Natural Resources of Georgia
by Alexander G. Tvalchrelidze
During the XX century natural resources of Georgia were thoroughly investigated by the special Council of the Georgian Academy of Sciences on Natural Resources, which in late fifties - early sixties issued a multi-volume Monograph: "Natural Resources of the Georgian SSR" [1] . Nevertheless, nowadays we have to re-consider not only the existing empiric data but also the approach to the governmental management of natural resources and methods of their economic evaluation and appraisal.
1. Macroeconomic Definition of the Resource Base
The short and tragic history of our independent statehood reveals a simple but important fact: after collapse of the USSR and first steps in free-market economic relations of the Newly Independent States, macroeconomic approach to the resource base and its governmental management have to be reviewed. According to the classical definition [2], the resource base implies a totality of natural resources of a given territory, which may be exploited or used otherwise under stated economic conditions and currently feasible technology or technology which will be feasible in the near future.
In the Soviet Union the resource base has always been considered as a political-economic category helping the enormous country to survive and to develop independently from civilized world, beyond the rigid iron curtain. Nowadays the resource base must be considered as an independent, immanent value that takes part in the world market processes and determines production of goods with the exactly evaluated prices and costs. In other words, the resource base entirely or any of its parts may be considered as a specific form of tangible property, taking part in market processes with all corresponding consequences: form the macroeconomic point of view the resource base or any of its parts may be sold, alienated, leased, landed, mortgaged, taken as warranty, given for exploitation, according to existing legislation, to any physical or legal person, etc.
2. Exogenous Energetic Resources
Fig. 1 contains general information on Georgian exogenous energetic resources (hydroresources, solar & wind resources). Table 1 describes distribution of Georgian hydroresources in different river valleys [3]. It could be seen that only 19.45% of technical hydroresources are exploitable by existing hydroelectric plants. Nevertheless, these plants, in case of rehabilitation may provide 13.3 billion KWh per annum or, in other word, entirely satisfy national demand in electricity.
Two main circumstances prevent effective usage of hydroresources:
" Main hydroelectric plants are depreciated and obsolete and need urgent rehabilitation. Necessary investments are evaluated to be as much as 1 billion USD.
Distribution of existing hydroelectric power is not even. Georgia is characterized by exceeded power in summer period and lack of necessary resources in winter: it is known that power of hydroelectric plants falls on 60% in this season.
Fig. 1: Exogenous Energetic Resources of Georgia
The existed hydroelectric infrastructure of Georgia has been inherited from the "soviet" macroeconomic model and, namely the famous "GOELRO" project. Famous Lenin's expression that "Socialism is the soviet power plus electrification of the overall country" determined implementation of gigantic projects. From this point of view, construction of the Enguri hydroelectric plant with the highest dam in the world was feasible taking into account the overall USSR energy infrastructure: the plant could provide electricity with power of about 1,200 MW in summer period whereas in winter time Georgia was thought to be supplied either with electricity from the Northern Caucasus via a 500 kV strategic electric line "Caucasus" or with gas for the Gardabani thermal electric plant. After Georgia obtained independence, these facilities became almost useless. Take a look of Table 1, which describes distribution of hydroenergy resources according to potential capacity of the Georgian rivers. It could be easily seen that 65.6% of hydroresources are exploitable by medium and small hydroelectric plants whereas 39.1% of them - by small (<10 MW) plants only. Thus, the approach to development and governmental management of the Georgian hydroenergy infrastructure is to be entirely reconsidered.
