990, a nuclear test shaft was closed at Cachimbo, in Pará State.
Iraq: Iraqi nuclear weapons program's root are also traced back to the American “Atoms for Peace” program and to the Soviet supplied research reactor
- the 2 megawatt IRT-5000, which was later upgraded to 5 MW in 1978.
In 1976, Iraq and France concluded an agreement for MTR reactors. MTR reactor was a derivative of the French Osiris reactor which was a pool-type reactor fuelled by 93% enriched weapon grade uranium.
In 1979, Iraq sent engineers to visit India's nuclear establishments and scientists.
During the same year, Iraq contracted with the Italian company SNIA-Techint for pilot plutonium separation and handling facility, and a uranium refining and fuel-manufacturing plant (not covered by IAEA safeguards).
Iraq also obtained large amounts of uranium - 100 tons of natural uranium from Portugal, and additional large shipments from Brazil and Nigeria.
During 1998 and 2001, an Indian company, NEC Engineers shipped several consignments of rocket fuel ingredients to Iraq via Dubai.
Outcome of proliferation: On behest of the IAEA, a group of nuclear weapon designers from the United States, Britain, France, and Russia met in April
1992 to assess the progress of Iraq's nuclear program prior to the Persian Gulf War. The group suggested Iraq's nuclear weapons program plan was established in 1988. Iraq's objective was to produce its first nuclear by 1991.
Those who view Pakistan's amateurish attempts at nuclear proliferation as unique or as a new phenomenon either harbor malice in their hearts or are selectively oblivious of history of nuclear proliferation. Their attempt is as spiteful as it is deliberate.
If the world community is really interested in finding the real nuclear proliferators, then it has to look no further than looking at the two superpowers. The Americans initiated the nuclear proliferation, while the Soviet Union setup the one stop nuclear superstore.
A parting word on pardons too. In the name of extraordinary services, the history is full of famous personalities going scot-free for their clear disregard of laws. For example, despite Oppenheimer's open association with the Communists, he was allowed to run the nuclear program till 1953.
Eventually, he was quietly sidelined for his Communist associations, but only after he gave the US its nuclear bombs. Shouldn't the hush hush sidelining of a diehard Communist spy and a true “father of the Atomic Bomb” be called a “mother of all Pardons”?
How about Casper Weinberger receiving the pardon and a “Medal of Freedom” for the breakup of the communist block despite his utter disregard for the US laws, and his clear role in the Iran-Contra deals?
Lets not even talk about President Clinton pardoning the drug runners and other criminals, because it's beyond any logic and reason.
Last but not the least, how about President Gerald Ford pardoning Richard Nixon for making a mockery of the US constitution and laws?
The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is any way so discriminatory that it was rightly called as “disarming the unarmed”. Those moralizing to Pakistan are well advised to do some honest soul searching.
Pakistan is only a window to the Nuclear Proliferating World, but certainly not the door to it.
History bears witness to the fact that there is nothing extraordinary, new or unique about Pakistan proliferating nuclear know-how, if at all. The United States started the tradition by gifting it to the UK and France. The rogue
(socialist) elements in the UK and US exported the same technology to the Soviet Union, who in turn gave it away to countries like China and India.
China in kind, passed it to Pakistan who is said to have kept the tradition alive by trying to pass it on to the Iran, Libya and N. Korea. India and Israel did their part by bringing South Africa and Brazil onboard.
For their share of proliferation the French passed the nuclear technology to Israel. Despite De Gaulle's opposition and direct orders to shut the technology pipeline built by Shimon Peres, his atomic energy minister Jacques Soustelle kept the transfer going on. Was Soustelle punished for going rogue and breaking the laws against the proliferation? Not that the world knows of.
If anything, it is the United States, which unintentionally, or otherwise, initiated the nuclear proliferation. The US was the first to let the nuclear genie out of the bottle, the rest merely followed in its footprints.
The US proliferation started even before the first nuclear device was ever detonated. It began when the US started to train the foreign scientists from Britain, Canada and France in the art of “Atomic Bomb” making during the Manhattan project. The fear of expansion of communism right after the WWII was so intense, that the US started to pass the nuclear technology willy-nilly to its friends under the garb of a program called “Atoms for Peace”. To this day the world has not been able to recover from this massive US proliferation.
At times the US looked the other way when its friends were building the nuclear network, and even pretended like nothing happened when its spy satellites detected an atmospheric nuclear explosion over the Indian Ocean on September 22, 1979. The episode was swept under the rug because there was a strong possibility that it was one of the American allies who conducted the test, namely Israel.
The recent transfer of simulation software to France enabled it to check the health of its nuclear weapons without detonating one is an example of American proliferation. A pledge to cooperate with India in the dual use nuclear and space technology is only the latest example the American proliferation.
Though the United States merits the dubious distinction of being the original proliferator, it was soon joined by a host of other wannabes. Following is a brief history of international proliferation, the actors involved and the end results.
