The Goodwyn-Bailey House at 2295 Old Poplar Rd. in Newnan, Georgia was built in 1835.  Also known as Catalpa Plantation, it includes Greek Revival architecture.  It was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1992.  The listing included five contributing buildings and one contributing site on .

This home was the 1991 Winner of the Georgia Trust for Historic Preservation's Honor Award.

The Goodwyn homeplace is one of the few remaining examples of the antebellum plantation houses that were once numerous in Coweta County. Time, neglect, fire, and ill-directed remodeling have taken a heavy toll on Coweta's early homes.

The Goodwyn home was built by a Virginia family of substantial means. Many families from Virginia came to Coweta in the 1830s and 1840s and settled near each other in the eastern districts. The Goodwyns included Anne Dance Goodwyn, widow of Burwell Goodwyn of Brunswick County, Virginia and her children, Thomas, Ann Eliza, Napoleon, Sarah, James, and Henry (and possibly others). The family settled in the Poplar Road area and remained there until after the turn of the century.

The administrator of Burwell Goodwyn's estate petitioned that Goodwyn "left real and personal property worth some considerable sum..." The quality of the home Thomas constructed after their arrival is testimony to the family's wealth. Few homes were built in Coweta in the 1840s (less than twenty years after the lottery opening the territory) of the size and detail found in the Goodwyn home. The homeplace remained in the family until 1900.

It continued to be a well-kept home, but sadly, not well-preserved. Numerous architectural changes and some structural ones ere made to the house over the years. Finally an absentee owner assured that the property would fall into disrepair through thirty years of tenants and vandalism. As the house stood vacant in the mid-1980s, many felt that the property was beyond saving.

In 1986, the property was purchased by Rod Smith. Mr. Smith immediately began extensive research on the home and the family. The house retained its original mantels, panelled wainscot, double panelled doors, plaster, floors, fluted square Doric columns, chimneys, and basic floor plan.

An exhaustive study of the home revealed that numerous changes had been made to the original structure over the years. These included the removal of the old stairway rising from the rear of the stair hall, it being replaced by an early 20th century stair facing the front of the hallway. A full one-story front porch was added incorporating the original columns. Second floor rear windows were closed off and another upstairs room was added. The original cookhouse was removed and a new kitchen was added.

The Smiths began their restoration by removing the additions to the house as well as those portions of the home which had deteriorated beyond repair. As work progressed, the original location of moved doors, windows, and staircase became evident. In many areas, decorative trim had been moved intact or reused in other areas of the home.

Removal of the 20th century staircase exposed the original outline of the early stair. The Smiths have recreated the stair with old materials where possible, including a newel post from a demolished Coweta home of the same era.

The doorway to the west parlor was returned to its original position under the restored stair. Double French doors had been added to the east parlor, which were removed and the original door trim found in another part of the home (matching the room's window trim) was placed back in position.

The single panelled double doors from the front of the home were found on a closet in the house (having been replaced by a more "modern" doorway at some point) Matching doors were made by Herbert Gordy, Coweta's master carpenter (brother of D.X. Gordy, the renowned potter) for the rear of the stair hall.

Mr. Gordy reproduced the bases for the massive columns from an early photograph and all other detail work needed for the restoration. The full-width front porch was of concrete, removed by Mr. Smith with a jackhammer. The balcony was replaced using the early photograph as a guide.

Mr. Smith, his wife, and his father carefully repaired, replaced where needed, and skim-coated all of the plaster walls and ceilings in the home. The floor of the dining room was replaced with period flooring and the work on the dining room turned up evidence of the back staircase to the basement "summer kitchen" and to the second floor rear bedroom. This staircase was restored to its original configuration with meticulous attention given to blend new materials with old. The job is so skillfully done that there is no evidence that the stair had not remained untouched for a century and a half. The brick floor to the lower-level room and the missing mantel were replaced. Two windows which had been changed were replaced with copies of the one intact window in the room.

The "new" kitchen was removed and a wing added to the house to accommodate the Smith's kitchen and sitting room. Every effort was made to keep the flavor of the early home in the new construction and the result is remarkably successful blend of a functional family area incorporated into the restoration.

The Smiths had acquired several outbuildings of the period and plan their restoration. The home has been opened to school children of the county as a part of the Heritage Education Program sponsored by the Coweta County School System.

References

Houses on the National Register of Historic Places in Georgia (U.S. state)
Greek Revival houses in Georgia (U.S. state)
Houses completed in 1835
Houses in Coweta County, Georgia
Plantation houses in Georgia (U.S. state)
National Register of Historic Places in Coweta County, Georgia
Newnan, Georgia

Goodwyn-Bailey House


Andalo (Àndel in local dialect) is a comune (municipality) in Trentino in north Italy, with some 1,200 inhabitants in 2021. It is the seat of the Comunità di Valle dell'Altopiano della Paganella.

Geography

The town lies on the Paganella plateau, between the mountains Piz Galin, elevation , and Paganella, , and its territory is part of the Adamello-Brenta natural park.

History
The area was first settled during the Middle Ages, and used to be divided into 13 hamlets called "masi" (Bortolon, Cadin, Casanova, Clamer, Dos, Fovo, Ghezzi, Melchiori, Monech, Pegorar, Perli, Pont and Toscana), which eventually merged into a single town. This fragmentation can still be noticed, especially in the most isolated masi (for instance, maso Pegorar).

During the second part of the 20th century the village became one of the most famous touristic resorts in Trentino, mainly due to its skiing facilities.

Economy
The local economy, once reliant exclusively on agriculture, is now almost completely centered on tourism (both during the summer and the winter, as opposed to some of the surrounding towns), mainly due to the town's position within the Dolomites.
As a result of tourism, Andalo is among the wealthiest towns in the province and in the country. The Paganella Ski Resort is located in the municipality, where Alpine Rockfest is held annually.