Table 1: Distribution of Potential Hydroresources versus Power of Rivers
| Power of Rivers, kW |
Number of Rivers |
Total Power |
|
|
|
in 1000 kW |
in % |
| > 500,000 |
6 |
5,326 |
34.4 |
| 100,000 - 200,000 |
24 |
4,104 |
26.5 |
| 50,000 - 100,000 |
33 |
2,426 |
15.6 |
| 20,000 - 50,000 |
66 |
2,134 |
13.7 |
| 10,000 - 20,000 |
64 |
949 |
6.1 |
| 5,000 - 10,000 |
60 |
432 |
2.8 |
| < 5,000 |
66 |
147 |
0.9 |
|
The low efficient hydroenergy infrastructure could be proven by Fig. 2, which describes density of hydroenergetic resources in Georgia and other countries of the Former USSR. It could be seen that Georgia is a richest country among the former USSR republics, and one of the richest state in the world. And only the above-mentioned "socialistic" approach to usage of hydroresources has caused dramatic exhaustion of existing basic equipment and actual sad reality of the huge energy crisis.
Helioresources of Georgia are also very important. Sun radiance on Georgian territory is equal to 1014 kW/h per annum. This figure exceeds 2,000 times the needed national amount of energy [4]. Fig. 1 describes zones where construction of any equipment of sun energy processing is feasible including electric plants. Such plants, as known, are expensive enough as based on photoelectric conduction principle. Table 2 contains information on the above-mentioned zones.
Table 2: Features of Helioresources of Georgia Within Zones with Highest Reserves
| Direct radiation on a horisontal plane, kWh/m² |
Total radiation, kWh/m² |
Duration of sun shining, h |
Working duration of
sun energy equipment, h |
| July |
Year |
July |
Year |
July |
Year |
July |
Year |
| 120-140 |
>850 |
195 |
1575 |
310 |
2350 |
2100 |
6600 |
Page1 end
Fig. 2: Ranking of Former Soviet Republics According to Density of Hydroresources
Georgian wind resources are very important as well. Fig. 1 contains information on areas with the most important wind resources under condition of chest-type distribution of the wind generators and distance between them 15 times exceeding their high. Table 3 characterizes technical features of these zones [5]. It should be noted that during the last 5 years a lot of wing generators were constructed throughout the world. Their total power is more than 2,400 MW. Within the same period the wind-generated electricity cost decreased from 0.5 USD per kW up to 0.05 USD. Nowadays USA possesses wind plants with power of about 1,700 MW, Germany - 900 MW, India - 900 MW, Denmark - 540 MW, China - 430 MW, UK - 400 MW, Spain - 272 MW, Mexico - 200 MW, Chili - 150 MW, Argentina - 100 MW, and so on. Georgia's wind energy resources belong to richest in the world but their usage is nil.
Table 3: Energetic Characteristics of Wind
| Zone |
Average annual |
Total duration, h |
Average continuous duration, h |
|
velocity of wind, m/sec |
with working wind velo-city, m/sec |
with non active wind velo-city, m/sec |
with working wind velocity, m/sec |
with non active wind velocity, m/sec |
| A. Most active zone
* Mountain chains
* Samtskhe-Djavakheti, central part
* Kolkheti lowland, central part
|
5.5-9.0
3.8
4.5-5.5
|
6,900
6,150
6,100
|
4,150
3,450
3,700
|
1,800
2,250
2,675
|
30-35
20-25
20-25
|
10-13
12-14
12-13
|
| B. Active zone
* Mtkvari valley, central part
* Samtskhe-Djavakheti, southern part
* Black Sea coast
* Kazbegi
|
4.0-6.5
2.5-3.0
3.5
6.5
|
4,225
4,575
4,280
4,590
|
2,975
1,915
2,000
3,900
|
4,650
4,200
4,480
4,170
|
18-25
18-20
18
27
|
20-22
15
17
25
|
| C. Less active zone
* Kolkheti Lowland
* Intermountain val-leys, Eastern Georgia
* Gagra Chain
|
2.5-5.0
3.0-3.5
3.0
|
3,350
3,475
3,400
|
1,600
1,675
1,920
|
5,150
5,450
5,360
|
13-18
14-18
17
|
18-22
20-26
27
|
| D. Intermediate zone
* Iori Plateau
* Sioni aquifair
|
2.5-4.0
2.5
|
2,875
2,900
|
1,175
1,300
|
6,175
5,770
|
13-15
13
|
20-28
17
|
| E. Passive zone
*Manglisi, Dmanisi, Telavi
|
2.5-3.0 |
1,600 |
520 |
7,200 |
10-20 |
27-35 |
|
3. Land and Forest Resources
First Decree signed by the Government of the First Georgian Democratic Republic in 1918 was the Decree on private property of land, and the first Decree signed by the Council of Red Commissars in 1921, after the 11th Soviet Army had conquered Georgia, was the Decree on nationalization of land. Thus, rights to own land is perhaps the most important criterion that distinguishes liberal economic system from the totalitarian one. In 1988 eighty seven percent of agricultural land was owned by the state, and it provided only 16% of crop. On the contrary, 13% of land that belonged to rural householders produced 84% of agricultural domestic product. Privatization of land started in 1992-1995. Nowadays over 918,000 ha (or 55% high-quality arable and 67% of perennial land) have been privatized by 1,020,000 householders.