Soviet Union/Russia: Despite the fact that great Soviet minds such as Yakov Zel'dovich and Yuli Khariton were already tinkering with the nuclear technology even before the WWII started, the Russians were still far from crossing the threshold. It took no less than complete design and data of American nuclear weapon supplied by the “Atom Spies” like Klaus Fuchs and Rosenbergs to detonate its first nuclear device four years after the United States.
Outcome of proliferation: The Soviets detonated their first nuclear device on August 29, 1949.
Britain: The British program directly benefited from the American “Manhattan Project” when its first rank scientists like Geoffrey I. Taylor and William G.
Penney were sent to Los Alamos under the cover of 1943 Quebec Agreement. These American trained British scientists provided the nucleus for British post-war atomic weapons development efforts.
Thanks to the Quebec Agreement, Canada supplied plutonium was incorporated into the core of first British nuclear device, code-named Hurricane.
Outcome of proliferation: Britain detonated its first device on September 15, 1952.
France: Just like the British scientist, the French scientists like Dr.
Bertrand Goldschmitt also worked with the Anglo-Canadian team on the Manhattan Project. After the war, he continued the weapons work in France and gave it its nuclear weapon.
Outcome of proliferation: The first French nuclear test, code-named Gerboise Bleue, was conducted on February 13, 1960 at Reggane in Algeria.
China: China was never a direct beneficiary of American proliferation, but it made tremendous gains from the blatant Soviet proliferation. In 1951 Peking signed a secret agreement with Moscow through which China received massive Soviet nuclear assistance in exchange uranium ores.
In 1957, China and USSR signed an agreement on new technology for national defense, which included additional Soviet nuclear assistance. The Soviets also provided China with a major gaseous diffusion facility for production of enriched uranium.
Outcome of proliferation: China's first nuclear test was conducted at Lop Nor on October 16, 1964.
India: India is a prime example of American initiated nuclear proliferation under the cover of “Atoms for Peace” program. During the 1950s and then in 1960s the United States and Canada helped India to lay the foundation for its nuclear weapons technology.
In 1956, Canada built 40 megawatt Canadian-Indian Reactor in India. The United States supplied the heavy water for it. This reactor will later become the source of plutonium for India's first nuclear device.
In 1963, India ordered two 210-megawatt boiling-water reactors for the Tarapur Atomic Power Station from General Electric.
India received its first heavy water production plant from Germany in 1962 and then built additional seven heavy water plants with help of France and Switzerland.
The United States continued to display a total disregard for all of non-proliferation conventions. In 1964, its assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs John McNaughton proposed to initiate a program to train and equip Indian forces to use nuclear weapons, and create a stockpile to disperse to India in times of crisis.
In 70s, the Soviet Union assumed the role of India's main supplier of heavy water, and covert and overt nuclear proliferation. During the 80s, India clandestinely acquired and developed centrifuge technology from the USSR and built uranium enrichment plants at Trombay and Mysore.
During the same decade, a German exporter and a former Nazi, Alfred Hempel shipped tons of heavy water via Dubai to India. This clandestine supply enabled the Indians to use its reactors like Dhruva to create plutonium for its atomic weapons program. The suppliers of heavy water included China, Norway and Soviet Union.
In January 1996, in a barefaced show of defiance of a “Nuclear Suppliers Group ” ban, Moscow and New Delhi, reached an agreement to build two Russian light-water nuclear reactors at Kudankalam in Tamil Nadu.
Outcome of proliferation: India conducted its first so-called “peaceful nuclear explosion,” on May 18 1974.
Israel: France laid the foundation of Israeli nuclear program on October 3, 1957, when it signed an agreement to build a 24 MWt reactor (although the cooling systems and waste facilities were designed to handle three times that power), and a chemical reprocessing plant in Israel. A secret nuclear complex was constructed outside the IAEA inspection regime, at Dimona, in the Negev desert under the leadership of Col. Manes Pratt of the IDF Ordinance Corps.
France not only built a nuclear and reprocessing plant for Israel, it also supplied the heavy water and delivered Uranium for the Israeli plant. The plant went critical in 1964.
Since 1958, the United States had been well aware of the Israel nuclear program, but it did nothing to stop it. Walworth Barbour, US ambassador to Israel from 1961-73, allegedly said at one point that “The President did not send me there to give him problems. He does not want to be told any bad news.”
After the 1967 war, Barbour even put a stop to military attachés' intelligence collection efforts around Dimona. When in 1966, the US embassy staff sent a warning message to Washington upon learning that Israel was beginning to put nuclear warheads on its missiles, the message disappeared in thin air and was never acted upon.
Outcome of proliferation: Israel is speculated to be in possession of between 100 to 200 nuclear weapons, and in 1979 is suspected to have conducted a nuclear explosion over the southern Indian Ocean in collaboration with South Africa.
South Africa: Israel introduced South Africa to the exclusive nuclear weapons club. Israel provided South Africa with technical assistance on its weapons program, in exchange for S. Africa's 300 tons of uranium. “Oppenheimer of Israel” Ernst David Bergmann and several other Israeli nuclear scientists visited South Africa in 1967.
