Living Sustainably (and bigger)

Is that even possible? It may not be entirely possible, but give our current state of affairs, we could at least evaluate ourselves to see which set of people are living most sustainably relative to others. The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), a reputed non-profit environmental group, rated large, medium and small cities based on a sustainability index. Their scoring/ranking criteria is explained below:

We sought the advice of academic, non-profit and government experts to come up with a broad set of criteria by which to measure and compare sustainability efforts in cities across the U.S. The ranking scheme, developed with the help of a scholar from Yale’s School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, was intended as a tool for identifying, for the purpose of spotlighting, those cities that are taking the lead in addressing the major environmental challenges of our time, from global warming to clean air and water.

The cities were evaluated based on air quality, energy production and conservation, recycling, transportation, water quality, etc. More details on the criteria are provided here.

The Top 15 large cities list is dominated by the West - 9 cities, with 6 from California. Seattle, WA tops the list, followed by San Francisco, CA and Portland, OR. 2 cities from the Northeast, Boston and New York as do the two Texas cities - Austin and Dallas. Finally, two cities from the Midwest complete the list - Chicago, IL and Columbus, OH. Wow... Columbus makes it to the top 15 large sustainable cities in the US...at the 15th spot! See the rankings here:
http://smartercities.nrdc.org/rankings/large

Except for the Texas cities, no other city from the South makes it to the Top 15. Louisville, KY takes the 21st spot, making it the only southern city to feature in the Top 30. Well, Louisville is just a few miles away from Cincinnati, so it does not represent a typical city from the South.

Madison, WI tops the list for medium cities, followed by Santa Rosa, CA and Fort Collins, CO (again from the West). Another Western city captures the top spot for small cities - Bellingham, WA.

The profile on Columbus claims that the city and the Mayor are working towards expanding the bike routes in the city to make Columbus the "biking capital" of the country by 2012.

http://smartercities.nrdc.org/cities/columbus-oh

Healthcare quotes

Quotes from today's web on Obama's healthcare plans:

Karl Rove writes in the nation's trusted newspaper, WSJ (see my earlier post):
On Tuesday, Gallup showed Mr. Obama’s personal approval was 55%, down from more than 60% a few weeks ago and lower than the 56% George W. Bush had at this point in his first term.

Didn’t know 1% made all that difference. I guess he didn't get to take a Statistics course, before dropping out of college...twice!

Betsy McCaughey using the same mouthpiece:

Since Medicare was established in 1965, access to care has enabled older Americans to avoid becoming disabled and to travel and live independently instead of languishing in nursing homes….. Medicare has made living to a ripe old age a good value. ObamaCare will undo that.

So, Medicare is good, in spite of being run by the....government, while insurance run by the same government can wreak havoc.

Intershame frames the debate quite well:

Complaining that a inherently socialist concept like insurance - the collection of funds by many to redistribute to the needy - will somehow be more socialist if the government gets involved is laughable.

while Gail Collins at The New York Times blames Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT):

Meanwhile in the Senate, everyone is waiting on Max Baucus of Montana. Nothing is going to happen on health care without the approval of Baucus, whose vast authority stems from the fact that he speaks for both the Senate Finance Committee and a state that contains three-tenths of one percent of the country’s population (emphasis mine).

Wall Street Journal: fair and balanced?

Few days ago, my good friend Srivathsan forwarded a link to a Wall Street Journal article to me on India's success with reducing rural poverty and contrasted it with China's approach. Though WSJ has won an impressive 33 Pulitzer prizes for excellence in reporting, it continues to hire editors and columnists, whose work can be explained in one word: shoddy. One-more word to describe WSJ: neo-conservative.

