Archive for the ‘Energy’ Category

Chinese lamps popular in DPRK

Sunday, March 7th, 2010

According to the Choson Ilbo

Chinese-made solar reading lamps are selling like hot cakes in North Korea. According to a North Korean source, the reading lamps sell for 10,000 to 20,000 North Korean won, a price several times the average monthly wage.

The customers are chiefly parents with children preparing for college entrance exams. Due to do the poor power supply, North Korea except for some parts of Pyongyang is plunged into pitch darkness every night, making it impossible to study. The solar-powered reading lamps provide a measure of independence from the power grid.

In the North, background determines if youngsters can enter college, and not all parents can afford to concentrate their energy on their children’s education. But relatively well-to-do families provide tutoring for their children by employing students of prestigious universities, such as Kim Il Sung University or Pyongyang University of Foreign Studies, in efforts to prepare their children for college entrance exams.

Read the full article here:
N.Korean Parents ‘Zealous’ About Children’s Education
Choson Ilbo
3/8/2010

Share

Earthquake in North Korea-Russia-China border area (interesting follow-up at the bottom)

Sunday, February 21st, 2010

According to the Choson Ilbo:

A strong underground earthquake registering a magnitude of 6.9 on the Richter scale occurred about 21 km from the Russian border with North Korea around 10:13 a.m. on Thursday, the Korea Meteorological Administration announced based on data by the U.S. Geological Survey.

The epicenter was 42.7 degrees northern latitude and 130.9 degrees eastern longitude 110 km southwest of Vladivostok near the border of North Korea, China and Russia.

The KMA said the quake was strong but the actual surface wave magnitude was a mere 2 because it happened 562.5 km below from the surface. “It’s the kind of situation where objects hanging from the ceiling swing a little and parked cars shake slightly, so almost no damage seems to have been done to people or buildings in North Korea and elsewhere,” a spokesman said. “The quake was a natural result of the subduction of the Pacific plate under the Eurasian plate. There always exists the possibility of strong quakes occurring on the Korean Peninsula as quakes stronger than magnitude 6 occur in the region every two years.”

Quakes are becoming more frequent. According to Chosun Ilbo’s analysis of the KMA data, 157 quakes occurred in both Koreas in the 1980s, but the frequency soared to 259 in the 1990s to 436 in the 2000s. Sixty quakes were reported last year, the most in the 31 years since the KMA began observation. Eight already occurred this year, similar to last year’s monthly average of five.

South Korea has far outdistanced North Korea both in frequency and magnitude of quakes. A total of 279 quakes have been reported on the peninsula since 1978, with 199 in the South and 80 in the North. Of the five quakes stronger than magnitude 5 since 1978, four occurred in South Korea. The South also led in terms of frequency of quakes with magnitudes between 4 and 5 with 28 of all 33.

A Unification Ministry official said, “We’re checking what effects the latest quake had on North Korea alongside related agencies.” Nothing has been reported yet by North Korean media, he added.

Sources in Najin Sonbong in North Korea and Hunchun in China, which are near the epicenter, said they have not been informed. Kim Sung-min, the director of Radio Free North Korea said their source in Hoeryong in North Hamgyong Province heard nothing about the quake.

Commenting on rumors that it was an artificial earthquake caused by a nuclear test, a South Korean government official said, “It would be realistically impossible for them to have dug 562 km down. Chances that it was caused by a nuclear test are extremely slim.” He said it was also unlikely that the North would conduct a test in a place close to the border plus the quake was too strong to be caused by an explosion.

Further information:

Here is the USGS data on the quake.

Here is the quake’s epicenter.

On October 22, 2008, a 4.8 earthquake struck off the coast of Chongjin.

And the fun–The US Geological Service has earthquake readings for both of the DPRK’s nuclear tests:

*Here is the USGS earthquake report for the DPRK’s October 09, 2006, test – a 4.3. 

*Here is the USGS earthquake report for the DPRK’s May 25, 2009, test – a 4.7.