In 1974, Moshe Dayan is reported to have made a secret visit to South Africa and discussed nuclear weapon cooperation, including the possibility of nuclear tests.
Between 1977 and 1978 Israel received 50 tons of natural uranium from South Africa and in return supplied 30 grams of tritium, in 12 separate shipments.
Israel is also believed to have provided the bomb design.
Outcome of proliferation: Till July 1990, South Africa was in possession of six nuclear devices as well as the partially completed seventh device.
Argentina: Argentina's nuclear program was supported by a number of countries.
Canada and West Germany supplied the power reactors, while China and Switzerland supplied a heavy water plant. The Soviet Union supplied other nuclear equipment. In the absence of international safeguards, hot cells were operated from 1969-1972.
Outcome of proliferation: Argentina came stones throw away from building a nuclear device, as a number of sites and facilities were developed for uranium mining, milling, and conversion, and for fuel fabrication. A missile development program was also pursued for some years.
Brazil: The US proliferation to Brazil goes way back to the 1940s when it signed an agreement to transfer the nuclear technology in exchange for cooperative mining of uranium and monazite. In 1965, the US provided Brazil with medium-grade enriched uranium for its first nuclear reactor.
In 1975, Brazil signed a technology transfer agreement with Germany (not covered under the IAEA safeguards) for a complete nuclear fuel cycle, including enrichment and reprocessing plants. The agreement called for West Germany to transfer eight nuclear reactors, uranium enrichment facility, plutonium reprocessing plant, and Becker “jet nozzle” enrichment technology.
Outcome of proliferation: Brazilian nuclear weapons program code-named “Solimões” was exposed by the members of CPI (Comissão Parlamentar de Inquérito). In its report it was revealed that the IEAV (Instituto de Estudos
Avançados) had designed two atomic bomb devices, one with a yield of twenty to thirty kilotons and a second with a yield of twelve kilotons. In September 1990, a nuclear test shaft was closed at Cachimbo, in Pará State.
Iraq: Iraqi nuclear weapons program's root are also traced back to the American “Atoms for Peace” program and to the Soviet supplied research reactor
- the 2 megawatt IRT-5000, which was later upgraded to 5 MW in 1978.
In 1976, Iraq and France concluded an agreement for MTR reactors. MTR reactor was a derivative of the French Osiris reactor which was a pool-type reactor fuelled by 93% enriched weapon grade uranium.
In 1979, Iraq sent engineers to visit India's nuclear establishments and scientists.
During the same year, Iraq contracted with the Italian company SNIA-Techint for pilot plutonium separation and handling facility, and a uranium refining and fuel-manufacturing plant (not covered by IAEA safeguards).
Iraq also obtained large amounts of uranium - 100 tons of natural uranium from Portugal, and additional large shipments from Brazil and Nigeria.
During 1998 and 2001, an Indian company, NEC Engineers shipped several consignments of rocket fuel ingredients to Iraq via Dubai.
Outcome of proliferation: On behest of the IAEA, a group of nuclear weapon designers from the United States, Britain, France, and Russia met in April
1992 to assess the progress of Iraq's nuclear program prior to the Persian Gulf War. The group suggested Iraq's nuclear weapons program plan was established in 1988. Iraq's objective was to produce its first nuclear by 1991.
Those who view Pakistan's amateurish attempts at nuclear proliferation as unique or as a new phenomenon either harbor malice in their hearts or are selectively oblivious of history of nuclear proliferation. Their attempt is as spiteful as it is deliberate.
If the world community is really interested in finding the real nuclear proliferators, then it has to look no further than looking at the two superpowers. The Americans initiated the nuclear proliferation, while the Soviet Union setup the one stop nuclear superstore.
A parting word on pardons too. In the name of extraordinary services, the history is full of famous personalities going scot-free for their clear disregard of laws. For example, despite Oppenheimer's open association with the Communists, he was allowed to run the nuclear program till 1953.
Eventually, he was quietly sidelined for his Communist associations, but only after he gave the US its nuclear bombs. Shouldn't the hush hush sidelining of a diehard Communist spy and a true “father of the Atomic Bomb” be called a “mother of all Pardons”?
How about Casper Weinberger receiving the pardon and a “Medal of Freedom” for the breakup of the communist block despite his utter disregard for the US laws, and his clear role in the Iran-Contra deals?
Lets not even talk about President Clinton pardoning the drug runners and other criminals, because it's beyond any logic and reason.
Last but not the least, how about President Gerald Ford pardoning Richard Nixon for making a mockery of the US constitution and laws?
The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is any way so discriminatory that it was rightly called as “disarming the unarmed”. Those moralizing to Pakistan are well advised to do some honest soul searching.
Pakistan is only a window to the Nuclear Proliferating World, but certainly not the door to it.
Will We Run Out of Energy?
Mark Brandly
With gas prices exceeding $2 per gallon, an alarmed American public is prone to believe scary predictions about a future without gas. And so into this hyper-charge environment will step a number of commentators who claim to marshall all the data to show that we must dramatically change our lives.
