Results for Panama Canal

On this page:

Panama Canal

A ship canal, about 82 km (51 mi) long, crossing the Isthmus of Panama in the Canal Zone and connecting the Caribbean Sea with the Pacific Ocean. It was begun by the French in 1881, but the project was abandoned in 1889. The United States gained construction rights after Panama declared its independence in 1903, and the canal was opened to traffic on August 15, 1914. A 1977 treaty stipulated that the Panamanians gained full rights of sovereignty over the canal on December 31, 1999.

#SearchBtn{margin-top:14px !important;}

Library

US Military Dictionary: Panama Canal

A canal about 50 miles (80 km) long, across the isthmus of Panama, connecting the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. Its construction, begun by Ferdinand de Lesseps in 1881 but abandoned in 1889, was completed by the United States between 1904 and 1914. The United States ceded control of the canal to Panama on December 31, 1999.

See the Introduction, Abbreviations and Pronunciation for further details.

Britannica Concise Encyclopedia: Panama Canal

Lock-type canal, Panama. Extending across the Isthmus of Panama, it connects the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. It is about 50 mi (82 km) long from deepwater to deepwater, with an average depth of 43 ft (13 m). The width varies between 500 to 1,000 ft (150 to 300 m). In 1881 a French company began constructing the canal, but the enterprise collapsed in 1889. Under a 1903 treaty Panama granted the U.S. the Panama Canal Zone and the rights to build and operate a canal. Work began in 1904; facing enormous obstacles, George Washington Goethals directed the construction from 1907, and the canal opened on Aug. 15, 1914. The canal enabled ships traveling between the two oceans to avoid the lengthy circumnavigation of South America and was a boon to world commerce. After disputes over sovereignty, a 1977 treaty provided for Panama to take control of the canal by 2000; it did so in 1999. Except for small craft, no vessel can pass through the canal under its own power. Ships are towed by electric locomotives, and it generally takes 15 – 20 hours to complete the passage (including waiting time). Sets of double locks enable ships to pass in opposite directions simultaneously.

For more information on Panama Canal, visit Britannica.com.

US History Encyclopedia: Panama Canal

In 1513, the Spanish explorer Vasco Núñez de Balboa crossed the Isthmus of Panama and sighted the Pacific Ocean. From that point forward, the Spanish and then the Dutch, French, British, and Americans would seek to create a path between the seas that would shorten the trip from the Atlantic to the Pacific without traveling around Cape Horn. It would take nearly four centuries to accomplish the goal.

Early Plans and Construction of the Canal

Once Colombia won independence from Spain, European and American interest in the canal began in earnest as Panama remained a province of Colombia. In 1829, Simón Bolívar commissioned a British engineer, John Lloyd, to study building a canal across Panama. With a positive report, the Colombians threw open the bidding in 1834, promising 100,000 acres of land and revenues for fifty years.

In the mid-1830s, President Andrew Jackson sent Charles Biddle to Central America. He negotiated with Bogotá to build a road to the navigable Chagres River and import two steamships to conduct trade across the isthmus. For his work, Bogotá promised 140,000 acres, an additional 750,000 at fifty cents an acre, and a fifty-year lease. All Biddle's efforts were for naught, however, as Jackson lost interest when a rival Dutch plan in Nicaragua failed.

Despite the initial setback, interest in the canal remained high. By the late 1840s, British and U.S. officials decided to negotiate for a "great highway" across Central America, to be open to all nations. Sir Henry Bulwer and U.S. Secretary of State John Clayton signed the Clayton-Bulwer Treaty on 19 April 1850. Both promised never to monopolize or fortify the proposed canal and agreed that neither would colonize any new part of Central America. While little happened during the next forty years to advance construction of a waterway outside of the creation of railroads and steamship enterprises, people still dreamed about a trans-isthmian canal. The great French engineer Ferdinand de Lesseps, builder of the Suez Canal, won a concession from the Colombian government to construct a canal in Panama in the 1880s. His French Canal Company failed miserably, but his successors retained the concession and asked $109 million for it.

In 1898, the war with Spain renewed interest when the U.S. Pacific Fleet had to travel around South America to Cuba. In 1901, the new president, Theodore Roosevelt, soon addressed a major obstacle, the Clayton-Bulwer Treaty. In November of that year, after tedious negotiations, Secretary of State John Hay and the British ambassador to Washington, Lord Pauncefote, signed an agreement that superseded the Clayton-Bulwer Treaty and permitted the United States to build and fortify a Central American canal.

With the British out of the way, Roosevelt made construction of the canal a priority, announcing his intention to make "the dirt fly" in Central America. As Roosevelt had taken office in September 1901, a commission had recommended a Nicaraguan canal. Working on the recommendation, in January 1902 the House of Representatives voted 308–2 to pursue the Nicaraguan canal. The French company, now called the New Panama Canal Company and led by Philippe Bunau-Varilla, swung into action. It hired a high-powered American lobbyist, William Cromwell, who had personal access to the White House. Cromwell and Bunau-Varilla succeeded, and in June 1902, Congress passed the Spooner Act, a measure that allowed Roosevelt to negotiate for the right of way in Panama.

Secretary of State Hay immediately set about the task of coming to an agreement with the Colombians. In January 1903, he and a Colombian diplomat, Tomás Herrán, signed an accord. The treaty granted the United States the right to build a canal zone six miles wide. In return, the United States promised a payment of $10 million and annual payments of $250,000 after nine years, with the lease renewable in perpetuity. Immediately Bogotá expressed reservations and told Herrán to wait for new instructions. The U.S. Senate refused to delay and approved the treaty in March 1903.

Problems resulted when the Colombians balked at the original agreement. The Colombian congress unanimously rejected the Hay-Herrán Treaty in August 1903. In response, Cromwell and Bunau-Varilla began formulating plans for Panama's secession from Colombia and for American ownership of the canal. Plotting from the New York Waldorf-Astoria Hotel during the summer of 1903, the group planted newspaper stories about Panama's plan to rebel and grant the United States sovereignty over the Canal Zone. They also gathered money for bribes of Colombian officials and organized a small army.

The Panamanians launched their rebellion on 3 November 1903. By the end of that day the rebels had formed a provisional government and unveiled a constitution, one written in New York. The presence of the USS Nashville and the use of bribes allowed a successful revolution. In one day and with only one death, the new Republic of Panama was born.

Washington immediately extended diplomatic recognition. Within several days, Bunau-Varilla (who had received permission from the provisional government to represent Panama) began negotiations. On 18 November, the two parties signed the Hay–Bunau-Varilla Treaty. It gave the United States a ten-mile strip of land, all the rights to construct and administer a canal, and the right to protect the canal. In return, the Panamanians received $10 million and an annual rent of $250,000. Washington also promised to maintain Panama's independence.