Share

South makes another push for Russia-[DPRK]-RoK gas pipeline

Wednesday, February 10th, 2010

According to Yonhap:

South Korea’s new ambassador to Russia said on Wednesday that he is committed to implementing the envisioned South Korea-North Korea-Russia natural gas pipeline.

South Korean President Lee Myung-bak and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev agreed at their 2008 summit in Moscow to cooperate on building a tripartite gas pipeline involving North Korea. But the agreement has yet to be realized, as Pyongyang has failed to respond amid chilly inter-Korean relations.

Ambassador Lee Youn-ho, who accompanied President Lee on the Russian trip in his capacity as knowledge economy minister, said that the three-nation gas pipeline project, if realized, will be very meaningful “economically and politically.”

“If the South Korea-Russia gas pipeline can pass through North Korea, it can be linked to the construction of electric power and railway networks (in North Korea),” said Ambassador Lee.

Lee then called for significant improvement of ties between South Korea and Russia, claiming the two are now more ready and fit than ever to forge a relationship that will be mutually beneficial.

You can read past posts about the Russia-Korea gas pipeline here

Read the full article here:
Seoul’s new envoy to Russia vows to speed up gas pipeline project
Yonhap
Byun Duk-kun
2/10/2010

Share

US intelligence chief: North Korea military crumbling

Tuesday, February 2nd, 2010

According to the AP (Via Boston Herald):

President Barack Obama’s top intelligence official said Tuesday that North Korea relies on its nuclear weapons program because of a crumbling military that cannot compete with South Korea.

Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair described in testimony before the U.S. Congress a North Korean army that struggles with aging weapons, poorly trained, out-of-shape soldiers, inflexible leaders, corruption, low morale and problems with command and control.

North Korea, Blair said, has little chance of reversing a huge gap in military capabilities with South Korea and so “relies on its nuclear program to deter external attacks on the state and to its regime.”

Officials from South Korea, the U.S., Japan, Russia and China have been working to get North Korea back to nuclear disarmament talks after Pyongyang walked away from the negotiations last year. For more than a decade, the North has gained energy and aid concessions from the talks and then backed away from nuclear agreements.

Blair said the United States does not know whether the North had made nuclear weapons but that it has that capability. He said that while a 2006 nuclear test was a “partial failure,” the May test of last year was more successful.

Blair said North Korea has shipped missiles to Iran and Pakistan and helped Syria build a nuclear reactor.

The North is thought to have enough weaponized plutonium for at least half a dozen atomic bombs. North Korea argues that it was compelled to develop nuclear weapons to cope with a military threat from the United States, which has about 28,500 troops in the South.

Blair said North Korean leader Kim Jong Il wants recognition of his country as a nuclear weapons power, something he said the United States will not do.

Dennis Blair’s Annual Threat Assesment of the US Intelligence Commuity can be read here. Here is what it had to say about the DPRK:

North Korean WMD and Missile Programs

Pyongyang’s nuclear weapons and missile programs pose a serious threat to the security environment in East Asia. North Korea’s export of ballistic missiles and associated materials to several countries including Iran and Pakistan, and its assistance to Syria in the construction of a nuclear reactor, exposed in 2007, illustrate the reach of the North’s proliferation activities. Despite the Six-Party October 3, 2007 Second Phase Actions agreement in which North Korea reaffirmed its commitment not to transfer nuclear materials, technology, or know-how we remain alert to the possibility North Korea could again export nuclear technology.

The North’s October 2006 nuclear test was consistent with our longstanding assessment that it had produced a nuclear device, although we judge the test itself to have been a partial failure based on its less-than-one-kiloton TNT equivalent yield. The North’s probable nuclear test in May 2009 supports its claim that it has been seeking to develop weapons, and with a yield of roughly a few kilotons TNT equivalent, was apparently more successful than the 2006 test. We judge North Korea has tested two nuclear devices, and while we do not know whether the North has produced nuclear weapons, we assess it has the capability to do so. It remains our policy that we will not accept North Korea as a nuclear weapons state, and we assess that other countries in the region remain committed to the denuclearization of North Korea as has been reflected in the Six Party Talks.