For example: "Civilization as we know it will come to an end sometime in this century unless we can find a way to live without fossil fuels." Alarmist David Goodstein begins and ends his new book, Out of Gas, with this warning.
According to Goodstein's worst case scenario, an oil crisis in the near future may lead to "Runaway inflation and worldwide depression [leaving] many billions of people with no alternative but to burn coal in vast quantities for warmth, cooking, and primitive industry. The change in the greenhouse effect that results eventually tips Earth's climate into a new state hostile to life.[1] End of story" (p. 37).
Dire warnings about oil shortages have been around almost since oil wells were first drilled. In the late 1800s, the oil fields in the eastern U.S. were in decline raising doubts about the possibility of providing for U.S. energy needs. The U.S. Geological Survey was founded at this time in part because of fears of oil shortages.[2] Then the discovery, in 1897, of a single oil well in northeastern Oklahoma, the famous Nellie Johnstone #1, started the Oklahoma oil boom and temporarily ended any threat of an oil shortage. Even though past forecasts of oil crises have continually been proven wrong, there's no shortage of additional predictions of this sort.
The Hubbert Model
Goodstein's book is the latest work to use the Hubbert model to predict an oil crisis. Marion King Hubbert, a geophysicist and a geologist for the USGS, is known for predicting, in 1956, that U.S. oil production would peak in 1970 and decline thereafter. This peak has come to be known as Hubbert's peak and is used to allegedly demonstrate that the current demand for oil will lead to a crisis and that that crisis is nearly upon us.
Goodstein applies Hubbert's argument to world oil production and concludes that world oil production will begin a continuous decline in the near future. The world is nearing Hubbert's peak and Goodstein expects the "crisis to occur when the peak is reached, rather than when the last drop [of oil] is pumped" (p. 30). And market forces will not prevent this crisis.
While Goodstein can't predict for certain, he notes that "we can all too easily envision a dying civilization, the landscape littered with the rusting hulks of useless SUVs," which could lead to "Oil War III" (p. 31). And as "we learned in 1973, the effects of an oil shortage can be immediate and drastic, while it may take years, perhaps decades, to replace the vast infrastructure that supports the manufacture, distribution, and consumption of the products of the . . . oil we Americans alone gobble up each day" (p. 18). In short, the crisis will be so severe that energy suppliers might not be able to make the adjustments needed to save civilization.
Goodstein has a solution, though. Science and the "laws of nature" cannot be changed. We can, however, change the "laws of people." Goodstein prescribes energy conservation and weaning ourselves off of fossil fuels. We also need higher gasoline prices and we must use hybrid cars, insulate our homes better, redesign our cities, improve public transportation, and move towards other energy sources such as nuclear power and solar power.[3]
Reliance on Empirical Findings
The problems with Goodstein's conclusions, and this applies to Hubbert's followers in general, begin with his reliance on empirical findings to generate the Hubbert curves. He projects decreases in the rate of growth of oil production into the future and then estimates the date of Hubbert's peak and the resulting decline in available oil. However, empirical findings do not always support this thesis.
Many countries' oil production curves are not shaped like Hubbert's bell curve. For example, some oil production curves have multiple peaks. This does not discourage Goodstein. The exact timing of Hubbert's peak is not the essential issue. The important lesson is that "the crisis will come . . . when the rate at which oil can be pumped out of the ground starts to diminish" (p. 37).
However, oil production curves that do not conform to Hubbert's model create insurmountable problems for Hubbert's followers. Since oil production curves have multiple peaks, the problem then becomes one of determining which peak is the final peak. A Hubbertarian needs to know the timing of the final peak in order to determine the start of the crisis.
One cannot predict that the crisis is near unless one knows that the oil production decline is a permanent one. Oil production declines will tend to lead to increased incentives to find more oil reserves preventing the decline from becoming a crisis. In order to predict a crisis, Hubbertarians need to be secure in their assumption that the decline is permanent and empirically this assumption is suspect.
The alarmists have repeatedly underestimated future production capabilities. Even recent predictions about future oil reserves have been revised upward due to the discovery of the Kashagan field in Kazakhstan and the Azadegan field in Iran. Any upturn in production anywhere seems to take the Hubbertarians by surprise. Simply put, Goodstein and his kind continually underestimate future oil projections (and much oil remains undiscovered.)
Goodstein also limits his analysis to conventional oil reserves. While he notes that there are unconventional sources for oil, he dismisses the possibility of finding economical methods to recover this oil. The world contains more unconventional oil, as far as we know, than conventional oil.
Venezuela's Orinoco heavy oil belt is estimated to have over 1 trillion barrels of reserves and the reserves in Canada's Athabasca Tar Sands are estimated to be as high as 1.8 trillion barrels. In addition, there are large deposits of oil shale in the United States and several other countries. While most of these reserves are not financially viable at this time, we know these reserves are in place. Higher energy prices or advanced technologies might make it feasible to use this unconventional oil.