Despite some criticisms of the agreement, Roosevelt pressed the Senate for ratification, urging it to follow the example of the Panamanian Congress. After spirited debate, on 23 February 1904 the Senate voted 66–14 to accept it. Immediately Washington purchased the assets of the New Panama Canal Company for $40 million. The Panamanians received their money and American engineers quickly set to work.

The canal took a decade to complete. It was a technological marvel, composed of a series of six locks that linked various waterways. Under the supervision of the engineers John F. Stevens (1905–1907) and Lieutenant Colonel George W. Goethels (1907–1914), the Canal Commission completed the construction with substantial assistance from workers imported from the Caribbean islands and southern United States, in numbers exceeding 44,000 in 1913. Employing heavy machinery—and benefiting from new techniques to reduce yellow fever and other tropical diseases in an effort led by Dr. William Crawford Gorgas—the laborers created a new society within the newly independent Panama. The canal opened for commerce on 15 August 1914. The United States now had major new support for its economic and military growth as the water route from New York City to San Francisco shrank from 13,165 miles to 5,300.

Panama Canal Zone, 1914–1979

For nearly forty years, the Panama Canal Zone operated under various acts of Congress with executive supervision.

In 1950, Congress passed the Thompson Act, which created the Panama Canal Company, operated under the auspices of a board of directors. A governor of the Canal Zone, appointed by the U.S. president, monitored the day-to-day operations of the zone and used revenues to make improvements and maintain the canal. In addition, the U.S. military maintained bases in the Canal Zone to protect the important strategic site.

Throughout the period, Panamanian nationalists clamored for more beneficial terms than those in the 1903 treaty. A 1936 agreement increased the annuity paid by the U.S. government to Panamanians, and a 1942 treaty transferred various civil works projects to the Panamanian government and promised additional infrastructure development. Additional revisions occurred in the 1950s, including the flying of the Panamanian flag in the Canal Zone as the United States tried to address issues of sovereignty.

Despite compromises, tensions continued to mount. In January 1964, the most serious confrontation over the canal developed. American high school students, supported by their parents, refused to raise the Panamanian flag at the Canal Zone's Balboa High School. Panamanians marched to show their flag near the school. As they neared, an American mob attacked them, tearing the flag. The news quickly spread, and thirty thousand Panamanians descended on the main avenue approaching the Canal Zone. Snipers poured hundreds of rounds into the U.S. positions, and U.S. troops fired back. Riots erupted as Panamanians destroyed American businesses.

Panama's President Roberto Chiari suspended diplomatic relations, and hard-liners in Congress urged President Lyndon Johnson to respond with force. However, Johnson chose to negotiate and dispatched Thomas Mann and Secretary of the Army Cyrus Vance to mediate the dispute, which Johnson blamed on the communists.

After four days of fighting and looting, the Panamanian National Guard reestablished order. Four Americans died and eighty-five were wounded. Twenty-four Panamanians died and more than two hundred were wounded. The fighting caused more than $2 million in damage, much of it to American businesses.

While blaming the communists, most American policymakers could not ignore the animosity that provoked the confrontation. In the aftermath, the Chiari government and the Johnson administration opened negotiations to address Panama's grievances. Ultimately Washington agreed to terminate the 1903 treaty in return for granting U.S. control and operation of the canal until 1999. Despite strong public criticism, Johnson submitted the treaty to the Senate in 1967. It languished there as Johnson's attentions focused on Vietnam and internal events in Panama sabotaged acceptance. It would take another Democratic president, more than a decade later, to push through Johnson's original ideas.

The Panama Canal Treaty

In 1977, President Jimmy Carter took control of the White House. One of his first goals regarding Latin America was the settlement of the Canal Zone debates. Carter believed that a treaty would have a positive impact on U.S.–Latin American relations. Carter and Secretary of State Cyrus Vance built on negotiations begun by Johnson and continued by Henry Kissinger during the presidencies of Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford. The Carter administration pushed hard for a treaty, dealing closely with Panamanian dictator Omar Torrijos, who had controlled the country since 1968. Tense negotiations headed by Ellsworth Bunker and Sol Linowitz continued for nearly a year.

Finally, on 11 August 1977, the parties held a press conference in Panama and unveiled the treaty. It had several parts, starting with the process of returning the canal to Panama by 31 December 1999. Second, the treaty guaranteed the rights of American workers in the Canal Zone through their retirement. Third, it provided the United States with a permanent right to defend the canal's neutrality. Last, Washington increased payment for its use of the canal from $2.3 million to $40 million annually and promised additional economic and military assistance.

The announcement of the treaty stirred debates in both countries. Since the treaty required approval by the Panamanian people (as outlined in their constitution) and confirmation by a two-thirds vote of the U.S. Senate, victory appeared far away in April 1977. In Panama, Torrijos pushed through the plebiscite in Panama, although not without opposition. In the United States, the Senate began deliberations in the summer of 1978. President Carter and his staff pushed hard, winning the support of diverse groups including the Pentagon (which believed the canal had outlived its tactical purpose) and the Catholic Church along with distinguished diplomats including Kissinger. Over time, Carter won the backing of important senators from both parties including Senate Majority Leader Robert Byrd (D-West Virginia) and Senate Minority Leader Howard Baker (R-Tennessee). With promises of compromise and pork barrel projects, the pro-treaty group moved forward.

Throughout the summer the foes battled on the floor of the Senate and in public forums. Carter secured an extra promise from Torrijos guaranteeing the right of the United States to defend the Canal Zone after 2000, which won additional votes. In March 1978, the Senate approved the neutrality part of the treaty 68–32. By mid-April, they approved the other part of the treaty, outlining administration through 2000, by the same vote. Carter, the Senate leadership, and pro-treaty forces enjoyed a major victory. The president emphasized that the treaty symbolized the efforts by the United States to create not only positive relations with Panama but with other Third World countries. The goal was partnerships based on mutual respect.

Relinquishing U.S. Control, 1979–1999

The process of turning over the canal began in October 1979, as Carter's term was ending. The Panamanians gained control over the former Canal Zone, and the Panama Canal Commission, composed of Americans and

Panamanians, began the process of overseeing the transition. In the summer of 1980 a Committee on the Environment and a Coordinating Committee began working to implement sections of the treaty.

