Introduction to the Kalabagh Dam

Introduction to the Kalabagh Dam The Kalabagh Dam is situated about 210 km downhill of Tarbela Dam on the River Indus. The project comprises the structure of 260 ft. tall rock-fill dam. With its punishing retentive equal to 915 ft., the basin, which the dam will make, will provide the capacity of storage of about 6.1 million-acre feet. The development of this project comprises of two channels on the right side for disposal of floodwater. If the cases of highest flooding are faced, then these channels will have a discharge capacity of over 2 million cusecs. The Left side of the dam comprises of the powerhouse, with a convincing generation capability of 3,600 MW. It is to be pointed that the regular current at Kalabagh is 89 MAF, comprises of 72 percent of the Indus, 25 percent of the river Kabul and 3 percent of the river Soan. The limited storing of 6.1 MAF is 7% of the regular annual flow. Where is KALABAGH DAM LOCATED? Kalabagh Dam is situated in the Mianwali District in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and the precise course of the dam conferring to the many coordinates is 32 °57à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ²23à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ³North and 071 °36à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ²49à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ³East. Kalabagh Dam is a dam, which features one of the distinctive type of earth, fills Dam in which the zoned fill ridge is accomplished with the help of mud and core. Suppose, we have an overview on the description and the sizes of the dam for which it is recognized as the main dam in Pakistan and one of the major dams in Asia. Height wise Kalabagh dam is 79 meters, which is 259 feet, length wise the dam is 3,350 meters, meaning it is equivalent to 10,991 feet. Confiscates of the Kalabagh Dam are straightly related with the Indus river. The tank, which is being executed at the Kalabagh Dam, has the lively volume of 7.52 km3 (6,100,000 acre/ft) while the sedentary volume of the dam is 9.7 km3 (7,900,000 acre/ft) while the covering area include of 110,500 sq mi (286,000 km2). Kalabagh Dams power station has the Hydraulic head of 170 feet which revenues 52 meters while the turbines power is 12 x 300 MW with the all-out volume of 3,600 MW and with the yearly production of 11,400 GWH. Kalabagh Dam is one of the very vital supplies of Pakistan when they are facing such intimidating and disturbing energy disaster and deficit of electricity and if the dam is being constructed to work on its whole volume then within no time Pakistan can get rid of this overwhelming problem of energy. Kalabagh Dam would allow extra and better agricultural work to all provinces, inside a little time limit. All other recognized locations for dams have a much lengthier development tenure, in the nonappearance of early lessons. The early installation will generate 11,400 million Kwh of energy annually. Because of conjunctive operation, it will allow improvement of 600 MW of climaxing competence and additional 336 million Kwh of yearly production at Tarbela. Kalabagh Dam will supplement irrigation provisions, hydropower and alleviate floods. Additionally, indirect benefits like more industrial and food production, employment and agricultural boost will accrue. The project will have a useful economic life of over 50 years, without requiring any major replacement of machines and EM equipment. The development will wage its asset cost in a retro of fewer than 10 years, as proposed project yearly welfares are US$ 628.18 Million and the development monetary cost is US$ 6002 Million (comprehe nsive of awareness and growths) at 1998 value flat. The opponents of Kalabagh dam while have the main impact on Sindh and KPK who have some anxieties relating to the building of this dam. The issues are involved which are related to faith shortfall. Due to the serious environment and human impact, the construction of this dam is believed to be worthless. KPK puts an objection to Kalabagh as it will clue towards the dislodgment of a substantial amount of its individuals and a huge area of its property will also be flooded or become waterlogged. Furthermore, it is hypothetical that the Noshehra city, which is actually home to 2000,000 people, might arise a danger of flooding, as it is located at the sets of Kabul River. Alternatively, a significant issue in Sindh is desertification, it has continuously felt endangered by Punjab, and it declines to put trust on the province that the entire River Indus waters will not be left to provide the needs of Punjab only, dehydrating the downstream Sindh River. These anxieties are connected to the understanding of the operation of Taunsa-Punjnad and Chashma-Jehlum canal. The unfriendliness of Balochistan to Kalabagh is also grounded on the faith that if the dam overstrains the request in the river than the needs for more water through Guddu Barrage will be encountered with little achievement. Other issues such as ecological deprivation and human impacts- restoration and relocation because of building have also been elevated. Most importantly, it is supposed that the location of the dam is on a fault line. Until now, Pakistan has recycled only about 10 percent of its projected 40,000 mw of monetarily feasible hydropower potential, a section around 30 percent inferior than India and China and around 75 percent lower than other established states. The country is not only facing severe electricity scarcity but in spite of the best irrigation system, it still undergo importations of wheat on credit from abroad. Kalabagh dam has rather become a disaster of supremacy; current faith shortfall between Punjab on one side and the other three provinces on the other is the important issue. It is not for the representatives or magistrates to choose whether this dam should be built. A national level discussion is obligatory lecturing the anxieties of Sindh and KPK based on technical study of the project. For this drive, apolitical experts from all four shires should take measures to study and present the feasibility report at the central level. It would be a optimistic growth if the report bounces a green signal to the construction. Though, if the report finds approximately correctness in the issues elevated by Sindh and KPK such as sinking of Nowshera and site being on the fault line, then it is period to move advancing for decent and contemplate of other supportable developments.