Via Wikipedia: Two summaries published in 1995 by the left leaning Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting and in 1996 by the Columbia Journalism Review.^[23] repeatedly criticized the editorial page of the Journal for inaccuracy and dishonesty in the 1980s and 1990's. During the Reagan administration, the newspaper's editorial page was particularly influential as the leading voice for supply-side economics. Regarding issues of international politics and national security, the Journal editorial page is squarely in the neo-conservative camp, for example supporting the continued presence of U.S. troops in Iraq and the legitimacy of the Guantanamo Bay detention camp. The Journal in recent years has strongly defended Lewis Libby, whom it portrays as the victim of a political witchhunt. The editorial page routinely publishes articles by scientists skeptical of the theory of global warming, including several influential essays by Richard Lindzen of MIT.

Although their reporting on the news is fairly impartial and even liberal, its editorial content is too conservative to easily tilt the balance towards the right. Another recent example is the public face of WSJ on TV: Peggy Noonan. Here are two statements she made recently.

On the release of Bush torture memos by the Obama administration, she said: "Sometimes in life you just want to keep walking", and, "Some of life has to be mysterious."

On SC Gov. Mark Sanford's hike to the Appalachian Trail and the revelation of the affair by the media: "Um..I must say I've been thinking about Clinton a lot and it seems to me that in the Clinton era, during that famous story, a new devilishness was unleashed, especially in the media where a new meanness took style."

I started with an idea of commenting on the WSJ article, but went on to write a lot about WSJ itself. I guess I will comment on the article in my next post. Keep waiting.

Somalia - the libertarian paradise

Six years

Since the financial meltdown has dominated the headlines for the last few months, I thought of reminding everyone that today marks 6 years since the Iraq War started. Jon Stewart reminded us about the war few days ago in his special segment "Mess O'Potamia".

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	M - Th 11p / 10c
Mess O'Potamia - The Iraq War Is Over
comedycentral.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Important Things w/ Demetri Martin Political Humor

Fallout of the AIG Bonuses

I guess everyone is aware of the employee retention bonuses awarded by AIG to its executives last Sunday. In the light of the federal stimulus money supporting the company, this comes as a great shocker for many. What was to be an intra-company affair became a national headline for 3 consecutive days beyond that. How did the bonus story became such a rage that lawmakers are considering various options to "get back" the bailout money. Opinion polls show people across the country are aghast at the greed of the company executives and want the money back.

Let's step back a moment and look at the story once again. Congress approved bailout money to support the dying-AIG, presumably because that was one way to prop up other large corporations like Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, Meryll Lynch, Bank of America, etc. Now, I don't claim this - this theory is from former New York Attorney General and Governor Eliot Spitzer, who spent much of his lifetime pursuing white-collar crimes, before he resigned as Governor following the prostitution scandal. There was an attempt from Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Oregon) and Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) to include a provision in the bailout to cap the executive bonuses a $100,000, but it apparently died in the negotiations. As a result, there were no legal provisions in the bailout agreement to either restrict or cap the executive bonuses.

Fast forward Sunday, March 15: AIG announced executive bonuses, without realizing the ramifications of that action. By Monday morning, the blogosphere and later the mainstream media was full of stories and commentaries about how this action was unethical, even illegal to pay employees who created the financial mess in the first place. Senators and White House officials were asked for their reactions, and everyone's response was: it is shameful, and shouldn't have been done. Some officials even went to the defense, suggesting that it was difficult to stop them from issuing bonuses, since they were part of the company contract to the exmployees. Meanwhile, Eliot Spitzer's successor at the office of New York Attorney General, Andrew Cuomo issued a notice to the company to reveal the names of the executives who were being paid the bonuses. Over the day, lawmakers started deliberations to introduce a new piece of legislation to tax the bonus at ridiculously high rates (one proposal was to tax them at 100%). IRS already taxes bonuses above 1 million at 35%.

Now there are some key questions arising out of this situation:
1. Should the company have issued the bonuses: No, considering the fact that the U.S. government holds 80% stake in the company. So, in effect, it is the taxpayers' money that is going to fund a few executives who created the mess in the first place.

2. Is there a way to get back the bonuses: Maybe, but taxing them is not a great idea.

3. Why shouldn't the bonuses be taxed: Though such a measure would find popular support, I believe it would be unconstitutional to introduce a legislation that would tax the bonuses issued prior to the enactment of the legislation. Whatever happened to being "grandfathered"?