Empirical refutation does not deter the Hubbertarians, however. One Hubbert acolyte, Colin J. Campbell, anticipating a negative response to his changing data sets, defends himself: "critics relish pointing out how the assessment has evolved over time, taking it as evidence that depletion studies are meaningless. A good response would be to quote the famous economist, Maynard Keynes, who on being accused of inconsistency replied. "When I have new information, I change my conclusions. What do you do? Sir."[4] I suppose that it's encouraging to find a Hubbertarian quoting any economist given their lack of understanding of the fundamentals of economics.
Geological Considerations and Market Forces
An even more critical failure of the Hubbertarians, including Goodstein, is their assumption that geological considerations in oil producing regions are the deciding factors in determining available oil reserves. For Goodstein, a decrease in reserves indicates a lack of potential exploration opportunities.
He overlooks the role that investment plays in oil exploration. While Goodstein recognizes the argument that market forces will respond to a potential oil shortage, he dismisses this possibility out of hand. While geology is a factor affecting oil reserves, investment in exploration, driven by the demand for energy, determines reserve levels.
If the demand for oil begins to exceed available oil production, oil prices will rise. This price increase indicates that there is a need for more oil, or energy substitutes, and provides an incentive for oil producers to find more oil reserves. A potential oil shortage will lead to an increase in existing oil reserves in three ways.
First, higher oil prices will lead to more exploration and the discovery of new oil fields.
Second, higher prices provide an incentive to improve production and exploration technology. Better exploration technology will make it easier to find more oil and improved production technology will increase the reserves in existing oil fields.
Third, rising oil prices increase oil reserves even without any additional exploration or changes in technology. Reserves are the estimated amounts of discovered economically viable oil production. At higher prices it's profitable to recover more of the oil available in previously discovered fields. We therefore have more oil reserves simply by having higher oil prices.
Higher oil prices may also make unconventional oil reserves economically viable. Again, it's estimated that there is more unconventional oil available than there is conventional oil. Any potential oil shortage will tend to spur oil producers to find a way to use these unconventional oil sources. Goodstein correctly notes that given current technology, unconventional oil cannot be profitable because we currently use as much or more energy to recover this oil than we gain from the oil itself. New technologies will be required in order to make it worthwhile to use tar sands and heavy oils as a fuel source. Higher oil prices, however, provide the incentive to develop such technologies.
Regarding the possibility of finding non-hydrocarbon substitutes for oil, Goodstein concedes that we will need to use energy substitutes, he prefers solar and nuclear power, but apparently rejects the possibility that free markets will solve this problem. According to Goodstein, energy markets failed us in the past and we can't rely on them in the future.
Government Intervention
This leads to another one of Goodstein's oversights, namely his failure to attribute energy problems to government intervention. He fails to note how intervention instigated and prolonged the energy problems of the 1970s. To recap, in response to the U.S. government's support for Israel in the 1973 war, OPEC restricted its oil production. Oil prices roughly quadrupled within 90 days. The U.S. government responded with price controls on oil and gasoline.
The controls on gasoline were short lived, given that the effect of the controls, long lines of buyers waiting to purchase gasoline, were obvious and were a political liability. However, the oil price controls lasted until 1980 and were followed by a heavy windfall profits tax on oil production. In addition, the oil severance tax rates and gasoline taxes increased during this time as states took advantage of the energy situation to swell their budgets. Also, environmental regulations became more stringent making oil exploration increasingly more difficult.
All of these U.S. policies harmed U.S. oil production and strengthened OPEC's market power. Attributing the energy crisis to market failure shows that Goodstein fails to see the role that private markets play in providing for our energy needs.
Goodstein also disregards how intervention is currently interfering with the discovery and production of oil. Taxes and regulations reduce projected net oil prices and investors react by cutting exploration funding. Also, the U.S. government restricts exploration in areas such as the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and the Outer Continental Shelf.
Intervention in foreign countries has also had a negative effect on oil exploration. For instance, OPEC's production restrictions in 1973 led to decreased exploration in OPEC countries. These countries saw little need in further exploration for oil that they wouldn't be able to sell for years. The nationalization of these foreign oil sources has also led to less competition and less exploration.
While Saudi Arabia has maintained a surplus capacity for oil, other OPEC members have little or no surplus capacity. This makes sense. Saudi Arabia has more reserves than any other country. Its surplus capacity gives it market power. It has some say in setting oil prices, both up and down. Even if other countries were to develop some surplus capacity, they still would not have much market power. It's simply not in their interest to have this surplus capacity. The economic interplay between these countries in the last three decades has led to less oil exploration than otherwise might have occurred.
Also, exploration in Iraq and Iran fell sharply after 1980 due to the Iraq/Iran war. The two Gulf wars and a decade of severe trade sanctions also prevented Iraq from developing its oil fields over the last 14 years.
The former Soviet Union provides another example of how political decisions have affected exploration decisions. While there have been recent discoveries in the FSU, political instability in this region has made oil exploration a risky proposition.
The point is that government intervention, here and abroad, tends to negatively affect oil exploration and production. Removing these political restrictions would tend to increase our available oil reserves. The Hubbertarians tend to overlook this possibility.