After denying a highly enriched uranium program since 2003, North Korea announced in April 2009 that it was developing uranium enrichment capability to produce fuel for a planned light water reactor (such reactors use low enriched uranium); in September it claimed its enrichment research had “entered into the completion phase”. The exact intent of these announcements is unclear, and they do not speak definitively to the technical status of the uranium enrichment program. The Intelligence Community continues to assess with high confidence North Korea has pursued a uranium enrichment capability in the past, which we assess was for weapons.

Pyongyang’s Conventional Capabilities. Before I turn the North Korean nuclear issue, I want to say a few words regarding the conventional capabilities of the Korea People’s Army (KPA). The KPA’s capabilities are limited by an aging weapons inventory, low production of military combat systems, deteriorating physical condition of soldiers, reduced training, and increasing diversion of the military to infrastructure support. Inflexible leadership, corruption, low morale, obsolescent weapons, a weak logistical system, and problems with command and control also constrain the KPA capabilities and readiness.

Because the conventional military capabilities gap between North and South Korea has become so overwhelmingly great and prospects for reversal of this gap so remote, Pyongyang relies on its nuclear program to deter external attacks on the state and to its regime. Although there are other reasons for the North to pursue its nuclear program, redressing conventional weaknesses is a major factor and one that Kim and his likely successors will not easily dismiss. Six Party Talks and Denuclearization. In addition to the TD-2 missile launch of April 2009 and the probable nuclear test of May 2009, Pyongyang’s reprocessing of fuel rods removed from its reactor as part of the disablement process appears designed to enhance its nuclear deterrent and reset the terms of any return to the negotiating table. Moreover, Pyongyang knows that its pursuit of a uranium enrichment capability has returned that issue to the agenda for any nuclear negotiations. The North has long been aware of US suspicions of a highly enriched uranium program.

We judge Kim Jong-Il seeks recognition of North Korea as a nuclear weapons power by the US and the international community. Pyongyang’s intent in pursuing dialogue at this time is to take advantage of what it perceives as an enhanced negotiating position, having demonstrated its nuclear and missile capabilities.

North Korea and Venezuela possess more limited intelligence capabilities focused primarily on regional threats and supporting the ruling regime. North Korea continues to collect information on US technologies and capabilities. Venezuela’s services are working to counter US influence in Latin America by supporting leftist governments and insurgent groups.

Share

US scientists pinpoint location of DPRK’s second nuclear test

Sunday, January 10th, 2010

According to Yonhap:

Lianxing Wen, a geophysics professor at the State University of New York in Stony Brook, and his graduate student, Hui Long, located the epicenter of the second nuclear test on May 5 last year with a margin of error of only 140 meters, compared with 3.8 kilometers achieved by the U.S. Geological Survey.

“We locate the 2009 test at 723 meters north and 2,235 meters west of the 2006 test,” the scientists said in the study, which was published in the January-February edition of Seismological Research Letters of the Seismological Society of America.

Identifying the coordinates of the 2009 test site as 41°17′38.14″N latitude and 129°4′54.21″E longitude, the scientists said their findings should help Asian monitors to pinpoint the location of another nuclear test should North Korea ever decide to go ahead with one.

“The location of any future nuclear test around this particular test site will be pinpointed in real time, with a similar precision,” Wen said in a separate email interview. “With its exact location known, the wave propagation effects due to location geology can be accurately accounted for, leading to a more accurate determination of yield.”

North Korea conducted its first underground nuclear test in Oct. 9, 2006 in Punggye-ri in its northeastern county of Kilju, according to U.S. and South Korean officials.

Wen and Long said they analyzed the seismic waves from the first nuclear test to understand the geological complexities of the earth in the region, and used the data to reduce the uncertainty involved in determining the ground zero of the second test.