4. Should the executives return the bonuses: That might be the only option left. It is morally incorrect to take home bonuses at the expense of taxpayers, when millions are losing their jobs, much less taking home bonuses. As someone said yesterday, 'morality cannot be legislated'.

5. Did the White House screw up on this issue: Totally. I believe the bailout was mishandled by Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner and the White House administration. They hoped that AIG would use the money properly, without inserting any enforceable clause in the agreement. They gave easy access to fire in the hands of a pyromaniac asked to watch over a building. How did they think AIG got to this position in the first place?

6. Should we make a big deal out of this? Hmmm... may be, may be not. $165 million is roughly 0.1% of the $150 billion in bailout money AIG received. So it doesn't make sense to go after the bonuses, when there are bigger fishes to fry. But the issue is not about substance, but attitude. The whole episode just shows gross disrespect towards the feelings of millions of people who have lost their jobs and/or homes. To put things in perpective, Ohio's share of the federal stimulus money is nearly $8.2 billion. The AIG bonuses are roughly 2% of Ohio's stimulus share. That might not look like a lot of money, but it can help complete most of the projects listed in this Dispatch article.

And the Oscar goes to...

So how did Nate Silver's predictions fare against the actual Awards?

He got the Best Supporting Actor, Best Actress, Best Director and the Best Picture correctly. 4 out 6.. not bad, I would say! Penelope Cruz beat Taraji Henson to win the Best Supporting Actress and Sean Penn knocked Mickey Rourke out of the Best Actor award. Sean Penn was a total surprise. May be it was the guilt over the passing of Proposition 8 that made the Academy look at his role more closely than usual. I thought his acceptance speech was powerful. He could be the poster-boy for gay rights, given that he has dabbled in political activism at times.

The other heartening awards - A R Rahman winning 2 Oscars for the Best Score and Best Song for Slumdog Millionaire. Add one for Gulzar (lyricist for Jai Ho) and Resul Pookutty (Best Sound Mixing - Slumdog Millionaire) - A near sweep by the underdog team. So much for the name! To top it all, Smile Pinki won the award for the Best Documentary. You might be surprised to know that the movie was made in Hindi and Bhojpuri and describes the tale of Pinki, a young girl with cleft lip who receives a free surgery from The Smile Train program.

P.S.: A reader asked me if prediction was an educated guess. My response is that though prediction is much more educated than a mere guess, it is more based on facts which precede the event. The 2008 election results were predicted (even state-by-state) based on the opinion polls conducted all throughout the summer, rather than on educated guesses (which is sometimes called guesstimate).

Oscar Predictions

What do we do when we don't know the outcome of a future event? We predict, and hope that our predictions come true. Is it the same as guessing? More often than not, people blur the line between the two and use the terms interchangeably. You predict that it will snow tomorrow, but you guess that the next throw on the dice will be a six. It is possible to predict the dice throw as well.... and that's what this article is about.

Now that we are approaching the Oscars, everybody wants to take a shot at predicting (or should I say guessing) the winners. There might be some obvious winners (Heath Ledger?), but it's a tough competition otherwise. Many folks base their judgment on previous awards such as the Golden Globe, Screen Actors Guild, Directors Guild of America, BAFTA, etc but what happens when the nominees split the awards. That's where I found the prediction from Nate Silver of FiveThirtyEight fame interesting. Having successfully predicted the state-by-state outcome of the 2008 U.S. Presidential Elections, Nate goes on to predict the winners of the 6 major awards at the Oscar ceremony. Briefly, here's how he arrived at his predictions:

Formally speaking, this required the use of statistical software and a process called logistic regression. Informally, it involved building a huge database of the past 30 years of Oscar history. Categories included genre, MPAA classification, the release date, opening-weekend box office (adjusted for inflation), and whether the film won any other awards. We also looked at whether being nominated in one category predicts success in another. For example, is someone more likely to win Best Actress if her film has also been nominated for Best Picture? (Yes!) But the greatest predictor (80 percent of what you need to know) is other awards earned that year, particularly from peers (the Directors Guild Awards, for instance, reliably foretells Best Picture). Genre matters a lot (the Academy has an aversion to comedy); MPAA and release date don’t at all. A film’s average user rating on IMDb (the Internet Movie Database) is sometimes a predictor of success; box grosses rarely are. And, as in Washington, politics matter, in ways foreseeable and not.