Table 4 describes the Land Fund of Georgia [6]. It could be seen that the overall land fund is equal to 6.95 million ha but only 43.1% or 2,991,100 ha are agricultural. Thus, Georgia is a country with limited agricultural land resources (0.55 ha per capita or 2.62 ha per household). Such environment creates huge difficulties for development of the Georgian Agriculture.
Table 4: Land Fund of Georgia
| Types of Land |
Distribution |
|
Area, thousand ha |
Percent of total, % |
| TOTAL |
6,949.4 |
100.0 |
| Arable land |
785.0 |
11.3 |
| Perennial plantings |
277.5 |
4.0 |
| Pastures |
1,928.6 |
27.8 |
| Agricultural lands in total |
2,991.1 |
43.1 |
| Forests |
2,006.6 |
28.8 |
| Other |
1,951.7 |
28.1 |
Fig. 3 demonstrates distribution of forests on the territory of Georgia, whereas Table 5 shows data on forest fund of Georgia, types of forests, area occupied by them and wood reserves [7]. Total forest fund of Georgia is equal to 2,309.600 ha, among which 2,006,600 ha or 86.88% are occupied by forests and the rest 13.22% - by shrubbery and glades.
Fig. 3: Distribution of forests on the Territory of Georgia
Table 5: Characteristic Features of Georgian Forests and Wood Reserves in Them
| N° |
Species |
Area, 1000 ha |
Wood reserves, 1000 m³ |
| 1 |
Pine |
72.5 |
11,967.99 |
| 2 |
Spruce |
119.5 |
34,660.85 |
| 3 |
Caucasus fir |
200.2 |
112,014.03 |
| 4 |
Oak |
186.0 |
17,525.42 |
| 5 |
Beech |
1,035.0 |
236,568.84 |
| 6 |
Chest nut |
46.6 |
10,529.88 |
| 7 |
Hornbeam |
119.5 |
12,930.79 |
| 8 |
Eastern hornbeam |
31.5 |
1,145.61 |
| 9 |
Box |
5.9 |
1,084.68 |
| 10 |
Alder |
59.9 |
5,691.50 |
| 11 |
Yew |
0.3 |
73.12 |
| 12 |
Other |
128.8 |
7,507.41 |
| 13 |
TOTAL |
2,006.6 |
451,700.12 |
Traditionally the forest fund of Georgia is divided into:
1. Reserve forests;
2. Forests of the green zone;
3. Resort forests;
4. Soil- and water protection forests, and
5. Industrial forests
Page2 end
Fig. 4: Distribution of Georgian Forests According to Their Types
4. Exogenous Water and Recreation Resources
Exogenous water resources are those, which are used in any industrial branch other than hydroenergy.
Exogenous water resources of Georgia are richest among the CIS countries and one of the richest in the World (Fig. 5) [8] .
The conditional water seam formed from annual precipitation has area of 93.3 km2 and thickness of 1,338 mm. Distribution of water resources between different aquifers is shown on Fig. 6.