References

External links
Official website
Official Andalo Page on Visittrentino.it

Cities and towns in Trentino-Alto Adige/Südtirol

Andalo


The Biafo Glacier is a 67 km long glacier in the Karakoram Mountains of the Northern Areas, Pakistan which meets the 49 km long Hispar Glacier at an altitude of 5,128 m (16,824 feet) at Hispar La (Pass) to create the world's longest glacial system outside of the polar regions. This highway of ice connects two ancient mountain kingdoms, Nagar (immediately south of Hunza) in the west with Baltistan in the east. The traverse uses 51 of the Biafo Glacier's 63 km and all of the Hispar Glacier to form a 100 km glacial route. Scientists still are yet to find out how old this glacier actually is

Glaciers of Pakistan

Biafo Glacier


Beast is a music composition and modular synthesis application released as free software under the GNU GPL and GNU LGPL licenses, that runs under Unix. It supports MIDI, WAV/AIFF/MP3/OggVorbis/etc audio files and LADSPA modules. It is capable of multitrack editing, unlimited undo/redo support, real-time synthesis support, 32-bit audio rendering, full duplex support, multiprocessor support, conditional MMX/SSE utilisation for plugins, precise timing down to sample granularity, on-demand and partial loading of wave files, on the fly decoding, stereo mixing, FFT scopes, MIDI automation and full scriptability in Scheme. The plugins, synthesis core and the user interface are actively being developed and translated into a variety of languages, regularly assimilating user feedback such as from the Beast_Feature_Requests page.
BEAST is an abbreviation for Better Audio System. BSE is an abbreviation for Better Sound Engine, and it implements all the necessary music processing logic required by BEAST in a separate reusable library. The "Better" portion of the names refer to the complexity and many iterations involved in implementing such a "BEAST".

History
As of 2013, the Beast code base has been migrated to LGPL and is mostly written in C++, notable release include:

 31 December 1999: Version 0.3.0 (pre-alpha) released.
  2 July 2001: BEAST was packaged up and got included into Debian.
  2 September 2002: Version 0.4.1 (added support for the extension language GNU Guile).
 14 April 2003: Version 0.5.1 (BEAST Featuring LADSPA)
 7 March 2004: Version 0.6.1 (The low latency BEAST Release)
 13 April 2005: Version 0.6.5 (new tool "bsewavetool")
 25 May 2005: Version 0.6.6 (maintenance)
 16 July 2006: Version 0.7.0 (new synthesis modules)
 28 December 2006: Version 0.7.1 (tunings, CVE fix)
 10 September 2010: Version 0.7.2 (new instruments, LGPL licensing)
  9 April 2011: Version 0.7.4 (driver fixes, performance)
 24 October 2012: Version 0.7.6 (regressions fixes, documentation)
 19 January 2013: Version 0.7.8 (C++ migration, usability)
 15 March 2013: Version 0.8.0 (C++11, use of Rapicorn)
 28 October 2014: Version 0.9.0
  7 April 2016: Version 0.10.0

References

External links

Free audio software
Audio editing software that uses GTK
Free software programmed in C++

Software that was rewritten in C++

BEAST (music composition)


Sunny Singh (born 18 December 1986 in Jind, Haryana, India) is an Indian cricketer. He plays for Haryana in the Ranji Trophy. Singh is a right-hand batsman who is an occasional medium pacer. Singh is a part of the Kings XI Punjab team of the Indian Premier League. He has also played for the India Under-19 cricket team in the 2004 ICC Under-19 Cricket World Cup.

Career
When he was 17, Singh began in first-class cricket with the Haryana cricket team in the 2003–04 Ranji Trophy season. He scored 474 runs from six matches at an average of 52.66. In the following year, he scored 654 runs from seven matches, including three hundreds, at an average of 59.45. Three seasons later, he was dropped from the side. In the 2009–10 season, Singh made 617 runs from 5 matches at an average of 88.14. He also made three centuries and became a permanent member of the team. In 2011, as he led his team to the semi-finals of the Ranji Trophy. There, he made a total of 593 runs from seven matches, including two hundreds, at an average of 45.61.

References

External links
Sunny Singh Kings XI Punjab website

Indian cricketers
Haryana cricketers
Kolkata Knight Riders cricketers
Punjab Kings cricketers
North Zone cricketers
Living people
1986 births

Sunny Singh (cricketer)


The Eurasian Economic Community (EAEC or EurAsEC) was a regional organisation between 2000 and 2014 which aimed for the economic integration of its member states.
 The organisation originated from the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) on 29 March 1996, with the treaty on the establishment of the Eurasian Economic Community signed on 10 October 2000 in Kazakhstan's capital Astana by Presidents Alexander Lukashenko of Belarus, Nursultan Nazarbayev of Kazakhstan, Askar Akayev of Kyrgyzstan, Vladimir Putin of Russia, and Emomali Rahmon of Tajikistan. Uzbekistan joined the community on 7 October 2005, but later withdrew on 16 October 2008.

During the 14 years, the EAEC implemented a number of economic policies to unify the community. The Customs Union of Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Russia was formed on 1 January 2010, and later renamed the Eurasian Customs Union. The four freedoms of movement modelled after the European Union (goods, capital, services, and people) were fully implemented by 25 January 2012, with the formation of the Eurasian Economic Space.

On 10 October 2014, an agreement on the termination of the Eurasian Economic Community was signed in Minsk after a session of the Interstate Council of the EAEC. The Eurasian Economic Community was terminated from 1 January 2015 in connection with the launch of the Eurasian Economic Union. While the Eurasian Economic Union effectively replaces the community, membership negotiations with Tajikistan are still ongoing. All other EAEC members have joined the new union.