Which level of government should take the lead?

In ascertaining which between the federal government and the state and local government can best address the problems facing this nation, it is important that the pressing problems of the United States of America be identified first. Evidently, the most pressing problems of our nation today include job creation and economic growth, the war in Iraq, health care and social security, energy and the cost of gas, terrorism, illegal immigration and environment and global warming.When it comes to addressing the problem of job creation and economic growth, the lead should not be taken by any of the two levels of government since both the federal as well as the state governments must share the burden of dealing with the same. At the state or local level, intrastate commerce must be readily addressed. While interstate commerce must be facilitated by the federal government.The federal government however must be permitted to take the lead in addressing the problems of the war in Iraq, terrorism, illegal immigration energy and the cost of gas and the environment and global warming as these problems substantially involves foreign policy works that only the federal government is empowered to do. These problems require immediate attention and may oftentimes necessitate instant action which may only be delivered by the national government.On the other hand, the problems of health care and social security must be addressed by the state and local governments for the identification as well as the cure to these problems can best be addressed locally. It is within the realm of the power of the state and local governments to make measures to attend to the problems of health care and social security. Discuss the Davis Administration and how it affected the writing of the 1876 Texas Constitution.Governor Samuel Jackson Davis’ administration was perhaps the most controversial and unpopular one in Texas history. This may be because even his assumption to office was in the first in stance questionable. The backbone of his administration was the Texas Constitution of 1869 which provided for the centralization of power into the Governor’s Office and the expansion of governmental power. Davis’ term lengthened from the original two years to four years and his salary was significantly increased.Davis was able to have control over local state officials because of the vast appointing and removal powers granted to him by the constitution. The Davis administration was also criticized for levying unreasonably high taxes and incurring lavish government expenditures. Aside from his control over the State Police, the Constitution also empowered Davis to take charge of the State Militia which he both used to maintain law and order and compel local officials whenever they refused or failed to obey.His unpopularity was bolstered by immense corruption coupled with his declaration of martial law in some counties. Texans have always preferred decentralization, chea per government spending and abhorred the coercive force of the state police and the state militia and the declaration of martial rule. That is why in December of 1873, Texans replaced Governor Davis with a Democrat in the person of Richard Coke and subsequently rewrote their constitution.Texans promulgated the Constitution of 1876 which, up to this time, remains to be the fundamental organic law of Texas. It provided for shorter terms and lower salaries of elected officials, obliteration of voter registration, local control of schools, low taxation and less government expenditure. Although the governor was given the power to appoint, fill vacancies, and enforce the laws of the land, he was not given control over local or other elected state officials. The 1876 Texas Constitution vastly differed from its predecessor constitution. References: Longley, Robert. â€Å"Federalism: National Vs. State Government.†Ã‚   (2008). April 28, 2008 . Webmaster. â€Å"The Handbook of Texas Online.†Ã‚   (2008). April 28, 2008 .