During the 1980s, the Panama Canal remained an issue of concern to the United States. Some thought that the election of Ronald Reagan might mean that the treaty would be overturned as he had been one of its leading critics during the presidential debates. But in fact the movement toward transition continued unabated during his two terms. More Panamanians became integrated into the Canal Zone as policemen and pilots, and American employees there gradually were weaned off their ties to the U.S. government.

Furthermore, the presence of the left-wing Sandinistas in Nicaragua in the 1980s and possible threats in the Caribbean led Americans to continue to view the Canal Zone and its defense installations as vital to U.S. national security. This made them fearful of provoking a confrontation in Panama. Reagan administration officials worked with General Manuel Noriega, who had replaced Torrijo after his death in a mysterious plane crash. Noriega allowed the contras—right-wing foes of the Sandinista government who were supported by the Reagan administration—to train in his country. While rumors had swirled for many years about Noriega's ties to the drug trade, U.S. leaders ignored them. In fact, the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) and Attorney General Edwin Meese sent letters of commendation to the Panamanian dictator. Noriega also regularly received U.S. dignitaries, including Vice President George H. W. Bush, to discuss policy issues.

By the middle of the 1980s, problems began to develop. As the Iran-Contra scandal blossomed and Reagan's credibility suffered, the tales of Noriega's drug ties became more prominent. Senator John Kerry (D-Massachusetts) held hearings in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee's Subcommittee on Terrorism, Narcotics, and International Operations that further substantiated published reports about Noriega's drug trafficking and money laundering.

When George H. W. Bush took office as president in 1989, he began concerted efforts to deal with Noriega, building on some late efforts by Reagan. The problem became more complicated when a Miami grand jury indicted Noriega on drug charges in 1988. Tensions heightened in early 1989 when Noriega overturned an election. Critics jumped on Bush's failure to do anything. Even when an opportunity presented itself in the form of a coup by disenchanted Panamanians, he did nothing. Soon after, Noriega defiantly declared a "state of war" between Panama and the United States, often brandishing a machete at mass anti-American rallies. With relations deteriorating, Panamanians killed an off-duty marine, and the Panamanian Defense Forces beat an American officer and threatened to rape his wife. Bush concluded that he had enough.

On 20 December, the United States attacked Panama with more than twenty thousand men. Code-named Operation Just Cause, the Pentagon employed all the latest weaponry including Stealth bombers. Hundreds of Panamanian civilians perished in the cross fire between the Panamanian Defense Forces and U.S. troops (twenty-three Americans died). The fighting inflicted more than $1 billion of damage in Panama City, especially in the poorest areas, where thousands found themselves homeless. Noriega evaded capture for fifteen days, but on 3 January 1990 he finally left his sanctuary in the papal nunciature (papal diplomatic mission headed by a nuncio), and DEA agents immediately put him on a plane to Miami.

In the aftermath of Operation Just Cause, the United States installed in office the legally elected president, Guillermo Endara. Washington poured more money into the country, but unemployment and poverty remained high. In 1994, one of Noriega's cronies, Ernesto Pérez Balladares, won the presidency. As for Noriega, an American jury sentenced him to forty years in jail without parole. Most observers concluded that despite Noriega's removal, the invasion accomplished little in stopping the drug trade and in fact created more animosity toward the United States.

In the aftermath of the invasion, despite calls from some Americans for a total renegotiation of the Panama Canal Treaty, it moved forward. In September 1990, Gilberto Guardia Fabréga became the Panama Canal Commission administrator, the first Panamanian in such a high position. Throughout the 1990s, the process continued. In 1997, the Panama Canal Authority was created, the final step toward removing any U.S. government control. In September 1998, Albert Alemán Zubieta became the first administrator of the Panama Canal Authority. Soon after, Panama's legislative assembly created the Canal Authority's budget for its first fiscal year of 2000.

All of these steps led to great fanfare for the celebration of 14 December 1999. Foreign dignitaries attended the ceremony where the United States completely relinquished its claim to the canal. Former president Jimmy Carter signed for the United States while Panamanian President Mireya Moscoso represented the new owners. Officially, on 31 December 1999, the Panama Canal became the possession of the nation of Panama.

Bibliography

Collin, Richard H. Theodore Roosevelt's Caribbean: The Panama Canal, the Monroe Doctrine, and the Latin American Context. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1990.

Conniff, Michael L. Black Labor on a White Canal: Panama, 1904– 1981. Pittsburgh, Pa.: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1985.

———. Panama and the United States: The Forced Alliance. Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1992.

Dinges, John. Our Man in Panama: The Shrewd Rise and Brutal Fall of Manuel Noriega. New York: Random House, 1990. Rev. ed., New York: Times Books, 1991.

Furlong, William L., and Margaret E. Scranton. The Dynamics of Foreign Policymaking: The President, the Congress, and the Panama Canal Treaties. Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press, 1984.

Hogan, J. Michael. The Panama Canal in American Politics: Domestic Advocacy and the Evolution of Policy. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1986.

LaFeber, Walter. The Panama Canal: The Crisis in Historical Perspective. New York: Oxford University Press, 1978. Updated ed., New York: Oxford University Press, 1989.

Leonard, Thomas M. Panama, the Canal, and the United States: A Guide to Issues and References. Claremont, Calif.: Regina Books, 1993.

Major, John. Prize Possession: The United States and the Panama Canal, 1903–1979. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1993.

McCullough, David G. The Path between the Seas: The Creation of the Panama Canal, 1870–1914. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1977.

Moffett, George D., 3d. The Limits of Victory: The Ratification of the Panama Canal Treaties. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1985.

Scranton, Margaret E. The Noriega Years: U.S.-Panamanian Relations, 1981–1990. Boulder, Colo.: Lynne Rienner, 1991.

Columbia Encyclopedia: Panama Canal,

waterway across the Isthmus of Panama, connecting the Atlantic (by way of the Caribbean Sea) and Pacific oceans, built by the United States (1904–14) on territory leased from the republic of Panama. The canal, running S and SE from Limón Bay at Colón on the Atlantic to the Bay of Panama at Balboa on the Pacific, is 40 mi (64 km) long from shore to shore and 51 mi (82 km) long between channel entrances. The Pacific terminus is 27 mi (43 km) east of the Caribbean terminus. The minimum depth is 41 ft (12.5 m).

From Limón Bay a ship is raised by Gatún Locks (a set of three) to an elevation 85 ft (25.9 m) above sea level, traverses Gatún Lake, then crosses the Continental Divide through Gaillard (formerly Culebra) Cut and is lowered by Pedro Miguel Lock to Miraflores Lake and then by the Miraflores Locks (a set of two) to sea level. The average tidal range on the Atlantic side is less than a foot (.3 m); that on the Pacific side is 12.6 ft (3.8 m).