Membership

Members

Uzbekistan was previously a member of the EAEC, however it suspended its membership in 2008.

In accordance with the Charter of the EurAsEC, observer status could be granted to the states or intergovernmental organizations at their request. The observers had the right to attend the public meetings of the Eurasian Economic Community, to speak at these meetings and with the consent of the presiding officer to obtain public documents and decisions taken by the Community. Observer status did not allow states to take part in decision-making at the meetings of the Eurasian Economic Community. Observer states were:

Aims
The Eurasian Economic Community was established for effective promotion of the creation by the Customs Union member states of a Single Economic Space and for coordinating their approaches while integrating into the world economy and the international trade system. One of the Organization's chief activity vectors is ensuring the dynamic evolution of the Community states through coordinating their economic and social reforms while effectively using their economic potentials to improve the living standards of their peoples.
Among the principal tasks of the Community are:
completing the formalization of a free trade regime in all respects, creating a unified customs tariff and a unified system of nontariff regulation measures;
laying down the common rules for trade in goods and services and their access to internal markets;
Ensuring the free movement of capital
introducing a unified procedure for foreign exchange controls;
creating a common unified system of customs regulation;
Harmonization of economies for the transition to a future single currency
drawing up and implementing joint programs of economic and social development;
creating equal conditions for production and entrepreneurial activities;
forming a common market for transportation services and a unified transport system;
forming a common energy market;
creating equal conditions for access by foreign investment to the sides' markets;
giving the citizens of the Community states equal rights in receiving education and medical assistance throughout its territory;
converging and harmonizing national legislation;
ensuring the coordination of the legal systems of the Eurasian Economic Community states with a view to creating a common legal space within the Community.

Institutional framework

Interstate Council
Integration Committee
Energy Policy Council
Transport Policy Council
Council on Border Issues
Council of Heads of Customs Services
Council of Heads of Tax Services
Council of Ministers of Justice
Secretariat
Commission of Permanent Representatives
Interparliamentary Assembly
Community's Court of Justice

Interstate Council

The supreme body of the Eurasian Economic Community is composed of the Heads of State and Government of the member states. The Interstate Council considers the main issues of the Community relating to the common interests of member states, determines the strategy, direction and prospects of integration and takes decisions aimed at achieving the goals and objectives of the Community. The Interstate Council meets at the level of Heads of State at least once a year, and the heads of government - at least twice a year. The council takes decisions by consensus. The decisions taken are binding on all Member States of the Community.

Integration Committee

The Integration Committee is a permanent organ of the Eurasec. It consists of deputy heads of governments of the countries of the Community. The Integration Committee meetings must be held at least four times a year.

In integration, the Committee's decisions are taken by a two-thirds majority.

Every member state has a certain number of votes:

Some boards and commissions within the Integration Committee:
Commission for the protection of national markets;
Commission on cooperation in the field of export control;
Commission on technical regulations, sanitary, veterinary and phytosanitary trade;
Commission on Tariffs and non-tariff regulation;
Cooperation Council In the field of atomic energy for peaceful purposes;
Council for Culture;
Council of the agro-industrial policy;
Council Transportation Policy;
Council for Energy Policy;
Council on Migration Policy;
Council of Social Policy;
Council on Intellectual Property.
Board of Health;
Board of Education;
Board of Environmental Protection;
Chief Executives Board authorized to regulate the securities market body;
Council of Heads of Tax Services;
Council of Heads of insurance supervision and regulation of insurance business;
Council of Heads of Customs;

Secretariat

The Secretariat is headed by the Secretary General of the Eurasec, the highest Community official, appointed by the interstate Council. The seats of the Secretariat are in the cities of Almaty (Kazakhstan) and Moscow (Russia).

The Interparliamentary Assembly

The Interparliamentary Assembly of the Eurasian Economic Community serves as body of parliamentary cooperation in the framework of the Eurasian Economic Community. It addresses the issues of harmonization (convergence, harmonization) of national legislation and bring it into line with the agreements concluded in the framework of the Eurasian Economic Community.  Assembly is composed of members of parliament, delegated by the parliaments of member states. Its structure includes:
 : 42 members
 : 16 members
 : 16 members
 : 8 members
 : 8 members

The Secretariat of the Interparliamentary Assembly is located in St. Petersburg, Russia.

Economic data

Economic cooperation

Single Economic Space

After discussion about the creation of a common market between the CIS countries of Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan, agreement in principle about the creation of this space was announced after a meeting in the Moscow suburb of Novo-Ogarevo on 23 February 2003. The Common Economic Space would involve a supranational commission on trade and tariffs that would be based in Kyiv, would initially be headed by a representative of Kazakhstan, and would not be subordinate to the governments of the four nations. The ultimate goal would be a regional organisation that would be open for other countries to join as well, and could eventually lead even to a single currency. On 22 May 2003 The Verkhovna Rada (the Ukrainian Parliament) voted 266 votes in favor and 51 against the joint economic space. However, Viktor Yushchenko's victory in the Ukrainian presidential election of 2004 was a significant blow against the project: Yushchenko had shown renewed interest in Ukrainian membership in the European Union, and such membership would have been incompatible with the envisioned common economic space. On March 1, 2010 the first deputy head of the presidential administration of newly elected Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, Iryna Akymova stated that Ukraine does not intend to join the Customs Union of Russia, Kazakhstan and Belarus in the near future "Since the customs union contradicts and will greatly complicate Ukraine's membership in the WTO".

A single market for the Eurasian Economic Community came into effect in January 2012, followed by the creation of the Eurasian Economic Union on 1 January 2015.