List of winners according to Nate Silver and their chances of winning in percent:

Supporting Actor: Heath Ledger (The Dark Knight) 85.8%
Supporting Actress: Taraji P Henson (Benjamim Button) 51.0%
Lead Actor: Mickey Rourke (The Wrestler) 71.1%
Lead Atress: Kate Winslet (The Reader) 67.6%
Best Director: Danny Boyle (Slumdog Millionaire) 99.7%
Best Picture: Slumdog Millionaire 99.0%*
* Nate claims that Milk has an outside chance of winning the Best Picture award (that's where politics plays a role)

Read the detailed analysis at: http://nymag.com/movies/features/54335/

Internship Search

My search for a Summer internship (2009) in environmental policy (with special emphasis on water policy analysis) is currently on. I am applying to a few institutes, but if you have any places in mind, please let me know.

Featured on namesake media outlet

I was featured in a namesake media outlet (The Columbus Dispatch) that carries the same name as this blog (or is it the other way around?) sometime after the Mumbai terror attacks. Incidentally, this media outlet is the prominent newspaper circulated in the city of Columbus, OH. Here is the link (scroll down to the last paragraph to see my statement)

Is this science?

Yesterday, I was in the lab, trying to get my setup working before next Thursday's meeting, when I saw Carrol with some kids coming into the lab. She then introduced her daughter and two lovely grandkids, both girls, to me. The kids were in 6th grade school, and were on vacation from Arlington, TX. Carrol explained to them about my research, but then wanted me to tell them more. So I started explaining to them about wastewater treatment and how I was trying to get rid of the 'microbes' in the dirty water. And then, one of the kids asked me, "Is this science"?

That question startled me for a second. I have interacted with high school kids and have talked to toddlers (who have no other option but to listen, and they can't talk back!), but it has really been a long time I talked to kids in primary/middle school, and that too about research. For kids, there is a clear demarcation of science, history and language. What we see as molecular genetics, wastewater treatment and wireless communication, they see as 'science'.

I replied to her, saying "Yes, this is science and engineering". This was not the only one, there were more to follow. The kid later asked me, "We have our school from 8 in the morning till 3.30 in the afternoon. Do you also have a specific time at which you come here and then leave". The whole conversation with the kids set me thinking on how far I have come from school. At her age, I would have asked similar questions to a graduate student. I don't know if she understood my explanations, but when asked about research and my work, she said, "It is very interesting and exciting". I hope she carries positive memories of this conversation and choses a profession that best appeals to her.

Photos from the ASEE Conference, Pittsburgh, PA

"Dirty Water" Explained

So, here goes the much-promised post on my lab-mate's work on treatment of wastewater, coming out of turkey processing plants.

The lab, the boss, Karen Mancl (pronounced Man-sil) and stand-in boss, Rashmi.

hmm...lots of food! wait a second...


Read the label carefully. This is where all the wastewater is stored. Refrigeration prevents decay of organic matter and thereby, the stink that we get in sewers and septic tanks.

Wastewater from the turkey processing plant - "dirty", smelly, red in color, full of animal blood and fat, high in carbon content (BOD)

It needs to go through these tower like structures, filled with sand, pea gravel /textile felt, where it gets filtered. Microbes growing on the media (sand, felt, etc) eat the carbon present in the wastewater, and reduce the organic content, thereby, cleaning the water.

The final outcome looks like this - clear and devoid of any suspended or organic matter. This water has very low BOD, and it almost drinkable, except for one thing - disinfection. It needs to be treated with disinfectants like chlorine, ozone before it can be consumed by humans. I am working on the disinfection, and that will be another blogpost sometime later.

