• On MovieTome: The 10 worst movies of 2009 so far!
September 27, 2009 12:34 PM PDT

GeoEye gives look at Iranian nuclear site

by Stephen Shankland
  • Font size
  • Print
  • 30 comments

Satellite imagery company GeoEye has released a photo of what it says is the controversial and underground Iranian uranium enrichment site that came to light last week.

The photo, taken Saturday, shows the facility at a military site about 20 miles north-northeast of Qum and 100 miles southwest of Tehran, GeoEye said. An analysis of the photo by IHS Jane's, a defense intelligence consulting firm, said the facility has a primary and several auxiliary entrances, ventilation shafts, a surface-to-air missile site, and quarry and construction equipment.

See the shots below for a view of what the companies say are the main and auxiliary entrances, the ventilation shafts, and an overall view.

The overall view of the Iranian site. The mountain under which the site is built is to the lower right of the image.

The overall view of the Iranian site. The mountain under which the site is built is to the lower right of the image.

(Credit: GeoEye satellite image/IHS Jane's analysis)
This view shows what IHS Jane's says are ventilation shafts and a possible auxiliary exit from the nuclear site.

This view shows what IHS Jane's says are ventilation shafts and a possible auxiliary exit from the nuclear site.

(Credit: GeoEye satellite image/IHS Jane's analysis)

The International Atomic Energy Agency said it received a letter Monday disclosing the facility, and on Friday Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said it was for uranium enrichment and was 18 months away from being operational.

Centrifuges can separate different isotopes of uranium to produced "enriched" uranium needed to make nuclear weapons; Iran said it's only enriching uranium for purposes of generating electricity. U.S. intelligence agencies said the newly revealed facility is designed to house 3,000 centrifuges, according to the New York Times and others.

The GeoEye-1 satellite took the photo while traveling north 423 miles above the Earth at 4 miles per second relative to the surface of the Earth. The satellite also supplies imagery for Google Maps and Google Earth.

At lower left in this shot is the main entrance to the facility; near it and to the upper right are two auxiliary access areas, according to an interpretation of the photo by IHS Jane's.

At lower left in this shot is the main entrance to the facility; near it and to the upper right are two auxiliary access areas, according to an interpretation of the photo by IHS Jane's.