Conclusion
Let me first note a positive in Goodstein's work. He spends much of his book providing us with a brief history of energy and discussions about energy issues such as thermodynamics and electromagnetism. These sections are both interesting and entertaining. However, this does not make up for his lack of economic understanding.
Goodstein depends on empirical findings while ignoring the data that contradicts his argument. He ignores the fact that energy alarmists have always underestimated future oil supplies and he dismisses the possibility of developing vast quantities of unconventional sources of oil.
Oil production declines will create incentives to find more conventional oil, to use unconventional oil, and to develop new energy alternatives. Government intervention makes our energy situation more precarious. Goodstein fails to understand any of these issues.
Though the book has received favorable press[5] for alerting us to alleged energy problems that confront us, its main value is that it compiles the economic fallacies regarding a potential energy crisis into a single slim volume.
------
Mark Brandly (brandlym@ferris.edu) teaches economics at Ferris State University and is an adjunct scholar of the the Mises Institute and Mackinac Center for Public Policy. Comment on the blog.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] While this review focuses on economic issues and ignores the environmental warnings in Goodstein's argument, it's important to note that Goodstein ignores the sharp differences of opinions on the issue of global warming and the greenhouse effect. Even the EPA admits that scientists are not in agreement on this issue.
[2] The USGS, in its early years, continually underestimated available U.S. oil. In 1920, the USGS chief geologist estimated total oil remaining in the U.S. at 6.7 billion barrels with a margin of error of 25%. In 1972, by comparison, U.S. reserves were estimated at 36 billions barrels.
[3] In his discussion on solar power, Goodstein notes that one proposed solution for global warming is to place a giant parasol, 1200 miles in diameter, in orbit around the earth in order to block a portion of the suns rays. It's to Goodstein's credit that he opposes this plan (p. 102). The parasol idea reminds me of Bastiat's Candlestick Makers' Petition, where the candlestick makers propose blocking out some of the suns rays in order to benefit the candlestick industry, the difference being that the concept of a giant parasol in space is a serious proposal.
[4] Campbell also derides his detractors as the flat-earth society: "Some members of the flat-earth fraternity have made a career from pointing out how earlier estimates needed revision and correction. They will not be disappointed with this assessment that differs yet again from earlier ones. Whereas a scientist would describe this evolution as progress based on a growing knowledge of Nature, the flat-earth fraternity will claim it as evidence that a resource-based approach to forecasting production is fundamentally flawed."
[5] See this Newsweek article, for example.
With gas prices exceeding $2 per gallon, an alarmed American public is prone to believe scary predictions about a future without gas. And so into this hyper-charge environment will step a number of commentators who claim to marshall all the data to show that we must dramatically change our lives.
For example: "Civilization as we know it will come to an end sometime in this century unless we can find a way to live without fossil fuels." Alarmist David Goodstein begins and ends his new book, Out of Gas, with this warning.
According to Goodstein's worst case scenario, an oil crisis in the near future may lead to "Runaway inflation and worldwide depression [leaving] many billions of people with no alternative but to burn coal in vast quantities for warmth, cooking, and primitive industry. The change in the greenhouse effect that results eventually tips Earth's climate into a new state hostile to life.[1] End of story" (p. 37).
Dire warnings about oil shortages have been around almost since oil wells were first drilled. In the late 1800s, the oil fields in the eastern U.S. were in decline raising doubts about the possibility of providing for U.S. energy needs. The U.S. Geological Survey was founded at this time in part because of fears of oil shortages.[2] Then the discovery, in 1897, of a single oil well in northeastern Oklahoma, the famous Nellie Johnstone #1, started the Oklahoma oil boom and temporarily ended any threat of an oil shortage. Even though past forecasts of oil crises have continually been proven wrong, there's no shortage of additional predictions of this sort.
The Hubbert Model
Goodstein's book is the latest work to use the Hubbert model to predict an oil crisis. Marion King Hubbert, a geophysicist and a geologist for the USGS, is known for predicting, in 1956, that U.S. oil production would peak in 1970 and decline thereafter. This peak has come to be known as Hubbert's peak and is used to allegedly demonstrate that the current demand for oil will lead to a crisis and that that crisis is nearly upon us.
Goodstein applies Hubbert's argument to world oil production and concludes that world oil production will begin a continuous decline in the near future. The world is nearing Hubbert's peak and Goodstein expects the "crisis to occur when the peak is reached, rather than when the last drop [of oil] is pumped" (p. 30). And market forces will not prevent this crisis.
While Goodstein can't predict for certain, he notes that "we can all too easily envision a dying civilization, the landscape littered with the rusting hulks of useless SUVs," which could lead to "Oil War III" (p. 31). And as "we learned in 1973, the effects of an oil shortage can be immediate and drastic, while it may take years, perhaps decades, to replace the vast infrastructure that supports the manufacture, distribution, and consumption of the products of the . . . oil we Americans alone gobble up each day" (p. 18). In short, the crisis will be so severe that energy suppliers might not be able to make the adjustments needed to save civilization.