Eurasian Customs Union

Forming a customs union between EurAsEC member states became a top priority from Spring 2008, when the EU announced its Eastern Partnership.  Since that time, there has been discord between the EU and Russia with both sides accusing the other of attempting to carve out spheres of influence over the countries at issue (Belarus, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine).  A supranational body of the customs union—the Eurasian Economic Commission—was established on December 12, 2008.  Boiled down to its essence, Russia has offered EurAsEC members access to its markets (i.e., for Kazakhstan) and lower energy prices (i.e., Belarus, Ukraine).  The EU's offer to membership countries amounts to promises of de facto EU integration, such as relaxed visa entry requirements.

Kazakhstani President Nursultan Nazarbayev had proposed the creation of a common noncash currency called yevraz for the community. This would have reportedly helped insulate the countries from the global economic crisis.

On 3 September 2013, EUobserver reported that Armenia had decided to join the Eurasian Customs Union. The website quoted a Russian government communique stating that, "Armenia [has] decided to join the Customs Union and take the necessary practical steps to subsequently participate in the formation of the Eurasian Economic Union."

Anti-Crisis Fund

On 9 June 2009, Member States of the EurAsEC in collaboration with Armenia, announced the establishment of an anti-crisis of Eurasec Fund to deal with the 2009 financial crisis.

The Russian Finance Minister, Alexei Kudrin clarified: "The money from the fund will be used to grant sovereign loans and stabilization credits to Member States and to finance interstate investment projects. Therefore, this fund will be a kind of replica of the Regional International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD). As we know, the IMF provides credit stabilization globally, while the EBRD grants loans for investment projects. Russia has refused to increase the amount of its contribution to the IMF, which would have been used to grant loans to stabilize countries in need around the world. Instead, it creates a regional fund to help its neighbors and allies. "

Belarusian President, Alexander Lukashenko said: "The Eurasian Economic Community will establish a fund of $10 billion to deal with the financial crisis." On June 9, 2009, the Fund was established at a meeting of the EurAsEc.

The Russia and Kazakhstan contributed 7.5 billion and 1 billion dollars respectively to the anti-crisis fund.

History

Origins of the Eurasian Economic Community

On October 10, 2000, when reforms on the CIS were reached the Eurasian Economic Community was formed. The EurAsEC aimed to erase the failures of the CIS, to form a true common market, face the challenges of globalization and to resume the integration processes within the CIS. Very quickly, the EurAsEC emerged as the economic complement of the CSTO.

The dissolution of the CEC into the EurAsEC

In 2004, Russia joined the Central Asian Economic Community (ECSC) in order to strengthen its presence in Central Asia. Soon after, Moscow expressed its desire to dissolve the ECSC in the EurAsEC . In late 2005, Uzbekistan argued for its accession to the EurAsEC, which led other members of the ECSC to negotiate and eventually merge the two organizations. This merge was effective on January 25, 2006. Most of the functions of the Central Asian Economic Community were transferred to the EurAsEC since 2006.

However the status of current observers of the ECSC that are not observers of EurAsEC is not yet settled (including Georgia and Turkey, the latter activist which is also for accession to the European Union) .

Members wanted the EurAsEC to become a viable economic bloc between the powerful EU in the West, and the growing economies in the east, which established the ASEAN).

Uzbekistan's withdrawal from the EurAsEC

On October 16, 2008, Uzbekistan submitted an official note to the EurAsEC Secretariat, requesting to withdraw from the Eurasian Economic Community (EurAsEC). Although Uzbekistan has not given any official reason, many interpret the move as an attempt to revive stagnating relations with the West and to assertively dismissing Russian influence. Other views interpret Uzbekistan's move as a nationalist attempt in response to an economic crisis, in order to regain tighter control over its economy.

Legacy of the Eurasian Economic Community

The Customs Union members—Kazakhstan, Belarus and Russia—reached an agreement on a unified customs tariff in June 2009 and endorsed a schedule for creating a unified customs territory. The new Customs Union is intended to go into effect on July 1, 2010

The Russian, Kazakhstani, and Belarusian leaders have approved documents to establish a "single economic space" on 1 January 2012 – a single market for goods, investment, and labor.

On 29 May 2014, a meeting of the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council took place in Astana, following which Vladimir Putin, President of Kazakhstan Nursultan Nazarbayev and President of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko signed an Agreement on the Eurasian Economic Union.

See also

 Comecon, Soviet-era economic integration plan.
 Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe statistics
 Regional organizations in the Post-Soviet states
 European integration
 Eurasianism

References

External links
Official website
EurAsEC website

Eurasian Economic Union
Commonwealth of Independent States
Eurasianism
Federalism by country
Trade blocs
Organizations established in 1996
United Nations General Assembly observers
Multilateral relations of Russia
Belarus–Russia relations
Kazakhstan–Russia relations
Kyrgyzstan–Russia relations
Russia–Tajikistan relations
Russia–Uzbekistan relations
Kyrgyzstan–Uzbekistan relations
Kyrgyzstan–Tajikistan relations
Tajikistan–Uzbekistan relations
Kazakhstan–Kyrgyzstan relations
Kazakhstan–Uzbekistan relations
1996 establishments in Europe
1996 establishments in Asia

Eurasian Economic Community


The 1968 New Zealand Grand Prix was a race held at the Pukekohe Park Raceway on 6 January 1968.  The race had 21 starters.

It was the 15th New Zealand Grand Prix, and doubled as the opening round of the 1968 Tasman Series.  Chris Amon became the third New Zealander to win his home GP, joining Bruce McLaren and original GP winner John McMillan.