(Credit: GeoEye satellite image/IHS Jane's analysis)
Stephen Shankland writes about a wide range of technology and products, but has a particular focus on browsers and digital photography. He joined CNET News in 1998 and since then also has covered Google, Yahoo, servers, supercomputing, Linux and open-source software, and science. E-mail Stephen, or follow him on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/stshank.
Recent posts from Deep Tech
Why to embrace Firefox 3.6's new-tab ethos
Mozilla issues near-final Thunderbird 3
Offline Gmail no longer shuns attachments
Chrome extensions site now open for uploads
New standard lets browsers get a grip on files
Firefox hopes to one-up IE with fast graphics
Drobo storage gets faster eSATA interface
Mozilla not interested in building a Firefox OS
Add a Comment (Log in or register) (30 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
by unknown unknown September 27, 2009 1:49 PM PDT
When Colin Powell gave his speech to the U.N leading up to the invasion of Iraq, he had satellite photography of Iraqi facilities supposedly being used in making WMDs, and we know how that turned out. I remain skeptical of our Intelligence Agencies ability to identify such facilities.
Reply to this comment
by Shankland September 27, 2009 3:22 PM PDT
Not to call your skepticism into question, but bear in mind in this particular case that Iran itself has identified the purpose of the facility as for uranium enrichment. Whether it's for military purposes is another matter, of course. Also, for the record, this photo and its interpretation were supplied by private-sector companies, not any government.
by galeso September 28, 2009 1:35 PM PDT
Shankland, said "Iran itself has identified the purpose of the facility". All the more reason to be skeptical. :-)
Didn't Saddam want the Iranians to think he had weapons of mass construction so they would think twice about attacking?
by Ramon366 September 27, 2009 2:30 PM PDT
The difference between the last American régime and this one are vanishing..........
Reply to this comment
by bonesbautista September 27, 2009 3:56 PM PDT
Not fighting you on this one, but I'm wondering why we just don't partner with them and offer materials, oversight, and protection. They're going to get there more than likely, I'm proposing that we're part solving their energy issues. Think of the billions saved and tensions eased.
by ojhnguyeno September 27, 2009 4:08 PM PDT
Well, considering that Gates is still the head of Defense of course there are going to be similarities. However, Iran is and has always been a much bigger threat than Iraq. The problem with your analysis bonesbautista is that Iran's leader has always been known to lie right out of his teeth. The fear (and rightly so) is that he is trying to develop nuclear warheads to clear Israel off the face of the Earth. He's made it well known about his hatred of Israel for a long time now... and well, Israel is one of our allies, so we can't exactly let that happen.
by eyepoker September 27, 2009 5:09 PM PDT
re israel... israel has a history of pre-emptive striking. The West is not going to hit that place - well maybe... but my money is on Israel bombing the facility before Iran can make a nuke.
by inachu1 September 28, 2009 9:23 AM PDT
funny how nobody has ever transcribed the speech eccept for a few and those that have done a factual and technical fluid translation of Ahmanadinajahd speech could not find anywhere where he spoke, "WIPE OFF THE MAP" The propaganda machine for this slight is so unjust and maligned for purpose of warmongering.
by webrp September 30, 2009 6:06 AM PDT
So maybe keep in mind that regime change never seems to significantly alter the underlying system...
by purplepeople_forever September 27, 2009 4:25 PM PDT
We have been surrounding Iran for the longest. Its just a matter of time for any reason made up or not that our government think it to be necessary to enter that country. Old boss same as the new boss syndrome.
We have permanent bases in Iraq, confirmed by friends of mine. We are waiting to link all the oil fields together, confirmed for more friends of mine. Yeah its just not that they have uranium enrichment its because they are in the road of a progression pipeline. As far as the disinformation trail goes anyone who trust the media to not help along whatever the government wants is just another "sheeple".
Reply to this comment
by zyxxy September 28, 2009 5:56 AM PDT
Confirmed by 'friends' of yours. Right. A friend of a friend of a friend of mine says your friends are wrong.
by purplepeople_forever September 27, 2009 4:31 PM PDT
Because we all know governments do not lie to get us into war/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods
Also
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_of_Tonkin_Incident
There is more do some learning.
Reply to this comment
by inachu1 September 28, 2009 9:35 AM PDT
This leads credence into The idea that Rumsfeld really did plan to hit the side of the pentagon using the same plane and exact side in both the training demo and in real life........
Rumsfeld is the same as that Nun who sprayed the swastika on her church to bring the community together.

The people in our govt who planned this were all smoking crack.
by grevesz September 27, 2009 9:44 PM PDT
I am a bit confused about the images. The same area in Google Earth (34 degrees 53 minutes North and 50 degrees 59 minutes 49 seconds E) is supposedly from 2009, yet looks far less developed.
Reply to this comment
by TonyNYC September 27, 2009 10:18 PM PDT
If anybody wants to view in Google Earth, location for picture above is 34°53'48.97"N , 50°59'2.00"E (use 1700m range.)
Reply to this comment
by sythara September 27, 2009 10:30 PM PDT
The site could be anything.

I wonder what would have happened if the US did a pre-emptive strike on the Soviet Union back in the 50s for developing nuclear weapons. Oh that right, back then it was ok.
Reply to this comment
by Raziel66 September 30, 2009 1:36 PM PDT
Iran has said what this facility is for. Put your politics to the side and pay attention to the news.
by stubbyns September 28, 2009 5:30 AM PDT
Gosh. Can you blame the Iranians for wanting to have a deterrent? You've got Israel which sponsors state terrorism, constantly threatening its neighbors.

Seems like the US just wants another excuse to invade yet again another country to steal its oil. Maybe this time the US won't just guard the oil ministry so it doesn't seem to obvious.
Reply to this comment
by zyxxy September 28, 2009 6:04 AM PDT
Particularly since Israel, Pakistan and India already have nuclear weapons and delivery systems.

Maybe the USA and Russia should both reduce their weapon systems by simply delivering five mobile launchers plus missiles to each country in the world that does not have them yet.
by tektaktyks September 28, 2009 7:43 AM PDT
i just wonder who makes the chips in their computers...that's sponsoring terrorism you know...
Reply to this comment
by smhb1258 September 28, 2009 11:50 AM PDT
Well these photos dont mean jack ****. It seems that as usual we have a short memory. Obama is pursuing the same policies that the neo crazies pursued. The only difference is that they were bankrupt and Obama has a bit of credibility that he will soon squander by lying through his teeth and following the zionists.