“The strategy is not to try to fully understand the complexities of the jungle (earth), but to take advantage of the forensic evidence of the jungle complexities that are imprinted in the recordings” of the first nuclear test, the scientists said in a separate introduction to their thesis.

The waveforms from the first test were obtained from nine seismic stations based in Japan, South Korea and China, the study said.

North Korea conducted its second nuclear test amid a deadlock in international talks aimed at stripping it of its nuclear ambitions, raising tensions and inviting harsh U.N. sanctions.

“High-precision location would reveal, in real time and at great accuracy, an increasingly complete view of the geographic network of a nation’s nuclear test infrastructure,” the paper said.

“Logistically and economically, it is convenient to use the same facilities to do multiple tests. Environmentally, it would confine nuclear wastes in a particular site,” Wen said in the email.

Their paper, “High-precision Location of North Korea’s 2009 Nuclear Test,” can be found here PDF.

Here is the location on Wikimapia.

Share

DPRK appropriating KEDO equipment

Friday, January 1st, 2010

According to the Joong Ang Ilbo:

North Korea has reused equipment and materials left from the halted construction work on light-water reactors, breaking a prior agreement with a multinational organization that oversaw the botched construction project.

According to the Unification Ministry and other sources, North Korea has taken 190 vehicles from the site in Kumho, South Hamgyong Province, and 93 pieces of heavy equipment, including cranes and excavators, and is likely using them for military purposes.

Sources said thousands of tons of steel bars and cement and communication devices are also being used by the North.

In late 2005, the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization, also known as KEDO, stopped construction of non-military nuclear reactors in the North. The work had begun in August 1997 as part of the 1994 Agreed Framework between the United States and North Korea. Under the terms of the agreement, Washington said it would build two reactors in the North in exchange for Pyongyang’s agreement to freeze all nuclear weapons activities.

But in October 2002, the United States said it had obtained intelligence that the North had been operating a clandestine program to produce highly enriched uranium to develop weapons and the U.S. State Department said North Korea admitted to doing so. By January 2003, the North withdrew from the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty. KEDO suspended its construction in November 2003.

Two years later, the KEDO’s board decided to terminate the construction project, which was about 30 percent complete. In December 2005, North Korea asked KEDO workers to leave the country and said they would not be allowed to repatriate equipment and construction materials.

At the time, KEDO and North Korea had agreed to leave materials at the site. Most belonged to South Korean subcontractors, and they had planned to sell off some of it to make up for financial losses stemming from the halted work.

In 2003, after the KEDO first suspended construction, the North said it would not allow the transfer of equipment unless it received compensation. A government official here said, “The North moved the equipment before we could even address the compensation issue, and that’s clearly in violation of our agreement. It can even be regarded as stealing.”

In January 2006, the Roh Moo-hyun administration in Seoul said the North had pledged to store the materials and that it expected the North to honor its word. Despite suspicions that the North had used some of the equipment in preparation for their second nuclear test this year, the current Lee Myung-bak administration has also remained silent.

But intelligence sources tell a different story.

They said the North started using equipment almost immediately after KEDO’s withdrawal and that the North Korean military was involved.

“North Korea is trying to keep South Koreans or KEDO officials from going near the construction base,” one source said. “Recent satellite photos of the site show that hundreds of the black covers that were used to conceal materials are mostly gone.”

Sources estimate equipment and materials are worth about 46 billion won ($39 million). South Korea, one of the founding members of the KEDO, spent $1.1 billion on the construction project.

Here is a satellite image of the KEDO reactorsHere is an image of the KEDO residential compound.