Fig. 5: Evaluation of Georgian Exogenous Water Resources Versus Those of Other CIS Countries
26,060 rivers are known in Georgia, their total length being equal to about 60 thousand km. Table 6 provides information on categories of Georgian rivers.
Fig. 6. Distribution of Exogenous Water Resources in Different Aquifers
Table 6: Morphologic Characteristics of Georgian Rivers
| Region |
Area, |
Index |
Category of Rivers |
|
1000 km² |
|
Rather small |
Small |
Medium |
Large |
Rather large |
TOTAL |
| Western Georgia |
32.42 |
Number |
18,036 |
64 |
9 |
- |
- |
18,109 |
|
|
Length, km |
30,946 |
2,723 |
1,573 |
- |
- |
35,042 |
| Eastern Georgia |
34.67 |
Number |
7,113 |
76 |
4 |
- |
1 |
7,794 |
|
|
Length, km |
18,382 |
2,989 |
971 |
- |
1,364 |
23,696 |
| Caucasus |
|
Number |
756 |
1 |
- |
- |
- |
757 |
| Northern slope |
|
Length, km |
1,162 |
31 |
- |
- |
- |
1,193 |
In this general essay we would not provide information on technical characteristics of Georgian rivers described in a lot of well-known publications [9]. On the other hand, essential data on their hydroenergetic capacity was given above. Thus, usage of rivers other than in hydroenergy and, therefore, their macroeconomic evaluation is determined by melioration and water supply facilities. In this connection consideration of Fig. 7, where bulk Georgian rivers' water resources are given, would be enough.
Fig. 7: Total Reserves of Georgian Rivers
Total water reserves of Georgian lakes are about 723,240,000 m3. 856 lakes are known in Georgia but about half of them have area less than 0.1 km2. Bulk area of the Georgian lakes is 170 km2 or about 0.24% of the country's surface. Large lakes are 1.7% of their total amount but they occupy 88% of the overall water table. Table 7 contains information on the Georgian large lakes.
Table 7: Morphologic Characteristics of the Georgian Large Lakes and Water Reserves in Them
| Lake |
Altitude, m |
Lake area, km² |
Basin area, km² |
Maximum depth, m |
Average depth, m |
Volume, million m³ |
| Amtkeli |
512.0 |
0.58 |
153.0 |
65.0 |
29.6 |
18.5 |
| Bazaleti |
878.0 |
1.22 |
14.4 |
7.0 |
4.5 |
5.6 |
| Bareti |
1,621.0 |
1.34 |
9.3 |
1.3 |
0.8 |
1.1 |
| Great Bebesiri |
15.9 |
0.61 |
17.5 |
4.5 |
2.3 |
1.4 |
| Great Okrotskali |
2,421.0 |
0.10 |
2.2 |
26.5 |
12.0 |
1.2 |
| Grdzeli Tba |
1,584 |
0.08 |
0.41 |
3.9 |
2.0 |
1.6 |
| Kartsakhi |
1,799.0 |
26.3 |
158.0 |
1.0 |
0.7 |
19.3 |
| Lamazi |
2,808.0 |
0.11 |
1.5 |
16.5 |
11.4 |
1.25 |
| Lisi |
624.0 |
0.47 |
16.1 |
4.0 |
2.6 |
1.22 |
| Madatapa |
2,108.0 |
8.78 |
136.0 |
1.7 |
1.1 |
9.5 |
| Mrude |
2,545.0 |
0.26 |
7.8 |
8.3 |
5.3 |
1.4 |
| Great Mtsra |
2,184.0 |
0.15 |
1.7 |
42.0 |
17.9 |
2.7 |
| Paliastomi |