U.S. Interest in a Canal

Building an interoceanic canal was suggested early in Spanish colonial times. The United States, interested since the late 18th cent. in trading voyages to the coast of the Pacific Northwest, became greatly concerned with plans for a canal after settlers had begun to pour into Oregon and California. Active negotiations led in 1846 to a treaty, by which the republic of New Granada (consisting of present-day Panama and Colombia) granted the United States transit rights across the Isthmus of Panama in return for a guarantee of the neutrality and sovereignty of New Granada.

The isthmus gained more importance after the United States acquired (1848) California and the gold rush began, and the trans-Panama RR was built (1848–55) with U.S. capital. At the same time, interest in an alternate route, the Nicaragua Canal, was strong in both Great Britain and the United States. Rivalry between the two countries was ended by the Clayton-Bulwer Treaty (1850), which guaranteed that neither power should have exclusive rights or threaten the neutrality of an interoceanic route. In the 1870s and 80s the United States tried unsuccessfully to induce Great Britain to abrogate or amend the Clayton-Bulwer Treaty.

After the United States acquired territory in the Caribbean and in the Pacific as a result of the Spanish-American War (1899), U.S. control over an isthmian canal seemed imperative. Following protracted negotiations, a U.S.-British agreement (see Hay-Pauncefote Treaties) was made in 1901, giving the United States the right to build, and by implication fortify, an isthmian canal. It was then necessary for Congress to choose between Nicaragua or Panama as the route for the canal.

French Attempts

Meanwhile a concession for building a sea-level canal in Panama (granted 1878) was acquired by a French company under Ferdinand de Lesseps. Work began in 1881, but poor planning, disease among the workers, construction troubles, and inadequate financing drove the company into bankruptcy in 1889. Amid charges of corruption and mismanagement, French courts transferred (1894) the rights and assets to a new company. Although the alternate Nicaragua route was favored by the United States, an American representative of the French company, William Nelson Cromwell, began working vigorously to interest the United States in the Panama route, and Philippe Bunau-Varilla, a leading figure in the new company, devoted himself to the cause. When a U.S. commission recommended a canal through Nicaragua in 1901, Bunau-Varilla persuaded the French directors to reduce the price of the company's rights, gaining the support of Mark Hanna and later of the new President, Theodore Roosevelt. The commission reversed its recommendation, and Congress authorized purchase of the French company's rights and construction of the Panama Canal.

Insurrection against Colombia

The Hay-Herrán Treaty, signed (Jan., 1903) with Colombia, would have given the United States a strip of land across the Isthmus of Panama in return for an initial cash payment of $10 million and an annuity of $250,000, but the Colombian senate refused to ratify it. An insurrection, involving Bunau-Varilla and other proponents of the canal as well as the regional population, was encouraged by the United States. Panama rose in revolt on Nov. 3, 1903, declaring itself independent of Colombia. Invoking the treaty of 1846, the United States sent an American warship to Panama, and its presence prevented Colombian troops from quelling the outbreak. The new republic was formally recognized three days later, and on Nov. 17 the Hay–Bunau-Varilla Treaty was signed, granting to the United States, in return for the same terms offered Colombia, exclusive control of a canal zone in perpetuity, other sites necessary for defense, and sanitary control of Panama City and Colón. Colombia's efforts to secure redress for the loss of Panama later resulted in ratification of a treaty (1921) by which the United States paid Colombia $25 million, and Colombia recognized the independence of Panama.

Construction and Improvements

Construction of a lock canal was decided on in 1906. The first three years were spent in the development of construction facilities, surveys, and disease control. The canal was informally opened Aug. 15, 1914; formal dedication took place on July 12, 1920. The total cost was $336,650,000, and c.240 million cu yd (184 million cu m) of earth were evacuated. Madden Dam, which stores additional water for the locks, was completed in 1935.

In 1939 treaty amendments increased Panama's annuity to $434,000 (retroactive to 1934 to offset dollar devaluation), provided for a transisthmian highway, and (at Panama's insistence) abrogated the U.S. guarantee of the neutrality and sovereignty of Panama. Although in the same year Congress authorized construction of a third set of locks, World War II intervened, and the plans were shelved. In 1955 the annuity was raised to $1,930,000, and the United States undertook to build a high-level bridge (completed 1962) over the Pacific side of the canal. The Gaillard Cut was widened in 1969 to permit two-way traffic. The largest modern merchant and fighting ships, however, cannot pass through the canal.

Panamanian Control

In the 1960s there was increasing agitation in Panama to achieve greater Panamanian control over the canal, resulting in the negotiation of a new treaty (1967) which failed, however, to gain ratification by the Panamanian government. In 1977 negotiations were successful, and a new treaty was signed. It returned the Panama Canal Zone to Panama while setting up joint U.S.-Panamanian control of the canal until the end of 1999, when Panama gained full control. A separate treaty (1979) guarantees the permanent neutrality of the canal. In 0ct., 2006, Panamanian voters approved expanding the canal by adding a third series of locks paralleling the existing locks; the new locks, whose construction was inaugurated in 2007, will be larger, enabling wider, longer vessels with deeper drafts to transit the Isthmus. The plan will utilize the work begun but abandoned on a third series of locks prior to World War II.

Bibliography

See G. W. Goethals, The Panama Canal: An Engineering Treatise (1916); M. P. DuVal, And the Mountains Will Move (1947, repr. 1968); D. G. Payne, The Impossible Dream (1972); J. P. Speller, The Panama Canal (1972); G. H. Summ and T. Kelly, The Good Neighbors: America, Panama, and the 1977 Canal Treaties (1988); A. C. Richard, The Panama Canal in American National Consciousness, 1870–1990 (1990).

Intelligence Encyclopedia: Panama Canal

From the time of its opening in 1914 until 1977, when the United States transferred it to the nation of Panama, the Panama Canal was a symbol of U.S. influence in the Americas and, ultimately, the world. Despite the bitterness that attended the debate over its transfer to Panama, combined with fears of foreign takeover that surfaced when Panama took formal control on December 31, 1999, the Canal lacks the strategic importance it enjoyed in its heyday. Still, it remains one of several important "chokepoints"—areas in which the flow of the world's oil supply traverses a narrow passage vulnerable to attack—and for this reason, the United States remains committed to the Canal's defense.