Classification
Results as follows:

References

New Zealand Grand Prix
Grand Prix
Tasman Series
January 1968 sports events in New Zealand

1968 New Zealand Grand Prix


Navajo Dam is a dam on the San Juan River, a tributary of the Colorado River, in northwestern New Mexico in the United States. The  high earthen dam is situated in the foothills of the San Juan Mountains about  upstream and east of Farmington, New Mexico. It was built by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) in the 1960s to provide flood control, irrigation, domestic and industrial water supply, and storage for droughts. A small hydroelectric power plant was added in the 1980s.

The dam is a major feature of the Colorado River Storage Project, which is designed to regulate water resources across the entire Upper Colorado River Basin. The reservoir, Navajo Lake, is a popular recreation area and one of the largest bodies of water in New Mexico, with its upper portion extending into Colorado.

Specifications

Navajo is a rolled earthfill embankment dam, composed of three "zones" of alternating cobbles, gravel, sand and clay. The dam is  high and  long, with a width of  at the base and  at the crest. The dam contains  of material. The crest of the dam is  above sea level. The dam forms Navajo Lake, one of the largest lakes in both New Mexico and Colorado with up to  of surface water. Navajo Lake extends for  up the San Juan River,  up the Los Pinos River (Pine River) and  up the Piedra River. The capacity of Navajo Lake is , of which  or 60.6 percent is considered "active" or usable storage.

Prior to the dam's construction, the San Juan River flow was high during spring snowmelt and summer monsoon, and a relative trickle at other times of the year. The dam has enabled a constant water flow throughout the year which benefits water supply, recreation, and flood control. Up to  of water is released into the San Juan River via a 32 megawatt hydroelectric plant owned by the city of Farmington. Hydropower generated at Navajo Dam serves about 37,000 customers in northwest New Mexico and averaged a production of 135,226,000 kilowatt hours for the period 1989–1999.

Floodwaters can be released through a tunnel outlet with a capacity of  per second, and an ungated concrete spillway with a capacity of . The spillway is  wide at the crest and falls  through a chute to a stilling basin. Flood releases are not to exceed the safe San Juan channel capacity of  below the dam. When the dam was first constructed, water releases were prioritized to meet irrigation demands and provide flood control; however, since the late 1990s the operating criteria have been changed in order to meet environmental restoration goals in the San Juan River (see below).

Navajo Dam is part of the federal Colorado River Storage Project (CRSP), a massive system of dams, reservoirs and irrigation projects across the Upper Colorado River Basin. Operations at Navajo Dam are crucial to ensuring enough water is available for both local San Juan basin users and contract holders of the San Juan–Chama Project, which diverts water from the San Juan River to the Rio Grande valley serving Albuquerque, New Mexico. The San Juan-Chama project uses up to  of water that would otherwise have flowed into Navajo Lake. At Navajo Dam, a large fraction of San Juan River water is diverted into the Navajo Indian Irrigation Project (NIIP), which irrigates  of farmland to the south of the river. About , or 30 percent of the lake's capacity, are allocated to the NIIP. Current water use by NIIP is about  per year, and is expected to increase as more of the NIIP lands are brought into agricultural production. Both the San Juan-Chama and Navajo Irrigation Projects are participating units of the CRSP.

History
The first studies for a dam on the San Juan River were made in 1904, but there was little need for such a project at the time, due to the remoteness of the area. The growth of Farmington and surrounding towns in the 1920s due to agriculture and a petroleum boom created the need for additional water supply as well as flood control, both equal in importance due to the seasonal nature of the San Juan River. The Navajo Nation's growing population was suffering from food and employment shortages, which the Bureau of Reclamation envisioned could be solved by a large irrigation project. The 1908 Supreme Court decision Winters v. United States ruled that a federally established Indian reservation was "entitled to the water needed to create a permanent homeland". In other words, the reservation carried implicit water rights dating back to its creation in 1868; in this case, the Navajo peoples' rights to San Juan River water. This ruling eventually led to development of the Navajo Dam project, which was first outlined in a 1955 Bureau of Indian Affairs report that proposed a "distribution system for irrigation of  of new land within and adjacent to the Navajo Indian Reservation, all in New Mexico."

The high dam proposed for the San Juan River ultimately became part of the Bureau of Reclamation's Colorado River Storage Project. Navajo Dam was authorized by Congress in the Colorado River Storage Project Act of April 11, 1956, which also authorized Glen Canyon Dam and numerous irrigation and power projects along the Green River, Gunnison River and other tributaries. The initial authorization for Navajo Dam did not include the Navajo irrigation project, which was authorized much later, in June 1962, along with the San Juan-Chama diversion project.

Preparatory work at the Navajo Dam site started on October 8, 1956 with archaeological excavations of Native American sites along the canyons and bottom lands of the San Juan River; however, these investigations were limited in scope and only preserved a handful of artifacts from the area. A number of sites sacred to the Navajo people would later be flooded with the filling of the lake. Other features to be demolished or relocated included the towns of Rosa and Los Arboles, several cemeteries along the Los Pinos River, and sections of the Denver and Rio Grande Western Railroad. The primary construction contract for the dam was awarded to Morrison–Knudsen, Henry J. Kaiser Company, and F&S Contracting Company on June 25, 1958 and work began a month later on July 30.

The first facilities to be constructed were the water works allowing for diversion of the San Juan River. The main diversion tunnel was completed on January 27, 1959 and the auxiliary tunnel on April 27, 1959. Concrete lining was complete in October and the river was diverted on January 4, 1960 allowing the start of construction on the embankment dam. More than  of material had to be placed to form the main embankment with a record of  placed during August 1960 alone. As the dam continued to rise, clearing operations in the reservoir basin began on June 30, 1961 and took about a year to complete. The concrete spillway, located to the west of the dam, was finished on September 15, 1961.