0.3 |
18.2 |
547.0 |
3.2 |
2.6 |
52.0 |
| Paravani |
2,073.0 |
37.5 |
234.0 |
3.3 |
2.4 |
90.8 |
| Partotskaro |
0.3 |
0.21 |
1.2 |
3.5 |
2.1 |
4.4 |
| Great Ritsa |
884.0 |
1.49 |
155.0 |
101.0 |
63.1 |
94.0 |
| Minor Ritsa |
1,235.0 |
0.10 |
3.0 |
76.0 |
33.8 |
3.2 |
| Sagamo |
1,996.0 |
4.81 |
528.0 |
2.3 |
1.6 |
7.7 |
| Tabatskuri |
1,991.0 |
14.20 |
83.1 |
40.2 |
15.5 |
221.0 |
| Kobavarchkhili |
2,650.0 |
0.21 |
1.1 |
35.0 |
15.8 |
3.3 |
| Nanchali |
1,928.0 |
13.3 |
176.0 |
0.8 |
0.5 |
6.4 |
| Great Tsitelikhati |
2,779.0 |
0.23 |
2.4 |
53.0 |
19.3 |
4.6 |
| Nurbliani Tba |
1,568.0 |
0.12 |
0.3 |
3.3 |
1.8 |
2.2 |
| Keli |
2,914.0 |
1.28 |
7.6 |
63.0 |
27.8 |
31.7 |
According to feeding conditions, Georgian lakes may be divided into several groups:
 Glacier feeding lakes having, as a rule, altitude above 2,500 m; Atmosphere precipitation feeding lakes; Underground water feeding lakes; Rivers feeding lakes; Bog feeding lakes. The great majority of Georgian lakes are situated in ecologically unpolluted areas, and their waters, having mineralization degree 500-1,000 mg/l, are potable. In the same time, small lakes of the Mtkvari-Alazani intermountain zone are distinguished by high mineralization (even above 2,500-mg/l). Two of them (Grdzeli Tba and Sakhare Tba) contain relatively high reserves of the Glauber salt (see corresponding item above). Georgian lakes represent important natural reserves for fishery being, thus, directly linked to Georgian recreation resources
Georgian glaciers are mainly located in the central part (between Bzibi and Aragvi rivers) of the Greater Caucasus Southern Slope. Some important glaciers are situated on the Northern Slope as well. About 734 glaciers are registered in Georgia (Fig. 8) [10]. Their total area is equal to 511.12 km2 or to 0.73% of the Georgia's surface. Distribution of glaciers and their reserves are shown on Fig. 8 . In summer period glaciers melt and form water flow equal to 1,498,200,000 m3 per annum. 88.91% of this volume inflows into the Western Georgia's rivers, 1.48% - into the rivers of the Greater Caucasus Southern Slope within the Eastern Georgia, and 9.61% - into the Northern Slope Rivers of the same region. The input of glacial waters into the total rover flow is equal to 8.2%.
Page3 end
Fig. 8: Characteristic Features of Georgia Glaciers
In the beginning of the XX century bogs occupied a considerable territory of the Kolkheti Lowland but in thirties an important project of their drying had been set forth. Nowadays they cover an area of about 627 km2. The Kolkheti Lowland bogs are characterized by considerable water and peat resources. Table 8 provides information on their characteristic features.