FOSS Research Assignment Essay

FOSS (Free and Open Source Software) had some trouble in 2006 when Microsoft submitted 235 patents that were allegedly violated by FOSS. Microsoft created these patents in order to collect royalties from companies in the â€Å"free world† (companies/people using free software). Eben Moglen of the Free Software Foundation contended that software is a mathematical algorithm and is not patentable. Moglen wrote, â€Å"It’s a tinderbox. As the commercial confrontation between free software and software-that’s-a-product becomes more fierce, patent law’s going to be the terrain on which a big piece of the war’s going to be fought.† FOSS has powerful corporate patrons and allies. So if Microsoft ever tried to sue Linux distributor Red Hat for patent infringement, for instance, OIN might sue Microsoft in retaliation, trying to enjoin distribution of Windows. In the 1970s and 1980s, software companies relied mainly on â€Å"trade secrets† doctrine and copyright law to protect their products. But everything changed in the 1990s. The copyright law was providing less protection to software than companies hoped for and the â€Å"trade secrets† doctrine was becoming unworkable because the secret itself (the source code) had to be revealed to an unlimited number of other people/companies. With the internet, Microsoft applied for 1,411 patents in 2002. By 2004 they submitted 3,780 patents. After that Microsoft had three choices. First they could do nothing and donate the patents to the development community. Second they could start suing other companies that were using their patents. Or third, they could begin licensing its patents to other companies for either royalties or access to their patents, which would be a cross-licensing deal. So they took the third option. Microsoft later made a deal with Novell. They agreed not to sue each other’s customers for patent infringement, which is okay because it’s something that Richard Stallman’s GPL doesn’t address. Novell then agreed to give MS a percentage of all its Linux revenue through 2011. Microsoft decided it would pay Novell $240 million for â€Å"coupons† that could sell to customers, who would then trade in the coupons for subscriptions to Novell’s Linux server software. They also paid a â€Å"balancing payment† for the patent part of the deal. So now all of the FOSS developers are in fear because â€Å"the big boys† aka MS could purchase their version of Linux through a vendor such as Novell while getting protection from lawsuits and letting the â€Å"little guys† to fend for themselves. But without the little guy developers, the future of high-quality FOSS is undetermined. So the Free Software Foundation drafted a new version of the GPL that would prevent anyone else from using the original copy’s loophole that MS exploited. But Moglen had another thought. The fact that MS was selling coupons that people/companies could trade in for Novell subscriptions meant that MS was now a Linux distributer and went against the terms of the GPL, and was in fact in violation themselves. So Moglen wrote that if MS continued to issue these coupons after the new GPL takes effect, it would be waiving its right to bring patent suits against all Linux users. Moglen kept his promise and the new version of the GPL was released that July. Microsoft and Novell proceeded with their deal. But Moglen’s revisions will prevent other companies from making any more deals like the Novell one. Microsoft hoped that the deal with Novell would be a model it could use it to collect royalties with other companies of free software. So the bridge from MS to FOSS failed, but we are now closer than ever to â€Å"patent Armageddon.† The bridge with MS needs to be burned and the patent system needs to be shut down. Moglen says â€Å"The free world says that software is the embodiment of knowledge about technology, which needs to be free in the same way that mathematics is free. Everybody is allowed to know as much of it as he wants, regardless of whether he can pay for it, and everybody can contribute and everybody can share.† Works Cited Article: â€Å"Microsoft takes on the free world† Link: http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2007/05/28/100033867/index2.htm

Premises Based on Immanuel Kants Perspective on the...