Goodstein has a solution, though. Science and the "laws of nature" cannot be changed. We can, however, change the "laws of people." Goodstein prescribes energy conservation and weaning ourselves off of fossil fuels. We also need higher gasoline prices and we must use hybrid cars, insulate our homes better, redesign our cities, improve public transportation, and move towards other energy sources such as nuclear power and solar power.[3]
Reliance on Empirical Findings
The problems with Goodstein's conclusions, and this applies to Hubbert's followers in general, begin with his reliance on empirical findings to generate the Hubbert curves. He projects decreases in the rate of growth of oil production into the future and then estimates the date of Hubbert's peak and the resulting decline in available oil. However, empirical findings do not always support this thesis.
Many countries' oil production curves are not shaped like Hubbert's bell curve. For example, some oil production curves have multiple peaks. This does not discourage Goodstein. The exact timing of Hubbert's peak is not the essential issue. The important lesson is that "the crisis will come . . . when the rate at which oil can be pumped out of the ground starts to diminish" (p. 37).
However, oil production curves that do not conform to Hubbert's model create insurmountable problems for Hubbert's followers. Since oil production curves have multiple peaks, the problem then becomes one of determining which peak is the final peak. A Hubbertarian needs to know the timing of the final peak in order to determine the start of the crisis.
One cannot predict that the crisis is near unless one knows that the oil production decline is a permanent one. Oil production declines will tend to lead to increased incentives to find more oil reserves preventing the decline from becoming a crisis. In order to predict a crisis, Hubbertarians need to be secure in their assumption that the decline is permanent and empirically this assumption is suspect.
The alarmists have repeatedly underestimated future production capabilities. Even recent predictions about future oil reserves have been revised upward due to the discovery of the Kashagan field in Kazakhstan and the Azadegan field in Iran. Any upturn in production anywhere seems to take the Hubbertarians by surprise. Simply put, Goodstein and his kind continually underestimate future oil projections (and much oil remains undiscovered.)
Goodstein also limits his analysis to conventional oil reserves. While he notes that there are unconventional sources for oil, he dismisses the possibility of finding economical methods to recover this oil. The world contains more unconventional oil, as far as we know, than conventional oil.
Venezuela's Orinoco heavy oil belt is estimated to have over 1 trillion barrels of reserves and the reserves in Canada's Athabasca Tar Sands are estimated to be as high as 1.8 trillion barrels. In addition, there are large deposits of oil shale in the United States and several other countries. While most of these reserves are not financially viable at this time, we know these reserves are in place. Higher energy prices or advanced technologies might make it feasible to use this unconventional oil.
Empirical refutation does not deter the Hubbertarians, however. One Hubbert acolyte, Colin J. Campbell, anticipating a negative response to his changing data sets, defends himself: "critics relish pointing out how the assessment has evolved over time, taking it as evidence that depletion studies are meaningless. A good response would be to quote the famous economist, Maynard Keynes, who on being accused of inconsistency replied. "When I have new information, I change my conclusions. What do you do? Sir."[4] I suppose that it's encouraging to find a Hubbertarian quoting any economist given their lack of understanding of the fundamentals of economics.
Geological Considerations and Market Forces
An even more critical failure of the Hubbertarians, including Goodstein, is their assumption that geological considerations in oil producing regions are the deciding factors in determining available oil reserves. For Goodstein, a decrease in reserves indicates a lack of potential exploration opportunities.
He overlooks the role that investment plays in oil exploration. While Goodstein recognizes the argument that market forces will respond to a potential oil shortage, he dismisses this possibility out of hand. While geology is a factor affecting oil reserves, investment in exploration, driven by the demand for energy, determines reserve levels.
If the demand for oil begins to exceed available oil production, oil prices will rise. This price increase indicates that there is a need for more oil, or energy substitutes, and provides an incentive for oil producers to find more oil reserves. A potential oil shortage will lead to an increase in existing oil reserves in three ways.
First, higher oil prices will lead to more exploration and the discovery of new oil fields.
Second, higher prices provide an incentive to improve production and exploration technology. Better exploration technology will make it easier to find more oil and improved production technology will increase the reserves in existing oil fields.
Third, rising oil prices increase oil reserves even without any additional exploration or changes in technology. Reserves are the estimated amounts of discovered economically viable oil production. At higher prices it's profitable to recover more of the oil available in previously discovered fields. We therefore have more oil reserves simply by having higher oil prices.
Higher oil prices may also make unconventional oil reserves economically viable. Again, it's estimated that there is more unconventional oil available than there is conventional oil. Any potential oil shortage will tend to spur oil producers to find a way to use these unconventional oil sources. Goodstein correctly notes that given current technology, unconventional oil cannot be profitable because we currently use as much or more energy to recover this oil than we gain from the oil itself. New technologies will be required in order to make it worthwhile to use tar sands and heavy oils as a fuel source. Higher oil prices, however, provide the incentive to develop such technologies.
Regarding the possibility of finding non-hydrocarbon substitutes for oil, Goodstein concedes that we will need to use energy substitutes, he prefers solar and nuclear power, but apparently rejects the possibility that free markets will solve this problem. According to Goodstein, energy markets failed us in the past and we can't rely on them in the future.