Early History

From the earliest voyages of discovery in the area of Central America and the Caribbean, it became clear that a canal across one of Central America's narrowest points would greatly shorten travel and transport time between Atlantic and Pacific ports. In 1835, the U.S. Senate passed a resolution in favor of building such a canal, but through Nicaragua. In 1881, a French team under the leadership of Ferdinand de Lesseps, builder of the Suez Canal, attempted to build a canal across the isthmus of Panama, but the project suffered a number of misfortunes, including bankruptcy and outbreaks of disease among workers. The French project was scrapped for good in 1898.

Meanwhile, the idea of a canal remained a topic of debate in the United States, which still favored a route through Nicaragua. After much political wrangling, however, Congress in 1902 passed the Spooner Act, which authorized the United States to purchase the assets of the French company and begin building a canal through Panama. The latter at that time belonged to Colombia, and when treaty negotiations with Colombia stalled, U.S. authorities gave their support to a declaration of independence by Panama in November 1903. Colombia, convulsed by four years of civil war, could do little to stop the act of secession, and the United States completed a treaty with the new nation of Panama. In February 1904, Congress created the Panama Canal Zone.

The building of the Canal took place over a 10-year period beginning in the summer of 1904. Its builders, who numbered as many as 40,000 at any one time, consisted of American and European engineers and technicians, with Latin American and Chinese immigrant labor. Among the challenges they confronted were disease, carried by mosquitoes that lived in the swampy lands along the canal route, and topography. Rather than build at sea level, the engineers finally decided on a plan involving a series of locks and an earthen dam, which created what was then the world's largest artificial lake, Gatun. The Canal—which actually follows a route from the northwest to the southeast, rather than east to west—opened on August 15, 1914.

Rethinking the Canal

Although the Canal was a vital lifeline during the two world wars, by the time of the Korean War, its limitations had begun to show. The Canal could not accommodate very large aircraft carriers, an increasingly critical aspect of U.S. national security. By the mid-1970s, most large oil tankers were also too big for passage.

Coupled with the physical issues were political ones associated with the growth of anti-American sentiment in Panama and elsewhere. On January 9, 1964, American refusal to fly the Panamanian flag over a high school in the Canal Zone sparked riots that left 23 Panamanians and four U.S. Marines dead. Afterward, Panama called for new treaty discussions with the United States.

The treaties. On September 7, 1977, President James E. Carter and Panamanian military dictator Omar Torrijos signed the Panama Canal Treaty, which abolished the Canal Zone, terminated all prior treaties regarding the Canal, and provided for the full transfer of the Canal to Panama on December 31, 1999. A separate Neutrality Treaty guaranteed the neutrality of the Canal in perpetuity.

The Neutrality Treaty and several aspects of the Panama Canal Treaty served to protect U.S. interests—interests that, in the view of many Treaty supporters, were best supported by a voluntary transfer of the Canal. The alternative, supporters maintained, would be a political and public-relations disaster for the United States, and would only serve to bolster Latin American resentment against the wealthy, powerful neighbor to the north.

Opponents to the Canal agreements, led by future President Ronald Reagan, cited the Treaty as one further sign of America's worldwide retreat, and warned of foreign takeover. Nevertheless, the transfer plan enjoyed support from a number of Republicans, including former President Gerald R. Ford and former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger. In 1978, the Senate ratified both treaties, and in 1979 Congress passed the Panama Canal Act. Among its many provisions, the Act created the Panama Canal Commission, which would act as custodian over the Canal for the next 20 years.

The transfer. Panama has not fared well in the years since the Treaty. The United States deposed another dictator, Manuel Noriega, in 1989, acting partly to protect the Canal from takeover. The country has been run by civilian governments since then, but these have proven inadequate to solve the nation's domestic problems. As the December, 1999, deadline loomed, some Panamanians expressed reservations regarding the transfer of the Canal.

On the one hand, its acquisition would greatly enhance national prestige, but many wondered if any small, poor country could undertake an operation hitherto over-seen by the world's leading superpower. Similar concerns in the United States led to a proposal regarding a continued U.S. military presence. However, talks between the two nations ended in September, 1998, without any such agreement.

On the last day of the 1900s, U.S. Army Secretary Louis Caldera led a delegation that officially turned over control of the Canal to Panama, represented by President Mireya Moscoso. Minutes before the hoisting of the Panamanian flag over the Canal administration building, a triumphant Moscoso proclaimed to her people, "The Canal is ours!"

The Canal Today

Subsequent events have not served to reinforce this initial enthusiasm. The Canal has faced several environmental problems, including a lack of rainwater, important to the transport of ships through its 12 locks, caused by droughts resulting from the El Niño weather phenomenon. Political and economic corruption has also shadowed the Canal. Not only did a local land-sale scam involving Canal properties bilk investors, but in November, 2000, it was discovered that millions of dollars in U.S. equipment (including firearms) from the former Canal Zone had disappeared.

Some of the fears raised prior to the transition, however, have proven illusory. One was the question of Chinese control, a powerful issue in Washington due to allegations of widespread Chinese espionage against the United States during the administration of President William J. Clinton. When the Hong Kong conglomerate Hutchison-Whampoa gained a contract to manage ports on the Atlantic and Pacific sides, this raised concerns that the Chinese might use this as an opportunity to seize control of the Canal. Subsequent events, however—or rather, the lack of events in this regard—have served to support the view of those who pointed out that China has never been expansionist beyond Asia.

If the Canal faces a serious foreign threat, it is likely to come from much closer to home, such as from Colombia, which continually teeters on the brink of anarchy as its government battles drug traffickers, revolutionaries, and paramilitary groups. At the beginning of the twenty-first century, many international observers expressed grave concerns that Panama in general, and the Canal in particular, could be drawn into these struggles.

In any case, the Canal lacks the strategic significance it once held, and in 2000 only 1.7 percent of total U.S. petroleum imports passed through it. Though as many as 10,000 vessels navigate the Canal each year, traffic has declined since the peak year, 1970, and today 10 percent of the world's cargo ships are too large to traverse it. Additionally, the Trans-Panama Pipeline, opened in October 1982, could be used to ship oil across the Panamanian isthmus if the Canal were closed. Discussions regarding an enlarged or alternate canal are ongoing, though it is unlikely such a project could undertaken without a wealthy nation or nations to underwrite it.

History

The earliest mention of a canal across the isthmus of Central America dates back to 1524, when Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor and king of Spain, suggested that a canal in Panama would ease the voyage for ships travelling to and from Ecuador and Peru.^[4]

Given the strategic situation of Central America as a narrow land dividing two great oceans, other forms of trade links were attempted over the years. The ill-fated Darien scheme was an attempt launched by the Kingdom of Scotland in 1698 to set up an overland trade route, but was defeated by the generally inhospitable conditions, and abandoned in 1700.^[5] Finally, the Panama Railway was built across the isthmus, opening in 1855. This overland link greatly facilitated trade, and this vital piece of infrastructure was a key factor in the selection of the later canal route.