On June 27, 1962 the diversion tunnel was blocked, and water was stored in Navajo Lake for the first time. Navajo Lake was the first reservoir of the Colorado River Storage Project to begin filling; the next, Flaming Gorge, would not start filling until November. The main embankment was topped out shortly thereafter on August 22, 1962; however, work on other features of the project, including riprap placement and final concrete work, continued. The dam was dedicated on September 15, 1962 by Secretary of the Interior Stewart Udall, but was not formally completed until April 20, 1963. The total cost of the Navajo Dam project was about $35 million ($ in  dollars).

A number of cracks and small slides developed in the dam after its construction in 1964, but were either repaired or settled by themselves without significant structural damage. The dam abutments and the spillway leaked considerably until the 1970s, when the Bureau of Reclamation finally took corrective action by installing drainage systems and placing stabilizing fill. The canal head works and diversion tunnel for the Navajo Indian Irrigation Project were started in 1966 and were completed on July 3, 1967; this allowed the commencement of irrigation water deliveries from Navajo Lake, although the main canal was not completed to its full length until 1977. Operations of the irrigation system were transferred to the Bureau of Indian Affairs shortly thereafter. The reservoir did not fill completely until spring 1973, when it flowed over the spillway for the first time.

Also in 1973, the Bureau of Reclamation also began planning for a hydroelectric power plant at Navajo, which had not been included in the original design of the dam. Construction began in 1976, but was halted when the National Wildlife Federation sued, citing that fluctuating power releases into the San Juan River could cause environmental damage. As a result, Congress did not approve the project. However, in 1981 the city of Farmington applied to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission for a permit to construct a private hydro power plant at the dam. The Navajo Nation protested, because if the power plant were to be constructed as a private project rather than a public Reclamation project, the Navajo would lose the potential benefits. Ultimately, the Navajo reached an agreement with the city and the power plant was approved for construction in 1986, with the first power generated in 1989.

Environmental impacts
Navajo Dam has greatly changed the ecology of part of the San Juan River, from a warm, muddy and highly seasonal river to a cold-water stream with relatively constant flow. The dam's impacts are most pronounced in the  stretch above Farmington (where the San Juan is joined by the mostly undammed Animas River and regains some of its seasonal variations); further downstream, the dam "apparently has had no significant effect" on the river channel and sediment flow. Under natural conditions, the San Juan River supported native fishes including Colorado pikeminnow, razorback sucker and roundtail chub, but these have been largely been eliminated in favor of rainbow trout, non-native (introduced) brown trout and other salmonids which thrive in the cold water released from the base of Navajo Dam. The San Juan is designated a Blue Ribbon fishery and is one of the most popular fly-fishing waters in the western United States.

After a federal biological assessment in 1999, the San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program (SJRIP) was established in order to help recover native fish populations in the river. Under the program, spring peak releases of  are made from Navajo Dam. The peak release can be up to 60 days during wet years, but may be suspended during dry years depending on available reservoir storage and predicted inflow. Meanwhile, the dry season base flow is reduced from  to . In combination, these mimic historic high and low flow conditions in the San Juan River before the dam was built. The high flows have been observed to benefit trout, but the low flows have been estimated to result in a 34 percent reduction of trout habitat.

See also
List of dams in the Colorado River system
List of dams and reservoirs in the United States

References

Works cited

External links
Navajo Lake current levels
Interview with Leonard Trujillo, construction worker on Navajo Dam

Buildings and structures in Rio Arriba County, New Mexico
Buildings and structures in San Juan County, New Mexico
Dams in New Mexico
Colorado River Storage Project
United States Bureau of Reclamation dams
Dams completed in 1962
Earth-filled dams
Dams in the Colorado River basin
1962 establishments in New Mexico

Navajo Dam


Leitneria floridana (corkwood), the sole species in the genus Leitneria, is a deciduous dioecious shrub or small tree, found only in the southern United States states of Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Missouri and Texas.

It grows at damp habitats, mostly in coastal areas and has extremely light wood with a density less than that of cork. It typically reaches 2–4 m tall, occasionally up to 8 m. The trunk can reach 10 cm in diameter. The leaves are alternate, simple lanceolate, 5–20 cm long and 3–6 cm broad.

In the past, it was treated as the only species in the family Leitneriaceae of the order Leitneriales, but genetic research by the Angiosperm Phylogeny Group has recently resulted in its being transferred to the family Simaroubaceae in the Sapindales. It is named after the German natural scientist E. F. Leitner.

Fossil record
A single, strongly compressed endocarp has been collected from the sediments of the Villa San Faustino site in Italy. This isolated specimen demonstrates that †Leitneria venosa persisted in Italy until the Early Pleistocene. Leitneria sp. is also among the species listed in the Early Pliocene San Gimigniano flora. In northern Italy several endocarps of L. venosa have been found at the top of the Cervo River of Late Pliocene age. Leitneria was a rare element in the late Cenozoic floras of Italy

References

External links
Interactive Distribution Map of Leitneria floridana

Simaroubaceae
Trees of the Southeastern United States
Trees of the North-Central United States
Trees of the South-Central United States
Near threatened plants
Monotypic Sapindales genera
Taxa named by Alvan Wentworth Chapman
Dioecious plants

Leitneria


The Songhai Empire dominated the western Sahel in the 15th and 16th century.

At its peak, the empire was one of the largest in both Islamic and African history. The Songhai people were the ruling elite in the empire. Gao was the capital of the empire. Other important cities in the empire were Timbuktu and Djenné, conquered in 1468 and 1475 respectively. Trade flourished in those towns.

Initially, the empire was ruled by the Sonni dynasty (c. 1464–1493), but it was later replaced and then ruled by the Askiya dynasty (1493–1591). After, the death of Sonni Ali and Askia Mohammed the empire was ruled by weak leaders and the Moroccans weakened and destroyed the empire.