Government Intervention
This leads to another one of Goodstein's oversights, namely his failure to attribute energy problems to government intervention. He fails to note how intervention instigated and prolonged the energy problems of the 1970s. To recap, in response to the U.S. government's support for Israel in the 1973 war, OPEC restricted its oil production. Oil prices roughly quadrupled within 90 days. The U.S. government responded with price controls on oil and gasoline.
The controls on gasoline were short lived, given that the effect of the controls, long lines of buyers waiting to purchase gasoline, were obvious and were a political liability. However, the oil price controls lasted until 1980 and were followed by a heavy windfall profits tax on oil production. In addition, the oil severance tax rates and gasoline taxes increased during this time as states took advantage of the energy situation to swell their budgets. Also, environmental regulations became more stringent making oil exploration increasingly more difficult.
All of these U.S. policies harmed U.S. oil production and strengthened OPEC's market power. Attributing the energy crisis to market failure shows that Goodstein fails to see the role that private markets play in providing for our energy needs.
Goodstein also disregards how intervention is currently interfering with the discovery and production of oil. Taxes and regulations reduce projected net oil prices and investors react by cutting exploration funding. Also, the U.S. government restricts exploration in areas such as the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and the Outer Continental Shelf.
Intervention in foreign countries has also had a negative effect on oil exploration. For instance, OPEC's production restrictions in 1973 led to decreased exploration in OPEC countries. These countries saw little need in further exploration for oil that they wouldn't be able to sell for years. The nationalization of these foreign oil sources has also led to less competition and less exploration.
While Saudi Arabia has maintained a surplus capacity for oil, other OPEC members have little or no surplus capacity. This makes sense. Saudi Arabia has more reserves than any other country. Its surplus capacity gives it market power. It has some say in setting oil prices, both up and down. Even if other countries were to develop some surplus capacity, they still would not have much market power. It's simply not in their interest to have this surplus capacity. The economic interplay between these countries in the last three decades has led to less oil exploration than otherwise might have occurred.
Also, exploration in Iraq and Iran fell sharply after 1980 due to the Iraq/Iran war. The two Gulf wars and a decade of severe trade sanctions also prevented Iraq from developing its oil fields over the last 14 years.
The former Soviet Union provides another example of how political decisions have affected exploration decisions. While there have been recent discoveries in the FSU, political instability in this region has made oil exploration a risky proposition.
The point is that government intervention, here and abroad, tends to negatively affect oil exploration and production. Removing these political restrictions would tend to increase our available oil reserves. The Hubbertarians tend to overlook this possibility.
Conclusion
Let me first note a positive in Goodstein's work. He spends much of his book providing us with a brief history of energy and discussions about energy issues such as thermodynamics and electromagnetism. These sections are both interesting and entertaining. However, this does not make up for his lack of economic understanding.
Goodstein depends on empirical findings while ignoring the data that contradicts his argument. He ignores the fact that energy alarmists have always underestimated future oil supplies and he dismisses the possibility of developing vast quantities of unconventional sources of oil.
Oil production declines will create incentives to find more conventional oil, to use unconventional oil, and to develop new energy alternatives. Government intervention makes our energy situation more precarious. Goodstein fails to understand any of these issues.
Though the book has received favorable press[5] for alerting us to alleged energy problems that confront us, its main value is that it compiles the economic fallacies regarding a potential energy crisis into a single slim volume.
------
Mark Brandly (brandlym@ferris.edu) teaches economics at Ferris State University and is an adjunct scholar of the the Mises Institute and Mackinac Center for Public Policy. Comment on the blog.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] While this review focuses on economic issues and ignores the environmental warnings in Goodstein's argument, it's important to note that Goodstein ignores the sharp differences of opinions on the issue of global warming and the greenhouse effect. Even the EPA admits that scientists are not in agreement on this issue.
[2] The USGS, in its early years, continually underestimated available U.S. oil. In 1920, the USGS chief geologist estimated total oil remaining in the U.S. at 6.7 billion barrels with a margin of error of 25%. In 1972, by comparison, U.S. reserves were estimated at 36 billions barrels.
[3] In his discussion on solar power, Goodstein notes that one proposed solution for global warming is to place a giant parasol, 1200 miles in diameter, in orbit around the earth in order to block a portion of the suns rays. It's to Goodstein's credit that he opposes this plan (p. 102). The parasol idea reminds me of Bastiat's Candlestick Makers' Petition, where the candlestick makers propose blocking out some of the suns rays in order to benefit the candlestick industry, the difference being that the concept of a giant parasol in space is a serious proposal.
[4] Campbell also derides his detractors as the flat-earth society: "Some members of the flat-earth fraternity have made a career from pointing out how earlier estimates needed revision and correction. They will not be disappointed with this assessment that differs yet again from earlier ones. Whereas a scientist would describe this evolution as progress based on a growing knowledge of Nature, the flat-earth fraternity will claim it as evidence that a resource-based approach to forecasting production is fundamentally flawed."
[5] See this Newsweek article, for example.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)