Construction work on the Gaillard Cut is shown in this photograph from 1907

An all-water route between the oceans was still seen as the ideal solution, and the idea of a canal was revived at various times, and for various routes; a route through Nicaragua was investigated several times. Finally, enthused by the success of the Suez Canal, the French, under Ferdinand de Lesseps, began construction on a sea-level canal (i.e., without locks) through the province of Panama (as it was then) on January 1, 1880. The French began work in a rush with insufficient prior study of the geology and hydrology of the region.^[6] Mosquito-born diseases, particularly malaria and yellow fever, sickened and killed vast numbers of employees, ranging from labourers to top directors of the French Company. Public health measures were ineffective because the role of the mosquito was then unknown. These conditions made it impossible to maintain an experienced work force as fearful technical employees quickly returned to France. Even the hospitals contributed to the problem, providing breeding places for mosquitos inside the unscreened wards. Actual conditions were hushed-up in France to avoid recruitment problems.^[6] In 1893, after a great deal of work, the French scheme was abandoned due to disease and the sheer difficulty of building a sea-level canal, as well as lack of French field experience, like downpours causing rust to steel equipment.^[7] The high toll from disease was one of the major factors in the failure, as many as 22,000 workers are estimated to have died during the main period of French construction (1881–1889).^[6]

According to Stephen Kinzer's 2006 book Overthrow, in 1898 the chief of the French Canal Syndicate (a group that owned large swathes of land across Panama), Philippe Bunau Varilla, hired William Nelson Cromwell, of the US law firm Sullivan & Cromwell) to lobby the US Congress to build a canal across Panama, and not across Nicaragua.

In 1902, after having run into a 10-cent Nicaraguan postal stamp produced in the US by the American Bank Note Company erroneously depicting a fuming Momotambo volcano (which was nearly dormant and stands more than 160 km (100 miles) from the proposed Nicaraguan canal path) and taking advantage of a particularly volcanic year in the Caribbean, Cromwell planted a story in the New York Sun reporting that the Momotambo volcano had erupted and caused a series of seismic shocks. He thereafter sent leaflets with the above stamps pasted on them to all U.S. Senators as witness to the volcanic activity in Nicaragua.

On June 19, 1902, three days after senators received the stamps, they voted for the Panama route for the canal. For his lobbying efforts, Cromwell received the sum of $800,000.^[8]

The United States, under Theodore Roosevelt, bought out the French equipment and excavations, and began work on May 4, 1904, after helping Panama achieve independence from Colombia. In exchange for U.S. help, Panama would give the United States control of the Panama Canal Zone. A significant investment was made in eliminating disease from the area, particularly yellow fever and malaria, the causes of which had recently been discovered (see Health measures during the construction of the Panama Canal). With the diseases under control, and after significant work on preparing the infrastructure, construction of an elevated canal with locks began in earnest. The Americans also gradually replaced the old French equipment with machinery designed for a larger scale of work, quickening the pace of construction.^[6]

In 1907 US President Theodore Roosevelt appointed George Washington Goethals as chief engineer of the Panama Canal. The building of the Canal was completed in 1914, two years ahead of the target date of June 1, 1916. The canal was formally opened on August 15, 1914 with the transit of the cargo ship Ancon.^[9] Coincidentally, this was also the same month that fighting in World War I began in Europe.

The advances in hygiene resulted in a relatively low death toll during the American construction; still, 5,609 workers died during this period (1904–1914).^[10] This brought the total death toll for the construction of the canal to around 27,500.

By the 1930s it was seen that water supply would be an issue for the canal; this prompted the building of the Madden Dam across the Chagres River above Gatun Lake. The dam, completed in 1935, created Alajuela Lake, which acts as additional water storage for the canal.^[11]^[12] In 1939, construction began on a further major improvement: a new set of locks for the canal, large enough to carry the larger warships which the U.S. had under construction, or planned for future construction. The work proceeded for several years, and significant excavation was carried out on the new approach channels; but the project was canceled after World War II.^[13]^[14]

USS Missouri passes through the canal

After the war, United States' control of the canal and the Canal Zone surrounding it became contentious as relations between Panama and the U.S. became increasingly tense. Many Panamanians felt that the canal zone rightfully belonged to Panama; student protests were met by the fencing in of the zone and an increased military presence.^[15] Negotiations toward a new settlement began in 1974, and resulted in the Torrijos-Carter Treaties. Signed by President of the United States Jimmy Carter and Omar Torrijos of Panama on September 7, 1977, this set in motion the process of handing the canal over to Panamanian control for free as long as Panama signed a treaty guaranteeing the permanent neutrality of the Canal (Neutrality Treaty) and allowed the U.S. to come back anytime. Though controversial within the U.S., the treaty led to full Panamanian control effective at noon on December 31, 1999, and control of the canal was handed over to the Panama Canal Authority (ACP).

Before this handover, the government of Panama held an international bid to negotiate a 25-year contract for operation of the Canal's container shipping ports (chiefly two facilities at the Atlantic and Pacific outlets), which was won by the Chinese firm Hutchison Whampoa, a Hong Kong-based shipping concern whose owner Li Ka Shing is the wealthiest man in China.

Layout

The canal consists of seventeen artificial lakes, several improved and artificial channels, and two sets of locks. An additional artificial lake, Alajuela Lake, acts as a reservoir for the canal. The layout of the canal as seen by a ship transiting from the Pacific end to the Atlantic is as follows:^[16] Due to the local geography, the main direction of sailing is north-westward, whereas the global direction from Pacific to Atlantic is eastward.