Former empires
Former monarchies of Africa

Songhai Empire


The volumetric heat capacity of a material is the heat capacity of a sample of the substance divided by the volume of the sample.  It is the amount of energy that must be added, in the form of heat, to one unit of volume of the material in order to cause an increase of one unit in its temperature.  The SI unit of volumetric heat capacity is joule per kelvin per cubic meter, J⋅K−1⋅m−3.

The volumetric heat capacity can also be expressed as the specific heat capacity (heat capacity per unit of mass, in J⋅K−1⋅kg−1) times the density of the substance (in kg/L, or g/mL).

This quantity may be convenient for materials that are commonly measured by volume rather than mass, as is often the case in engineering and other technical disciplines. The volumetric heat capacity often varies with temperature, and is different for each state of matter. While the substance is undergoing a phase transition, such as melting or boiling, its volumetric heat capacity is technically infinite, because the heat goes into changing its state rather than raising its temperature.

The volumetric heat capacity of a substance, especially a gas, may be significantly higher when it is allowed to expand as it is heated (volumetric heat capacity at constant pressure) than when is heated in a closed vessel that prevents expansion (volumetric heat capacity at constant volume).

If the amount of substance is taken to be the number of moles in the sample (as is sometimes done in chemistry), one gets the molar heat capacity (whose SI unit is joule per kelvin per mole, J⋅K−1⋅mol−1).

Definition
The volumetric heat capacity is defined as

where  is the volume of the sample at temperature , and  is the amount of heat energy needed to raise the temperature of the sample from  to .  This parameter is an intensive property of the substance.

Since both the heat capacity of an object and its volume may vary with temperature, in unrelated ways, the volumetric heat capacity is usually a function of temperature too.  It is equal to the specific heat  of the substance times its density (mass per volume) , both measured at the temperature .  Its SI unit is joule per kelvin per cubic meter (J⋅K−1⋅m−3).

This quantity is used almost exclusively for liquids and solids, since for gases it may be confused with the "specific heat capacity at constant volume", which generally has very different values.  International standards now recommend that "specific heat capacity" always refer to capacity per unit of mass. Therefore, the word "volumetric" should always be used for this quantity.

History
Dulong and Petit predicted in 1818  that the product of solid substance density and specific heat capacity (ρcp) would be constant for all solids. This amounted to a prediction that volumetric heat capacity in solids would be constant. In 1819 they found that volumetric heat capacities were not quite constant, but that the most constant quantity was the heat capacity of solids adjusted by the presumed weight of the atoms of the substance, as defined by Dalton (the Dulong–Petit law). This quantity was proportional to the heat capacity per atomic weight (or per molar mass), which suggested that it is the heat capacity per atom (not per unit of volume) which is closest to being a constant in solids.

Eventually it became clear that heat capacities per particle for all substances in all states are the same, to within a factor of two, so long as temperatures are not in the cryogenic range.

Typical values
The volumetric heat capacity of solid materials at room temperatures and above varies widely, from about 1.2 MJ⋅K−1⋅m−3 (for example bismuth) to 3.4 MJ⋅K−1⋅m−3 (for example iron). This is mostly due to differences in the physical size of atoms. Atoms vary greatly in density, with the heaviest often being more dense, and thus are closer to taking up the same average volume in solids than their mass alone would predict. If all atoms were the same size, molar and volumetric heat capacity would be proportional and differ by only a single constant reflecting ratios of the atomic molar volume of materials (their atomic density). An additional factor for all types of specific heat capacities (including molar specific heats) then further reflects degrees of freedom available to the atoms composing the substance, at various temperatures.

For most liquids, the volumetric heat capacity is narrower, for example octane at 1.64 MJ⋅K−1⋅m−3 or ethanol at 1.9. This reflects the modest loss of degrees of freedom for particles in liquids as compared with solids.

However, water has a very high volumetric heat capacity, at 4.18 MJ⋅K−1⋅m−3, and ammonia is also fairly high: 3.3 MJ⋅K−1⋅m−3.

For gases at room temperature, the range of volumetric heat capacities per atom (not per molecule) only varies between different gases by a small factor less than two, because every ideal gas has the same molar volume. Thus, each gas molecule occupies the same mean volume in all ideal gases, regardless of the type of gas (see kinetic theory). This fact gives each gas molecule the same effective "volume" in all ideal gases (although this volume/molecule in gases is far larger than molecules occupy on average in solids or liquids). Thus, in the limit of ideal gas behavior (which many gases approximate except at low temperatures and/or extremes of pressure) this property reduces differences in gas volumetric heat capacity to simple differences in the heat capacities of individual molecules. As noted, these differ by a factor depending on the degrees of freedom available to particles within the molecules.

Volumetric heat capacity of gases
Large complex gas molecules may have high heat capacities per mole (of molecules), but their heat capacities per mole of atoms are very similar to those of liquids and solids, again differing by less than a factor of two per mole of atoms. This factor of two represents vibrational degrees of freedom available in solids vs. gas molecules of various complexities.