Hope this was interesting enough.

Indian Hockey Federation and KPS Gill sacked

Breaking News! President of the Indian Hockey Federation (IHF) KPS Gill has been sacked by the Indian Olympic Association (IOA). IOA has also suspended the IHF with immediate effect. IHF is to be replaced by an ad-hoc commission, which will continue to govern Indian hockey. A new President and other office bearers will be elected soon. IOA has decided to take over the IHF so that it could be run in a transparent manner.

The decision was taken after a sting operation conducted by Aaj Tak exposed former IHF Secretary Jothikumaran taking bribe on camera to select a player in the national team. Jothikumaran was forced to resign after the exposure.

Gill's removal is seen as a welcome step towards the revival of Indian Hockey. He held the post for 14 years and refused to step down despite criticism from several quarters. For the first time in 80 years, India failed to qualify for the Olympics. Gill was blamed for the continued decline in the standards of Indian hockey ultimately leading to the failure to qualify for the Olympics.

Source: Breaking News Online, CNN-IBN, NDTV News

"Dirty" Water

My next blog would be on wastewater...specifically, it would include my lab-mate's research (with photos!). She's gone on a holiday, and me and my other lab-mate are taking "care" of her set-up. Stay tuned. Meanwhile, get yourself up to speed on what wastewater is all about.

Oil Price Bubble?

Supply is up, demand is down, yet the price is soaring. Here's why... (courtesy: Ronald Bailey from ReasonOnline)

Oil prices climbed to their highest level ever, reaching over $108 per barrel this week. And Americans are feeling this price spike at the pump, with gasoline averaging $3.22 per gallon. An analysis released by the investment firm Goldman Sachs suggested that oil prices might soar to $200 per barrel. Does this make sense?

Not really. Although U.S. crude oil inventories have fallen, gasoline inventories are at their highest since March, 1993, notes Tim Evans, an energy futures analyst at Citigroup's Futures Perspective. World oil production was up 2.5 percent in the first quarter of 2008 over the same period in 2007 while world oil consumption rose by just 2 percent. In fact, world production is projected to be 3.3 percent higher in the second quarter and 4.1 percent higher in the third quarter than the same periods a year ago. On the other hand, world demand is projected to rise by just 1.6 percent over the next six months.

In fact, demand is falling in some countries. According to economist John Kemp at the commodities firm Sempra Metals, the U.S. consumed 4 percent less petroleum in January 2008 than it did the year before. Evans agrees, noting that the U.S. demand for petroleum products began falling off last July. Interestingly, this drop in U.S. oil consumption began before crude prices turned vertical and before we began to see weakness in the broader economy. Even China's thirst for oil is abating somewhat. Its demand for oil, which once rose at 10 percent per year, has now dropped to 6 percent per year. In addition, world surplus oil production capacity has gone from a very tight 1.5 million barrels per day a couple of years ago to more than 3 million barrels today, says petroleum economist Michael Lynch.

So supply is up; relative demand is down and yet, the price of oil is soaring. What's going on? Last week, Exxon Mobil CEO Rex Tillerson blamed a third of the recent run up in oil prices on the weak dollar, another third on geopolitical uncertainty, and the rest on market speculation.

Let's start with geopolitical uncertainties. Last year, oil consumers watched warily as unrest in Nigeria's oil fields, the possibility of war between the U.S. and Iran, and the antics of Venezuela's Hugo Chavez threatened to disrupt oil supplies. That analysis may have once made sense, but most of those tensions have abated in recent months. Nevertheless, it remains true that most of the world's oil is produced in volatile regions and by erratic governments, so the price of crude must still include some kind of political risk premium.

What effect does the falling dollar have on the price of crude? Most oil price contracts are denominated in dollars. The dollar has fallen in value by more than 30 percent against a Federal Reserve index of major currencies since 2002. This means that the price of imports, including oil, have gone up. To some extent, the chief of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) Chakib Khelil was correct when he said earlier this week, "What's happening in the oil market is due to the mismanagement of the U.S. economy." Continuing U.S. trade and fiscal deficits along with lower interest rates are stoking inflationary fears.