Table 8: Characteristic Features and Water Reserves in the Kolkheti Bogs
| Bog |
Altitude, m |
Average depth, m |
Area, km² |
Water volume, million m³
|
| Eristskali I |
1.5 |
1.0 |
1.5 |
1.20 |
| Pochora-Kvishona |
4.0 |
2.0 |
13.2 |
21.10 |
| Eristskali II |
0.9 |
1.0 |
117.0 |
93.60 |
| Torsi |
8.5 |
1.0 |
9.0 |
8.10 |
| Nakargali |
4.0 |
1.5 |
21.0 |
25.20 |
| Tokori-Churia |
3.0 |
0.8 |
90.0 |
64.80 |
| Poti-Chaladidi |
12.5 |
1.5 |
144.0 |
194.00 |
| Kveshenati |
8.5 |
1.0 |
1.0 |
0.80 |
| Morchkhili |
8.5 |
1.0 |
1.0 |
0.80 |
| Chvintagele |
8.5 |
1.1 |
1.4 |
1.12 |
| Pochora-Paliastomi |
9.2 |
8.0 |
191.0 |
1,365.00 |
| Laituri |
15.0 |
2.0 |
1.2 |
2.16 |
| Kobuleti |
1.8 |
7.0 |
19.0 |
103.00 |
| Natanebi-Supsa |
1.8 |
1.5 |
15.0 |
20.20 |
Water reservoirs represent artificial aquifers, which are destined for regulating seasonal variations of river flows in course of efficient utilization of water resources. 44 Georgian water reservoirs have host 163 km3 of water (Table 9). Eight reservoirs had been built in the Western Georgia and mainly (excluding 1 reservoir) have energetic usage. Comparatively low humidity of the Eastern Georgia had determined construction of irrigation reservoirs. Complex reservoirs serve for several reasons. For instance, the Jinvali reservoir is used for electricity production, irrigation and potable water supply. In the same time, almost all reservoirs are used for fishery, recreation and relief of inundation consequences. A number of Georgian reservoirs had been built in the natural lake aquifers supplied with water by artificial channels. For instance, the brine waters (mineralization over 2,700 mg/l) of the Kumisi Lake were discharged and now water is supplied from the Mtkvari River by artificial channels and a pumping system. A lot of reservoirs had been constructed in river valleys. For instance, the Jvari reservoir has a highest dam in the World and feeds the Enguri hydroelectric plant with water.
Table 9: Main Characteristic Features of Georgian Water Reservoirs
| Reservoir |
Feeding river |
Volume, 1000 m³ |
Area of water |
Industrial |
|
|
Total |
Industrial |
table, km² |
utilisation |
| Western Georgia |
| Jvari |
Enguri |
1,092.0 |
662.0 |
13.5 |
Energetics |
| Gali |
Eristskali |
145.0 |
26.0 |
8.0 |
Energetics |
| Gumati |
Rioni |
39.0 |
13.0 |
2.4 |
Energetics |
| Vartsikhe |
Rioni, Kvirila |
14.6 |
2.4 |
5.1 |
Energetics |
| Shaori |
Shaora |
71.0 |
68.0 |
13.2 |
Energetics |
| Ladjanuri |
Ladjanuri |
12.0 |
12.0 |
1.6 |
Energetics |
| Tkibuli |
Tkibula |
84.0 |
62.0 |
11.5 |
Energetics |
| Kukhi |
Kukhistskali |
1.9 |
1.8 |
0.3 |
Energetics |
| Bulk |
|
1,471.1 |
851.8 |
55.6 |
|
| Eastern Georgia |
| Zahesi |
Mtkvari |
12.0 |
3.0 |
2.0 |
Energetics |
| Jandari |
Mtkvari |
52.0 |
23.0 |
12.5 |
Melioration |
| Zresi |
Murdjaheti |
2.2 |
1.3 |
1.8 |
Melioration |
| Tskisi |
Kvabliani |
1.5 |
1.5 |
|
Melioration |
| Nadarbazevi |
Liakhvi |
8.2 |
7.2 |
2.0 |
Melioration |
| Zonkari |
Minor Liakhvi |
40.0 |
39.0 |
1.4 |
Melioration |
| Jinvali |
Aragvi |
520.0 |
370.0 |
11.5 |
Complex |
| Narekvavi |
Narekvavi |
6.8 |
5.6 |
0.6 |
Melioration |