In monatomic gases (like argon) at room temperature and constant volume, volumetric heat capacities are all very close to 0.5 kJ⋅K−1⋅m−3, which is the same as the theoretical value of RT per kelvin per mole of gas molecules (where R is the gas constant and T is temperature). As noted, the much lower values for gas heat capacity in terms of volume as compared with solids (although more comparable per mole, see below) results mostly from the fact that gases under standard conditions consist of mostly empty space (about 99.9% of volume), which is not filled by the atomic volumes of the atoms in the gas. Since the molar volume of gases is very roughly 1000 times that of solids and liquids, this results in a factor of about 1000 loss in volumetric heat capacity for gases, as compared with liquids and solids. Monatomic gas heat capacities per atom (not per molecule) are decreased by a factor of 2 with regard to solids, due to loss of half of the potential degrees of freedom per atom for storing energy in a monatomic gas, as compared with regard to an ideal solid. There is some difference in the heat capacity of monatomic vs. polyatomic gasses, and also gas heat capacity is temperature-dependent in many ranges for polyatomic gases; these factors act to modestly (up to the discussed factor of 2) increase heat capacity per atom in polyatomic gases, as compared with monatomic gases. Volumetric heat capacities in polyatomic gases vary widely, however, since they are dependent largely on the number of atoms per molecule in the gas, which in turn determines the total number of atoms per volume in the gas.

The volumetric heat capacity is defined as having SI units of J/(m3⋅K). It can also be described in Imperial units of BTU/(ft3⋅°F).

Volumetric heat capacity of solids
Since the bulk density of a solid chemical element is strongly related to its molar mass (usually about 3R per mole, as noted above), there exists noticeable inverse correlation between a solid's density and its specific heat capacity on a per-mass basis. This is due to a very approximate tendency of atoms of most elements to be about the same size, despite much wider variations in density and atomic weight. These two factors (constancy of atomic volume and constancy of mole-specific heat capacity) result in a good correlation between the volume of any given solid chemical element and its total heat capacity. Another way of stating this, is that the volume-specific heat capacity (volumetric heat capacity) of solid elements is roughly a constant. The molar volume of solid elements is very roughly constant, and (even more reliably) so also is the molar heat capacity for most solid substances. These two factors determine the volumetric heat capacity, which as a bulk property may be striking in consistency. For example, the element uranium is a metal which has a density almost 36 times that of the metal lithium, but uranium's volumetric heat capacity is only about 20% larger than lithium's.

Since the volume-specific corollary of the Dulong–Petit specific heat capacity relationship requires that atoms of all elements take up (on average) the same volume in solids, there are many departures from it, with most of these due to variations in atomic size. For instance, arsenic, which is only 14.5% less dense than antimony, has nearly 59% more specific heat capacity on a mass basis. In other words; even though an ingot of arsenic is only about 17% larger than an antimony one of the same mass, it absorbs about 59% more heat for a given temperature rise. The heat capacity ratios of the two substances closely follows the ratios of their molar volumes (the ratios of numbers of atoms in the same volume of each substance); the departure from the correlation to simple volumes in this case is due to lighter arsenic atoms being significantly more closely packed than antimony atoms, instead of similar size. In other words, similar-sized atoms would cause a mole of arsenic to be 63% larger than a mole of antimony, with a correspondingly lower density, allowing its volume to more closely mirror its heat capacity behavior.

Thermal inertia
Thermal inertia is a term commonly used to describe the observed delays in a body's temperature response during heat transfers.   The phenomenon exists because of a body's ability to both store and transport heat relative to its environment.  Since the configuration of system components and mix of heat transfer mechanisms (e.g. conduction, convection, radiation, phase change) varies substantially between instances, there is no generally applicable mathematical definition for thermal inertia.  The phenomenon occurs in conjunction with a material's or a transport medium's heat transfer properties.  A larger thermal storage capacity typically yields a more sluggish temperature response.

A system containing one or more components with large volumetric heat capacity indicates that dynamic, or transient, effects must be considered when modelling system behavior.  Steady-state calculations, many of which produce valid estimates of equilibrium heat flows and temperatures without an accounting for thermal inertia, nevertheless yield no information on the pace of changes between equilibrium states.  Response times for complex systems can be evaluated with detailed numerical simulation, or a thermal time constant estimated from a lumped system analysis.  A higher value of volumetric heat capacity generally means a longer time for the system to reach equilibrium.

Analogies of thermal inertia to the inertial behaviors observed in other disciplines of engineering and physics can sometimes be used with caution.   In building design, thermal inertia is also known as the thermal flywheel effect, and a thermal mass can produce a delay between diurnal heat flow and temperature which is similar to the delay between current and voltage in an AC-driven RC circuit.  Thermal inertia is less directly comparable to the mass-and-velocity term used in mechanics, where inertia restricts the acceleration of an object.  In a similar way, thermal inertia is a measure of the thermal mass and the velocity of the thermal wave which controls the surface temperature of a material.

Thermal effusivity

For a semi-infinite rigid body where heat transfer is dominated by the diffusive process of conduction only,  thermal inertia can be approximated from the material's thermal effusivity (e).  It is defined as the square root of the product of the material's bulk thermal conductivity and volumetric heat capacity, where the latter is the product of density and specific heat capacity:

  is thermal conductivity, with unit W⋅m−1⋅K−1
  is density, with unit kg⋅m−3
  is specific heat capacity, with unit J⋅kg−1⋅K−1
  has SI units of thermal inertia of J⋅m−2⋅K−1⋅s−. Non-SI units of kieffers: Cal⋅cm−2⋅K−1⋅s−1/2, are also used informally in older references.

Constant volume and constant pressure

For gases it is necessary to distinguish between volumetric heat capacity at constant volume and volumetric heat capacity at constant pressure, which is always larger due to the pressure–volume work done as a gas expands during heating at constant pressure (thus absorbing heat which is converted to work). The distinctions between constant-volume and constant-pressure heat capacities are also made in various types of specific heat capacity (the latter meaning either mass-specific or mole-specific heat capacity).

See also
 Heat capacity
 Specific heat capacity
 Temperature
 Thermal effusivity
 Thermodynamic equations

References

Thermodynamic properties
Physical quantities
Volume
Heat transfer

Volumetric heat capacity