Share

“150 Day Battle” production campaign stories

Monday, October 12th, 2009

150-speed.jpg

Photo by Eric Lafforgue

North Korean claims record production gains through ‘150-day battle’
Institute for Far Eastern Studies (IFES)

NK Brief No. 09-10-12-1
10/12/2009

It has been boasted that North Korea’s ‘150-day Battle’ to boost the economy (April 20-September 16) resulted in record-breaking jumps in DPRK production numbers, and it has been suggested that that by 2012, some enterprises will “attain production numbers higher than the best numbers recorded at the end of the 1980s.” This claim was made by Ji Young-il, the director of the Chosun University Social Science Research Institute, which is run by the pro-Pyongyang “General Federation of Korean Residents in Japan.”

In “Professor Ji Young-il’s Monthly Economic Review: The 150-day Battle and Prospects for Building an Economically Powerful Nation,” an article in the federation’s newspaper, Choson Sinbo, the author wrote, “There are more than a few enterprises that have set production goals for 2012 at more than three times the current level of production.” He also claimed that some enterprises in the mining, energy and railroad transportation sectors had set goals of as much as 6 times today’s production numbers.

Professor Ji went on to write, “Basically, it is an extraordinary goal ensuring growth of 1.3-1.5 times (a growth rate of 130-150%) per year.” He also explained that surpassing production rates as high as those seen in the late 1980s is one of the fundamental markers on the road toward “opening the door to a Strong and Prosperous Nation.”

Citing North Korea’s “Choson Central Yearbook,” he gave production numbers in various sectors of the DPRK economy at the end of the 1980s: electricity, 55.5 billion kWh (1989); coal, 85 million tons (1989); steel, 7.4 million tons (1987); cement, 13.5 million tons (1989); chemical fertilizer, 5.6 million tons (1989); textiles, 870 million meters (1989); grain, 10 million tons (1987).

Director Ji claimed that during the recent ‘battle’, production in the metals industries was up several times that of the same period in previous years, while energy producers generated several hundred million kWh of electricity, coal production was up 150%, and cement and other construction materials were up 140%. He pointed out that in 14 years of the Chollima movement, beginning in 1957, during which socialist industrialization took place in the North, the yearly average production growth was 19.1%, and he stated that the annual growth of 9 to 10% in industrial production over the past several years was a noteworthy record.

Moving to the agricultural sector, Director Ji also noted that while overseas experts have critiqued this year’s harvest, there has been a definite breakthrough in grain production with land cultivation hitting previously unseen levels over the past several years.

Previous 150-day battle stories below:
(more…)

Share

China and DPRK mineral wealth

Tuesday, October 6th, 2009

According to the Financial Times:

North Korea’s mineral wealth is receiving close scrutiny, with South Kor­ea’s government this week valuing reserves at $6,000bn (€4,070bn, £3,670bn). Encouraged by data on metals, Goldman Sachs last month predicted the economy of a unified Korea could rival Japan’s by 2050.

Trade with China is growing, reaching $2.8bn last year from about $2bn in 2007. But military authorities in North Korea are perceived as hostile to the changes in society and infrastructure that foreign investment could bring.

“If the North opens its mineral resources to foreign countries, that is tantamount to taking a military, social and political gamble, jeopardising their security,” said Lim Eul-chul, of Seoul’s Institute of Far Eastern Studies.

A South Korean diplomat closely involved with nuc­lear talks doubted Pyong­yang would allow China to make big investments inside its border. “They cannot permit that kind of influence,” he said.

Although they were long communist allies, North Korea and China have a mutual mistrust, partly tied to territorial claims.

Still, limited foreign investment in the sector is not impossible. Colin McAskill, executive chairman of Koryo Asia, says he has signed a letter of intent and memorandum of understanding to invest in North Korean metals and argues his model would not interfere with sovereignty issues that concern Pyongyang.

Switzerland’s Quintermina has posted reports on its website saying it is looking to extract magnesite in North Korea.

Chinese investors are believed to have some metals interests and are also involved in coal mining.

“The Chinese companies that have tried to do business in North Korea complain a lot that the regulations change frequently and that the power supply is erratic,” said a Chinese academic in Beijing.