From the buoyed entrance channel in the Gulf of Panama (Pacific side), ships travel 13.2 km (8.2 mi) up the channel to the Miraflores locks, passing under the Bridge of the Americas
The two-stage Miraflores lock system, including the approach wall, is 1.7 kilometres (1.1 mi) long, with a total lift of 16.5 meters (54 ft) at mid-tide
The artificial Miraflores Lake is the next stage, 1.7 kilometers (1.0 mi) long, and 16.5 metres (54 ft) above sea level
The single-stage Pedro Miguel lock, which is 1.4 kilometres (0.8 mi) long, is the last part of the ascent with a lift of 9.5 meters (31 ft) up to the main level of the canal
The Gaillard (Culebra) Cut slices 12.6 kilometres (7.8 mi) through the continental divide at an altitude of 26 metres (85 ft), and passes under the Centennial Bridge
The Chagres River (Río Chagres), a natural waterway enhanced by the damming of Lake Gatún, runs west about 8.5 kilometres (5.3 mi), merging into Lake Gatun
Gatun Lake, an artificial lake formed by the building of the Gatun Dam, carries vessels 24.2 kilometers (15.0 mi) across the isthmus
The Gatún locks, a three-stage flight of locks 1.9 kilometres (1.2 mi) long, drop ships back down to sea level
A 3.2 kilometer (2.0 mi) channel forms the approach to the locks from the Atlantic side
Limón Bay (Bahía Limón), a huge natural harbour, provides an anchorage for some ships awaiting transit, and runs 8.7 kilometres (5.4 mi) to the outer breakwater

Thus, total length of the canal is 77.1 km (47.9mi).

Canal lock size

Initially the locks at Gatun had been designed as 28.5 metres wide. In 1908 the United States Navy requested that the locks should be increased to have a width of at least 36 metres. This would allow for the passage of US naval ships. Eventually a compromise was made and the locks were to be constructed to a width of 33 metres. Each lock is 300 metres long with the walls ranging in thickness from 15 metres at the base to 3 metres at the top. The central wall between the parallel locks at Gatun has a thickness of 18 metres and stands in excess of 24 metres in height. The lock gates are made from steel and measures an average of 2 metres thick, 19.5 metres in length and stand 20 metres in height.^[17]

Features

Point	Coordinates (links to map & photo sources)	Notes
Northern end	9°′″N 79°′″W / 9.3105, -79.9197 (Northern end)
Southern end	8°′″N 79°′″W / 8.9326, -79.5589 (Southern end)

Tolls

RORO carriers, such as this one at Miraflores locks, are among the largest ships to use the canal

Tolls for the canal are decided by the Panama Canal Authority and are based on vessel type, size, and the type of cargo carried.^[18]

For container ships, the toll is assessed per "TEU" (Twenty-foot Equivalent Unit), which is the size of a container measuring feet ( m) by feet ( m) by 8.5 feet (6 m by 2.4 m by 2.6 m). Effective May 1, 2007, this toll is US$54 per TEU. A Panamax container ship may carry up to 4,400 TEU. A reduced toll is charged for container ships "in ballast"; ie. traveling empty, with no cargo or passengers.

Most other types of vessel pay a toll per PC/UMS net ton, in which one "ton" is actually a volume of 100 cubic feet (2.8 m³). (The calculation of tonnage for commercial vessels is quite complex.) As of 2007, this toll is US$3.26 per ton for the first 10,000 tons, US$3.19 per ton for the next 10,000 tons, and US$3.14 per ton thereafter. As with container ships, a reduced toll is charged for freight ships "in ballast".

Small vessels are assessed tolls based on their length. As of 2007, these are:

Length of vessel	Toll
Up to 15.240 metres (50 ft)	US$500
More than 15.240 metres (50 ft) up to 24.384 metres (80 ft)	US$750
More than 24.384 metres (80 ft) up to 30.480 metres (100 ft)	US$1,000
More than 30.480 metres (100 ft)	US$1,500

The most expensive toll for canal passage to date was charged on May 30, 2006 to the container ship Maersk Dellys, which paid US$249,165.00 for passage. The least expensive toll was 36 cents to American adventurer Richard Halliburton who swam the canal in 1928.^[19] The average toll is around US$54,000.

Current issues

Ninety years since its opening, the canal continues to enjoy great success. Even though world shipping — and the size and ships themselves — has changed markedly since the canal was designed, it continues to be a vital link in world trade, carrying more cargo than ever before, with less overhead. Nevertheless, the canal certainly faces a number of potential problems.

Efficiency and maintenance

The administration Building of the Panama Canal is in Balboa, Panama

There were fears that efficiency and maintenance would suffer following the U.S. withdrawal; however, this does not appear to be the case, and the canal's efficiency appears to be improving under Panamanian control.^[20] Canal Waters Time (CWT), the average time it takes a vessel to navigate the canal, including waiting time, is a key measure of efficiency; according to the ACP, CWT is decreasing.

The Panama Canal Authority claims that the waterway's rate of accidents is at a record low.^[21]

Increasing volumes of imports from Asia which previously landed in the U.S. west coast ports are now traveling through the canal to the east coast.^[22] The total number of vessel transits in fiscal year 1999 was 14,336; this fell to a low of 13,154 in 2003, due at least in part to global economic factors, but has risen to 14,194 in 2006 (the canal’s fiscal year runs from October to September). However, this has been coupled with a steady rise in average ship size and in the numbers of Panamax vessels transiting, so that the total tonnage carried has risen steadily from 227.9 million PC/UMS tons in fiscal year 1999 to 296.0 million tons in 2006.^[23]^[3] Given the negative impact of vessel size on the rate of transits (for example, the inability of large vessels to cross in the Gaillard Cut), this represents significant overall growth in canal capacity, despite the reduction in total transits. The canal set a traffic record on March 13, 2006, when 1,070,023 PC/UMS tons transited the waterway,^[24] beating the previous record of 1,005,551 PC/UMS tons set on March 16, 2004.^[25]

A bucket dredge works to deepen and widen the canal.

The canal administration has invested nearly US$1 billion in widening and modernizing the canal, with the aim of increasing capacity by 20%.^[26] The canal authority cites a number of major improvements, including the widening and straightening of the Gaillard Cut to reduce restrictions on crossing vessels, the deepening of the navigational channel in Gatun Lake to reduce draft restrictions and improve water supply, and the deepening of the Atlantic and Pacific Entrances of the Canal. This is supported by new vessels, such as a new drill barge and suction dredger, and an increase of the tugboat fleet by 20%. In addition, improvements have been made to the operating machinery of the canal, including an increased and improved tug locomotive fleet, the replacement of more than 16 kilometres of locomotive track, and new lock machinery controls. Improvements have been made to the traffic management system to allow more efficient control over ships in the canal.^[27]

The withdrawal of the U.S. has allowed Panama to sell excess electricity produced by the canal's dams, which was previously prohibited by the U.S. government. Only 25% of the hydroelectric power produced in the canal system is required to run the canal.

Capacity

The canal is presently handling more vessel traffic than had ever been envisioned by its builders. In 1934 it was estimated that the maximum capacity of the canal would be around 80 million tons per year;^[28] as noted above, canal traffic in 2005 consisted of 278.8 million tons of shipping.