Iran doesnt have to prove a negative. They are well entitled to build and nuclear processing or reprocessing facility as long as they declare the facility to the IAEA 6 months before they introduce fisile material into the plant.

The Iranians are a good member of the IAEA that have met all their legal obligations under NPT contrary to what our lying politicians and our corporate media say about them.

If we want to have any credibility we have to stop these stupid games we play and understand that the 3rd world / developing world is well aware of our duplicitous schemes and policies and they are onto us. Time for us to stop all the lies and bullying and start following the same rules as we seem so adamant that others adhere to.
Reply to this comment
by Been_there_Saw_it_before September 28, 2009 12:59 PM PDT
Like bonesbautista said above, lets partner with them. It will be cheeper. Keep your friends close, keep your enemies closer. If we were partners, we could be in the facility ourselves, looking around at what they were doing and, if necessary, how to destroy it.
by mssoot September 29, 2009 11:09 AM PDT
This is the US Government SOP, do as I say (while I exempt myself)
by rmullen0 September 28, 2009 1:21 PM PDT
I see Bin Laden. He's driving one of Iraq's mobile weapons lab trucks! So that's where they went! I guess Cheney isn't a lying SOB afterall.
Reply to this comment
by jtjt145 September 28, 2009 2:57 PM PDT
Agreed, Iran having access to nuclear arms does not make one feel comfortable.

On the other hand, we have successive Israeli governments armed with something in excess of 200 nuclear bombs, who are also not really being famous for keeping cool heads. And what makes it worse, is the Israeli blatantly, greedy land grab for their neighbors lands.

I wonder, if in the interest of peace for the rest of the world, it maybe desirable between the 2 sides to have something like a balance.
Of course, the ideal solution would be, that none of the 2 factions have the bomb. But that's never gonna happen, is it?

Arthur
Reply to this comment
by JAMD456 September 28, 2009 6:34 PM PDT
I really do not understand our Government, we should not be allowed to dictate World policy by being one of the few Countries that are "permitted" to be using Nuclear arms?
I do believe that America's close and needless ties with Israel are becoming a nuisance, they are on the OTHER side of the Atlantic, They should be forming ties with Europe not America and with the other countries in the region, why should we be wasting wealth and be sending our troops into Global situations that do not necessarily involve us, we have sometimes been the root cause of some of these tensions in the World, we are not an empire it is time we stopped acting like one.
Reply to this comment
by mzkostr September 29, 2009 4:00 AM PDT
Did you say "NOT AN EMPIRE"?????????, the US is and has been an Empire along its history--Hawii and more Pcific Ilands.
by Rmando30 September 28, 2009 8:01 PM PDT
First Kuwait , then came Iraq , after that Afghanistan, now they want Iran. we need to hold our government responsible for their actions. I still want to see the WMD that supposedly were in Iraq. I hope they are using real intelligence or not some pychic that does tarot reading. Iran is claiming to have a nuclear program because they are afraid of the US being so close. I pray to God that the US does not provoke Iran and the US uses this as an excuse to invade. How many dead will it take for us to wake up?
Reply to this comment
by rottengods September 29, 2009 1:31 AM PDT
Mullahs and IRGC are on to something big?.you will hear it when it is too late!





Thanks for photos.

[CNET editors' note: Promotional link deleted]
Reply to this comment
by jmoran September 30, 2009 5:36 PM PDT
This is Israel's immediate problem. They're threatened almost daily by the regime in Iran and I for one think that Iran will not produce a bomb. Israel will see to that. Case closed.
Reply to this comment
(30 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next

The browser battles go on and on

roundup From Firefox to IE and from Chrome to Opera and Safari, there's no sitting still for browser makers looking to keep their products fresh and competitive.

3G wireless still holds promise

The next generation of 4G wireless may get all the headlines, but advanced 3G technology will likely dominate services for the next few years.

About Deep Tech

Stephen Shankland, who's covered the computing industry since 1998 and was a science reporter before that, here delves into a wide range of technology trends and offers hands-on tests. His particular interests include Web browsers, cameras, standards, research, science, and start-ups.

Add this feed to your online news reader

Deep Tech topics

advertisement
advertisement

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right