| Algeti |
Algeti |
65.0 |
60.0 |
2.3 |
Melioration |
| Marabda |
Algeti |
1.2 |
1.2 |
0.2 |
Melioration |
| Tsalka |
Khrami, Ktsia |
312.0 |
292.0 |
34.0 |
Energetics |
| Mtisdziri |
Mashavera |
3.3 |
3.0 |
0.9 |
Melioration |
| Pantiani |
Mashavera |
5.4 |
5.3 |
0.6 |
Melioration |
| Iakublo |
Mashavera |
11.0 |
11.0 |
2.0 |
Melioration |
| Kumisi |
Mtkvari |
11.0 |
4.0 |
5.4 |
Melioration |
| Sioni |
Iori |
325.0 |
300.0 |
14.4 |
Complex |
| Tbilisi |
Iori, Zmaiti |
308.0 |
155.0 |
11.8 |
Complex |
| Chala |
Chugurgula |
1.7 |
1.4 |
0.4 |
Melioration |
| Kudigora |
Durudji |
3.5 |
3.5 |
3.0 |
Melioration |
| Oktomberi |
Avaniskhevi |
1.8 |
1.5 |
0.2 |
Melioration |
| Telatskali |
Telatskali |
1.6 |
1.2 |
0.1 |
Melioration |
| Kushiskhevi |
Kushiskhevi |
4.0 |
2.3 |
0.6 |
Melioration |
| Kranchiskhevi |
Kranchiskhevi |
1.3 |
0.9 |
0.3 |
Melioration |
| Tazvtskaro |
Aragvi |
1.3 |
1.0 |
0.3 |
Complex |
| 11 smallreservoirs |
|
4.2 |
3.6 |
1.9 |
Melioration |
| Bulk |
1,843.8 |
|
1,417.6 |
107.4 |
|
| TOTAL |
|
3,315.3 |
2,168.9 |
|
163.0 |
Thus, natural resources of Georgia represent a good challenge for economic growth of the country and private or corporate investments.
1 Natural Resources of the Georgian SSR. Edited by F. Tavadze. Academy of Sciences of the Georgian SSR. USSR Academy of Sciences Publ., Moscow, Vol. 1 - 1959; Vol. 2 - 1960; Vol. 3 - 1961; Vol. 4 - 1962 (in Russian).
2 P. De Verte Harris, Mineral resources appraisal. London: Clarendon Press, 1984, 445 p.
3 See, for instance, Hydroenergetic resources. In: Atlas of the Georgian Soviet Socialistic Republic, Academy of Sciences of the Georgian SSR, Vakhushti Institute of Geogeraphy, Tbilisi-Moscow, Publ. Head Department for Geodesy & Cartography, 1964, p. 160-163 (in Russian); B. Chkhaidze, Georgian energetic resources, Georgian Centre for Strategic Studies and Development, 1998, Bulletin # 7, p. 2-17 (in Georgian).
4 B. Chkhaidze, Georgian energetic resources, Georgian Centre for Strategic Studies and Development, 1998, Bulletin # 7, p. 2-17 (in Georgian).
5 Idid
6 J. Zonenashvili, Land resources of Georgia, Georgian Centre for Strategic Studies and Development, 1998, Bulletin # 16, p. 24-43 (in Georgian).
7 Forests. In: Atlas of the Georgian Soviet Socialistic Republic, Academy of Sciences of the Georgian SSR, Vakhushti Institute of Geography, Tbilisi-Moscow, Publ. Head Department for Geodesy & Cartography, 1964, p. 145-147 (in Russian).
8 G. Khmaladze, Water resources of Georgia, Georgian Centre for Strategic Studies and Development, 1997, Bulletin # 1, p. 2-56 (in Georgian).
9 See, for instance, Water resources of Transcaucasus, Eds: G.G. Svanidze and V.S. Tsomaia, Leningrad, Hydrometeoizdat Publ., 1988, 325 p. (in Russian); G.G. Svanidze, V.P. Gagua, E.P. Sukhishvili, Renewable energetic resources of Georgia, Leningrad, Hydrometeoizdat Publ., 1987 237 p. (in Russian); Water resources of Georgia - sustainable development for Georgia, Tbilisi, 1995, 93 p. and so on.
10 G. Khmaladze, Water resources of Georgia, Georgian Centre for Strategic Studies and Development, 1997, Bulletin # 1, p. 2-56 (in Georgian).
Page4 end
|
