Climate Change

William B. Gail's article on climate engineering [“Climate Control,” May] brought out many important points and does not deserve only the negative reviews I saw in July's Forum. Of course almost everyone recognizes that the best solution is to control greenhouse gas emission, but then how many “commons” does history document the destruction of? What will we do if Kyoto-type agreements continue to fail at setting meaningful goals and achieving them? Gail's insight, that any climate engineering agreements on goals must be negotiated now while the playing field is still level and ambiguous, was my take-away message. In the short run, climate change will produce a few winners for every 10 losers, and they will not agree to reverse the process. The objections that we cannot calculate the consequences of mitigation strategies and that they will be too expensive will remain self-fulfilling prophecies as long as we reject consideration of these approaches out of hand.

Michael Mallary

IEEE Fellow

Harmony, Pa.

Grecian Formula for Failure

The hack that occurred [“The Athens Affair,” July] could not have come as a surprise to the telecom provider OTE (the Hellenic Telecommunications Organization) or the Greek government. There had been wiretapping problems within the Greek government during the 1980s and 1990s. As far back as 1998, OTE was tasked to secure the confidentiality of telephone conversations, per decision 229/26, law 2225/94 of the National Committee for Telecommunications and Posts, for the amendment of Presidential Decree 437/1995, published in the Government Gazette 1303/10/2001.

In 2000 and 2001, OTE embarked on finding and testing a solution that would meet the objectives as outlined in the presidential decree. In February 2002, a press release was broadcast by Greek radio and television announcing that OTE had conducted a pilot trial to secure the confidentiality of telephone conversations on OTE's network. But ultimately, later that year, the outcome was that OTE did not follow through with the project, even though OTE had created a technical specification and successfully implemented a pilot trial to secure the access to distribution wiring cabinets in its copper network.

One of the fundamental problems was determining who was going to pay for a solution. From the recommendation of the national committee, the national regulator of telecommunications of Greece (EET) decreed that OTE was obligated to provide a solution. OTE management indicated that a solution would have to be funded by the Greek government. The supplier of the pilot trial implemented the solution at its own expense with the approval of executive management at OTE. Due to political scandals at OTE's executive levels, the decision to proceed with implementing a solution across OTE's network footprint never materialized.

It is no surprise to learn of the hack in OTE's wireless network. Intracom was a primary supplier then and now. The status quo and culture at OTE most likely haven't changed much over the last decade.

Michael F. Moore

IEEE Member

Allen, Texas

Don't Blame Britain

IEEE Fellow Nirode Mohanty [Forum, August] blames India's colonial past for “putting incompetent bureaucrats in charge of critical technical and military institutions.” In blaming Britain, he seems to have forgotten that Britain left India about 60 years ago and that every one of the “incompetent persons” appointed by the British is dead by now. He also seems to have forgotten that 90 percent of India's bureaucracy did not exist at time of the British.

With minor exceptions, incompetence is the hallmark of bureaucracy worldwide. It is irrelevant that a country was once a colony. Incompetence applies to the bureaucracy at large in all countries, including Britain itself. Luckily for Mohanty, the British do not blame the incompetence of their bureaucrats on their past association with India and other colonies!

Abdul Mousa

IEEE Fellow

Vancouver, B.C., Canada

Size Matters

The June “Megacities” coverage provides compelling reading, especially for one living in Kolkata (formerly Calcutta), one of the poorest and most polluted megacities in the world.

The traffic situation here is horrendous, with the authorities unable to enforce a law banning hand-pulled rickshaws! Continuous supply of electricity is also a problem, as is drainage during the monsoon months.

Considering all that and the current situation you described in Lagos, I find it strange that no one has bothered to try to determine an optimum size of megacities, a size beyond which the quality of life is bound to deteriorate and maintaining law and order becomes a problem. Should engineers just be at the beck and call of politicians and planners to build even higher skyscrapers while ignoring realities on the ground?

In India, for example, it makes sense to develop smaller cities, with populations of 1 million or so—which would provide their own means of employment with schools/colleges and health systems—about 300 kilometers from the megacities. This is all the more feasible with India's widening road network, the Golden Quadrilateral, and the ever-increasing presence of the Internet and cellphones.

The Spectrum articles provide no measure of the number of schools/colleges, hospitals, and health care centers that determine infant mortality rates, longevity, and levels of literacy and education in the megacities of the Third World—all of which go to make up the quality of life.

Dwarka N. Bose

IEEE Senior Member

Kolkata, India

Nuclear Power in India

I was pleased to read “More Missiles Than Megawatts” [July] about India's nuclear development, and I agree with the author's conclusion. I would like to add a few more comments on the subject.

When India got independence in 1947 and became a republic in 1950, it had a great dream of becoming self-sufficient in nuclear technology to produce electric power. At the early stage of the independence, Homi J. Bhabha, a well-known nuclear scientist, was in charge of the program. Then, after his death in a plane crash in 1966, there was a great setback in the program development. Dr. Abdul Kamal, an electrical engineer and nuclear scientist who would become president of India, became the chairman of the program. Initially, Canada helped India, providing a test reactor to kick-start the program. Unfortunately, Indian political systems used the enriched uranium fuel from the reactor to make so-called nuclear weapons. As a result, Canada, the United States, and other countries decided to withdraw from India's nuclear energy program. Therefore, not much development took place for the past 20 years.

Today, with India's growth rate of 8 to 10 percent, the country needs electricity to support economic growth. There is a power shortage in India. As a result of load sharing, power shortages are common during hot summer days in Mumbai, Kolkata, Bangalore, and other big cities. Also, India's industries are not working to their capacities due to power shortages.

Some North American private companies are trying to construct clean coal-power generators in India. Unfortunately, due to India's bureaucracy, it is taking ages for them to get construction approval from the appropriate authorities.

Debabrata “Debu” Kundu

IEEE Senior Member

Toronto

Overpopulation Overlooked

I raise an ethical question that has long concerned me: Is it unethical for scientists and engineers to work on major issues in terms only of their disciplines and scientific/engineering features with little or no consideration of and effort on other significant features?

Great efforts on two major problems provide cases in point: the substantial enterprise during the past 50 years to increase food productivity to feed the hungry and current attempts to reduce the human contribution to global warming. Major players in both areas primarily address and work on their scientific/engineering features. Few, if any, confront the potentially overriding component in both cases: human overpopulation and the need to mitigate its continued growth.

Satisfactory solution of both problems must integrate steps against overpopulation with scientific and engineering advances. The latter are necessary but not sufficient. Scientists and engineers, especially those with substantial stature, are remiss in not pressing for societal steps against overpopulation while they pursue solutions to scientific and engineering components of both problems.

Glen Smerage

IEEE Life Member

Santa Fe, N.M.

Click here for the first part of the forum.