Introduction: In the following essay I will be presenting premises based on Immanuel Kant’s perspective on the matter of, â€Å"Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals†. Once I have outlined Kant’s view on the matter, I will then object to the conclusions, that â€Å"Always treat a human being (yourself included) as an end, and never as a mere means† (Kant pg.169), making his whole argument false. Immanuel Kant’s Argument: 1. Good Will – â€Å"that could be considered good without limitation†(Kant pg. 103) it is good in itself (Kant pg. 104) 2. The Notion of Duty – â€Å"In order to do so, we shall set before ourselves the concept of duty, which contains that of a good will though under certain subjective limitations and hindrance, which, however, far from concealing it and making It unrecognizable, rather bring it out by contrast and make it shine forth all the more brightly.† (Kant pg.104) 3. The Nature of Imperatives- if the action would be good merely as a means to something else the imperative is hypothetical; if the action is represented as in itself good, hence as necessary in a will in itself conforming to reason, as its principle, then it is categorical. ... A. â€Å"Act as if the maxim of your action were to become by your will a universal law of nature.†(Kant pg. 109) B. â€Å"Act that use humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, always at the same time as an end, never merely as a means.† (Kant pg112) 4. Conclusion: â€Å"Therefore Always treat a human being (yourselfShow MoreRelated Immanuel Kants Ethics Of Pure Duty and John Stuart Mills Utilitarian Ethics Of Justice2753 Words   |  12 PagesImmanuel Kants The Grounding For The Metaphysics of Morals and John Stuart Mills Utilitarianism Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill are philosophers who addressed the issues of morality in terms of how moral traditions are formed. Immanuel Kant has presented one viewpoint in The Grounding For The Metaphysics of Morals that is founded on his belief that the worth of man is inherent in his ability to reason. John Stuart Mill holds another opinion as presented in the book, Utilitarianism thatRead MoreComparing Aristotle And John Stuart Mill1130 Words   |  5 Pagesquestionable issue. With these in-depth examinations, some similar outlooks as well as differing views have been recorded. Many philosophers have dissected this important topic, however I intend to concentrate of the famous works of Aristotle, Immanuel Kant, and John Stuart Mill. After meticulously analyzing each of the above philosophers’ texts, I personally prefer the position of utilitarian and Benthamite, John Stuart Mill. After comparing and contrasting the positions and reasonings of theseRead MoreCriti que And Critique Of Kantian Ethics1812 Words   |  8 Pagespower†¦[Other] qualities†¦Have no intrinsic unconditional worth, but they always presuppose, rather, a good will, which restricts the high esteem in which they are otherwise rightly held.† (Kant, pg.7 393-394). So Immanuel Kant introduces the public to his Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals, which results not in simply a grounding work, but one that is utterly groundbreaking. This opener, wholly devoted to the establishment of the importance of will and intention, notes the guiding characteristicsRead MoreEssay on Cultural Standards Are All That We Have2105 Words   |  9 Pagesâ€Å"right†, it is often hard to except the fact that others live differently. In reality, different cultures have different moral codes. The belief in the objectivity and universality of moral truth is an unachievable ideal standard, and holds no practical value. It is irrefutable that some values vary from culture to culture. As one travels the world, they will inevitably see diverging moral standards in many areas, such as wearing clothes, funerary practices, and abortion. For example, in Mainland ChinaRead MoreSuicide and the Harm Principle2897 Words   |  12 Pagesinstances of severe pain, while Kant’s moral theory of the categorical imperative provides reasoning against taking one’s own life. Mill’s principle of utility is the maximization of pleasure and the reduction of pain. Mill regards happiness as the greatest good in life and all actions should be performed as long as they have the tendency to produce pleasure. Mill also introduces the Harm Principle. The Harm Principle is used to determine whether coercion is justifiable based on the impact of individualRead MoreBranches of Philosophy8343 Words   |  34 Pagesphilosophy The following branches are the main areas of study: †¢ Metaphysics investigates the nature of being and the world. Traditional branches are cosmology and ontology. †¢ Epistemology is concerned with the nature and scope of knowledge, and whether knowledge is possible. Among its central concerns has been the challenge posed by skepticism and the relationships between truth, belief, and justification. †¢ Ethics, or moral philosophy, is concerned with questions of how persons ought toRead More Ethical Theories  and Major Moral Principles Essay5111 Words   |  21 Pagessix theories taking up the vast majority of the rest of the discussion. Over the course of the next few pages I will explain to you the basics of eight different ethical theories: utilitarianism, Kantian ethics, contractarianism, feminist or care-based ethics, natural law theory, Confucian ethics, intuitionism and ideal observer theory, and virtue ethics. I will tell you about some of the major proponents of the theory, some of its variations, and give you some examples of how it might be appliedRead MoreJurisprudential Theories on IPR13115 Words   |  53 Pages According to Article 27 of the  Universal Declaration of Human Rights, everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.[32]  Although the relationship between intellectual property and  human rights  is a complex one,[33]  there are moral arguments for intellectual property. The arguments that justify intellectual property fall into three major categories. Personality theorists believe