That brings us to speculation. Evans observes that since September 2003, the total number of open crude oil futures and options contracts rose by 364 percent. Meanwhile the global demand for petroleum rose by just 8.2 percent. "So the futures and options market has become more important than the physical supplies in driving the price," concludes Evans. "We are seeing investment flows into the oil market that don't have anything to do with the demand and supply of oil."

Investors are treating oil as a hedge against inflation and a falling dollar. Oil markets are part of a negative positive feedback loop in which higher oil prices contribute to higher inflation, which in turn lowers the value of the dollar, which boosts oil prices, and so forth. In other words, the oil market is coming to resemble the gold market (which has also been soaring). Evans notes that most gold traders don't even ask the question of how much gold was mined last year or how much spare gold mining capacity there is.

In the short run, oil prices are very inelastic: A large change in price produces only a small change in demand. If the price of gas goes up a dollar per gallon overnight, you still have to fill your tank to get to work. However, over the long run, consumers and producers respond to higher oil prices. For example, Americans are driving less and have switched to buying more fuel efficient cars.

Higher prices also encourage innovation. Economist Richard Rahn from the Institute for Global Economic Growth believes battery technologies are improving so rapidly that the majority of cars sold in 10 years will be all-electric. This would certainly help drive down the price of oil. Supply is also inelastic—it takes a long time to do the exploration, drilling, and refining necessary to boost production in response to higher prices. This inelasticity of demand and supply means that petroleum prices are very sensitive to relatively small changes in either. This means that prices can fall as steeply has they rose.

Whenever you begin to hear market gurus decree that "this time it's different," as we did during the dot-com bubble and the housing bubble, that's a sure sign of danger in the market. Naturally, proponents of the peak oil theory claim that the recent run up in prices is evidence that the end is nigh. Evans responds, "Fears of peak oil are what this market has in common with the 1980s, not what is different." Recall that during the "oil crisis" of the 1970s when oil prices were as high as they are today, U.S. oil consumption declined by 13 percent between 1973 and 1983. The higher prices of the 1970s led eventually to an oil glut and prices fell to about $10 a barrel by 1986.

So what will happen to oil prices over the next few years? No one is predicting $10 per barrel oil. However, once the current bubble bursts, both Evans and Lynch believe that the price of crude will settle at around $60 to $70 per barrel in the next couple of years. "It's very hard to pinpoint just how long a bubble can expand before it breaks. Getting the timing right is not an easy matter," says Evans. But he adds, "I think that this is the riskiest time to be long in crude oil since 1980."

OFI Campaign ends

The One For India (OFI) campaign arranged by AID Columbus came to an end 2 days ago. (See earlier post to know about OFI). We were able to generate $3000 in a span of 40 days and sold about 60 calendars. Thanks to everyone who contributed to this campaign. If you were not able to but would like to donate later or know more about us, send me an email.

One For India

Association for India's Development (AID) has launched its year-end fund-raising campaign titled "One For India (OFI)". Have you wondered what ONE can do for a Nation?

Make any ONE contribution to bring hope and joy to thousands of lives!
ONE dollar a day can support a village school for a year
ONE dollar a week can provides health care for a village household
Even ONE dime a day can make a difference to someone's life

Make any ONE donation that suits you

AID has a tax-exempt status from IRS, so I urge you to make that ONE contribution today. Donate here. If you would like to know about our activities, please see our latest year-ending newsletter (in PDF).

For more details, send me an email at sridharved AT gmail DOT com

Famous on the Blogosphere

A weekend full of parties, and the weekend doesn't seem like getting over! On Saturday, we were invited to a dinner at 1531 Worthington Ave by Jayanth and roommates. Sunday was Leena's graduation party at Steve's house, and Monday was a dinner at Premnandhini's house for all our friends.