Despite the gains which have been made in efficiency, the canal is soon expected to approach its maximum capacity. An additional complication is that the proportion of large (close to Panamax-sized) ships transiting is increasing steadily; this may result in a further reduction in the number of transits, even if cargo tonnage rises. In any case, if the canal is to continue to serve the needs of world shipping, action will be required to increase its capacity.

Gatun Lake, pictured here in 2000, is having difficulty supplying water for the canal's operation

Competition

Despite having enjoyed a privileged position for many years, the canal is increasingly facing competition from other quarters. Although remote, speculation continues over a possible new canal through Colombia, Nicaragua or the Isthmus of Tehuantepec in Mexico, that will be capable of accommodating post-Panamax vessels, and two private proposals for a railway linking ports on the two coasts.^{[citation needed]}

Critics have also voiced their concerns over the planned increase in canal tolls, suggesting that the Suez Canal may become a viable alternative for cargo en route from Asia to the U.S. East Coast. Nevertheless, demand for the Panama Canal continues to rise.

The increasing rate of melting of ice in the Arctic Ocean has led to speculation that the Northwest Passage may become viable for commercial shipping at some point in the future. This route would save 9,300 kilometres (5,800 mi) on the route from Asia to Europe compared with the Panama Canal, possibly leading to a diversion of some traffic to that route. However, such a route would still hold significant problems due to ice, as well as unresolved territorial issues.^[29]^[30]

Water issues

A significant problem is the decreasing average amount of water in Gatún Lake, caused largely by deforestation. 202,000 m³ (52 million U.S. gallons) of fresh water from the lake are drained into the sea by the locks every time a ship transits the canal;^[31] and although there is sufficient annual rainfall to replenish the water used by the canal in a year, the seasonal nature of this rainfall means that the water must be stored from one rainy season to the next. Although Gatún lake can store some of this water, the rainforest has traditionally played a major role by absorbing this rain, and then releasing it at a steady rate into the lake. With the reduction in vegetation, rain flows quickly down the deforested slopes into the lake, from where the excess is spilled out into the ocean. This results in a shortfall of water during the dry season, when there is comparatively little water flowing to the lake to replenish it. Deforestation also causes silt to be more easily eroded from the area around Gatún Lake and collect at its bottom, reducing its capacity.

Future

With demand rising, the canal is positioned to be a significant feature of world shipping for the foreseeable future. However, changes in shipping patterns — particularly the increasing numbers of post-Panamax ships — will necessitate changes to the canal if it is to retain a significant market share. It is anticipated that by 2011, 37% of the world's container ships will be too large for the present canal, and hence a failure to expand would result in a significant loss of market share. The maximum sustainable capacity of the present canal, given some relatively minor improvement work is estimated at between 330 and 340 million PC/UMS tons per year; it is anticipated that this capacity will be reached between 2009 and 2012. Close to 50% of transiting vessels are already using the full width of the locks.^[32]

An enlargement scheme similar to the 1939 Third Lock Scheme, to allow for a greater number of transits and the ability to handle larger ships, has been under consideration for some time.^[33] This enlargement scheme had been approved by the government of Panama.^[34] This proposal to expand the Canal was approved on a national referendum by approximately 80% on October 22, 2006.^[35]

Third Set of Locks Project

Main article: Panama Canal expansion project

The new locks will be in triple flights, with sliding lock gates on each chamber

The current plan is for two new flights of locks: one to the east of the existing Gatún locks, and one southwest of Miraflores locks, each supported by approach channels. Each flight will ascend from ocean level direct to the Gatún Lake level; the existing two-stage ascent at Miraflores / Pedro Miguel will not be replicated. The new lock chambers will feature sliding gates, doubled for safety, and will be 427 metres (1,400 ft) long, 55 metres (180 ft) wide, and 18.3 metres (60 ft) deep; this will allow for the transit of vessels with a beam of up to 49 metres (160 ft), an overall length of up to 366 metres (1,200 ft) and a draft of up to 15 metres (50 ft), equivalent to a container ship carrying around 12,000 20-foot (6.1 m) long containers (TEU).

The new locks will be supported by new approach channels, including a 6.2 kilometre (3.8 mi) channel at Miraflores from the locks to the Gaillard Cut, skirting around Miraflores Lake. Each of these channels will be 218 metres (715 ft) wide, which will require post-Panamax vessels to navigate the channels in one direction at a time. The Gaillard Cut and the channel through Gatún Lake will be widened to no less than 280 metres (918 ft) on the straight portions and no less than 366 metres (1,200 ft) on the bends. The maximum level of Gatún Lake will be raised from reference height 26.7 metres (87.5 ft) to 27.1 metres (89 ft).

The water storage basins adjacent to each lock chamber are staged in height to allow each of them in turn to be filled by gravity as the lock chamber drains.

Each flight of locks will be accompanied by nine water reutilisation basins (three per lock chamber), each basin being approximately 70 metres (230 ft) wide, 430 metres (1410 ft) long and 5.50 metres (18 ft) deep. These gravity-fed basins will allow 60% of the water used in each transit to be reused; the new locks will consequently use 7% less water per transit than each of the existing lock lanes. The deepening of Gatún Lake, and the raising of its maximum water level, will also provide significant extra water storage capacity. These measures are intended to allow the expanded canal to operate without the construction of new reservoirs.

The estimated cost of the project is US$5.25 billion. The project is designed to allow for an anticipated growth in traffic from 280 million PC/UMS tons in 2005 to nearly 510 million PC/UMS tons in 2025; the expanded canal will have a maximum sustainable capacity of approximately 600 million PC/UMS tons per year. Tolls will continue to be calculated based on vessel tonnage, and will not depend on the locks used.

The new locks are expected to open for traffic in 2015. The present locks, which will be 100 years old by that time, will then have greater access for maintenance, and are projected to continue operating indefinitely.^[32] An article in the February 2007 issue of Popular Mechanics magazine describes the plans for the canal, focusing on the engineering aspects of the expansion project.^[36]

On September 3, 2007, work commenced on the expansion of the canal, with thousands of Panamanians at Paraiso, Panama City, witnessing a huge explosion bite into a hill. However the event was marred by the death of a worker, killed when his truck hit an electric pylon. The first phase of the project will be dry excavations of the 218 meter (715 ft) wide trench connecting the Culebra Cut with the Pacific coast, removing 47 million cubic meters of earth and rock. The tendering process for the $3 billion project to build a new set of locks will begin later this year.^[37]

References

^ Scott, William R. (1913). The Americans in Panama. New York, NY: Statler Publishing Company.
^ The Panama Canal. Global Perspectives. Retrieved on 2007-09-03.
^ ^a ^b