One quote in this article struck me as a little off:

A South Korean diplomat closely involved with nuc­lear talks doubted Pyong­yang would allow China to make big investments inside its border. “They cannot permit that kind of influence,” he said.

First of all, China has already made plenty of investments inside the DPRK and the Chinese government and companies already exert influence.  There is a difference between having influence and being in control.  Secondly, China is the largest market for North Korean exports.  Even though they might not “own” the North Korean assets from which they purchase the goods, the North Koreans are limited in terms of who will/can trade with them.  In this sense China earns surplus through either bulk purchase discounts or monopsony power.

Read the full story here:
China eyes N Korea’s mineral wealth
Financial Times
Christian Oliver
10/6/2009

Share

DPRK’s take on nuclear program

Tuesday, October 6th, 2009

According to Yonhap:

North Korea has received some 2.7 trillion won (US$2.29 billion) from South Korea and international partners since 1994 in return for false promises to scrap its nuclear program, according to a lawmaker on Monday.

For the Geneva Framework Agreement reached in 1994, the North received $1.98 billion worth of support from South Korea, the U.S., Japan and the European Union, which was mostly used in building light-water reactors, Rep. Kwon Young-se of the ruling Grand National Party said, citing a report submitted by the foreign ministry.

Read the full story here:
N. Korea received US$2.3 billion through past nuke agreements: lawmaker
Yonhap
Tony Chang
10/5/2009

Share

Russia-ROK gas deal on hold

Tuesday, September 29th, 2009

Last year we reported on an effort to bring Russian natural gas to South Korea via a pipeline that could either go through North Korea or across the East Sea (aka Sea of Japan).  If the pipeline was to cross the DPRK, they stood to gain by leasing the land for the pipeline.

According to news this week, the plan has been indefinitely shelved.   According to the story:

Plans to import Russian natural gas through a North Korean pipeline have been shelved due to strained inter-Korean relations, the head of South Korea’s state-run energy company said Tuesday.

Korea Gas Corp (KOGAS) (KSE:36460) president Choo Kang-soo said unless North Korea specifically asks for the pipeline to be built on its soil, Seoul will not pursue the piped natural gas (PNG) project but opt to import liquefied natural gas (LNG) directly from Russia by ship.

“An understanding has recently been reached with Russian partners on this issue,” the chief executive said, adding that recent developments like the nuclear standoff raised the importance of creating a “controllable schedule” for getting the gas on time.

He pointed out that the inability to control cross-border issues has made the PNG plan less viable.

Under a blueprint announced in 2008, Seoul said it wanted to import 7.5 million tons of Russian gas starting in 2015 to ensure a steady supply of fuel. Seoul had previously relied heavily on imports from Southeast Asian countries, which have since hiked up prices.

The deal, valued at more than US$100 million, called for a pipeline running from Russia’s far east to South Korea through North Korea.

Choo hinted that because Russia is eying both the Japanese and Chinese markets, it also prefers to transform its natural gas into LNG for overseas sales.

KOGAS, meanwhile, said that the total amount of fuel that will be imported from Russia will equal 20 per cent of South Korea’s projected natural gas needs in 2015. In 2007, the country bought 7.8 million tons of gas for home use alone, with more being spent on power generation and various fuel needs.

Russia has an estimated 38 billion tons of natural gas and announced plans to spend US$28 billion to link the Krasnoyarsk, Irkutsk, Yakutsk and Sakhalin gas fields into a unified gas supply system that can facilitate exports.

Statistically speaking, natural resource exports are bad news for good governance and economic development.  This is because resource-dependent governments never need to develop the policies and institutions necessary to promote sustained entrepreneurship in the private economy from which they can extract tax revenue. Since non-democratic countries are supposed to love natural resource exports because they essentially translate into free hard currency, I am surprised the DPRK could not set politics aside and cash in on this deal.

Also, what does this say about Russia’s relationship with the DPRK?

Read the full story here:
S Korean plan to import Russian natural gas via N Korea on hold
TradingMarkets.com
9/29/2009

Share