During Sunday's graduation party, I met Nigamanth and Divya after a long time. We got down talking about several different issues, and suddenly at one point, Nigamanth told Divya and others nearby convincingly that "Oh..! this guy lives on the blogosphere." Then the conversation switched to my blog. Nigamanth said, "There are a lot of people living in Columbus who have not met him, but know him through his blog". Boy, was I flattered? Sudu commented that he too knew about me (through my blog) much before we actually met a party.

I had sort of given up on blogging for sometime. If you write often, you have a flow going on, but once you stop, the inertia sets in and it takes a lot of effort to start writing again. But man, this was certainly a lot of admiration for a little blog that I write not-so-often. Nigamanth's comments have certainly fueled the nearly-extinguished fire within me on blogging. I will certainly try my best to be active on the blogoshpere. Watch out for my next blog, but till then, spread the word!

India @ 60

On the 60th anniversary of independent India, I pick up the important events that shaped the country over these last 60 years (in chronological order). Others are welcome to share their views and suggest changes to this list:

1. 1947 - Without doubt, the most important event was the independence from the British Raj, after nearly 150 years of colonial rule.
2. 1948 - The first war with Pakistan that followed soon after independence caused a simmering divide between the two countries that is yet to subside.
3. 1950 - Declaring itself a republic, formally breaking all the bonds with the monarch in London and adoption of a new Constitution in 1950.
4. 1955 - Decision to stay away from the US and Soviet blocs; and formation of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM).
5. 1962 - The war with China and dispute over Sikkim and Arunachal Pradesh.
6. 1971 - Liberation of Bangladesh and victory over Pakistan.
7. Early 1970s - The emergence and rise of Amitabh Bacchan as the angry young man on screen.
8. 1975 - Imposition of Emergency by the then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. Agreeably, one of the darkest hours of democracy which lasted for over 2 years.
9. 1983 - Winning the Cricket World Cup in a country devoid of real stars. The victory spawns a whole generation of sporting heros who endorse anything from cars to toothpastes to energy drinks.
10. 1983 - Operation Bluestar and the assassination of Indira Gandhi. Widespread anti-Sikh riots in Delhi, Punjab and other nearby states.
11. 1989 - Rise to prominence of the hindu nationalist party, Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in the General Elections.
12. 1991 - An year of turmoil starts as the then Prime Minister V P Singh brings up the Mandal Commission recommendations, clearly targeting the oncoming parliamentary elections. Widespread protests break-out and schools and colleges are closed for an extended period in most parts of the country.
12. 1991 - Assassination of Prime Ministerial candidate, Rajiv Gandhi by LTTE terrorists.
13. 1991 - LPG (Liberalization, Privatization and Globalization) of economic reforms rolled out by the duo of Manmohan Singh, the then Finance Minister and Prime Minister Narasimha Rao to dole out the country from an impending economic crisis. Indian economy opens up to allow trans-national companies to setup and trade in India.
14. 1992 - Demolition of the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya, which is soon followed by the serial bomb blasts in Mumbai. The country is torn apart by communal clashes and the ghastly scenes witnessed in 1983 anti-Sikh riots are revisited. Though everyone hoped this would be the last one, Godhra was to follow 10 years later.
15. 1998 - Nuclear tests in Pokhran, Rajasthan put India into the 'Nuclear Club'. Similar tests by Pakistan, and the spectre of a nuclear war between the two countries loomed large. These tests were immediately followed by economic and technological sanctions imposed by a slew of countries including US, UK , Canada, Australia and Japan, apart from a host of European nations.
16. 2000-01 - The Dotcom boom and bust, followed by a slowdown of the global economy. The temporary collapse of the American economy following the 9/11 attacks compounded the problem. Couple of years later, the Indian economy regained its shape, stronger and better than ever. IT and related services, added with manufacturing were the drivers of the new age economy. Agriculture, however, was getting neglected and farmer suicides was just one indicator.
17. 2005 - Right to Information (RTI) Act. Hailed as one of the most progressive laws ever made in the country, it is a powerful tool to combat the rampant corruption prevalent in public administration in the country.