Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
doc
DDW 2011
105284591.doc
DDW 2011
105284591.doc
DDW 2011
105284591.doc
DDW 2011
7. Warming tipping points inevitable too late NPR 9 (1/26, Global Warming Is Irreversible, Study Says, All Things Considered, http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=99888903)
Climate change is essentially irreversible, according to a sobering new scientific study. As carbon dioxide emissions continue to rise, the world will experience more and more long-term environmental disruption. The damage will persist even when, and if, emissions are brought under control, says study author Susan Solomon, who is among the world's top climate scientists. "We're used to thinking about pollution problems as things that we can fix," Solomon says. "Smog, we just cut back and everything will be better later. Or haze, you know, it'll go away pretty quickly." That's the case for some of the gases that contribute to climate change, such as methane and nitrous oxide. But as Solomon and colleagues suggest in a new study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, it is not true for the most abundant greenhouse gas: carbon dioxide. Turning off the carbon dioxide emissions won't stop global warming. "People have imagined that if we stopped emitting carbon dioxide that the climate would go back to normal in 100 years or 200 years. What we're showing here is that's not right. It's essentially an irreversible change that will last for more than a thousand years," Solomon says. This is because the oceans are currently soaking up a lot of the planet's excess heat and a lot of the carbon dioxide put into the air. The carbon dioxide and heat will eventually start coming out of the ocean. And that will take place for many hundreds of years. Solomon is a scientist with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Her new study looked at the consequences of this long-term effect in terms of sea level rise and drought.
105284591.doc
DDW 2011
1
1NC Warming 4/4 8. No warming and no impact Taylor 09 (James, Senior Fellow Env. Policy @ Heartland Institute, Naples Daily News, Guest Commentary: Global warming, http://www.naplesnews.com/news/2009/jan/03/guestcommentary-global-warming/) In a pair of recent columns claiming humans are causing a global-warming crisis, Ben Bova disparages mere assertions while saying people need to rely on observable, measurable facts. While Bovas concern about Earths climate is admirable, he should follow his own advice regarding assertions versus facts. Bova asserts Earth has a rising fever. Yet the fact is that
global temperatures are unusually cool. For most of the past 10,000 years temperatures have been 1.0 to 3.0 degrees Celsius warmer than they are today. The 0.6 degree rise in temperatures during the 20th century occurred from the baseline of the little ice age, which saw the coldest global temperatures during the past 10,000 years
Earth has a rising fever only if we pretend the little ice age was normal and ignore Earths long-term temperature facts. Bova asserts the loss of sea ice in the Arctic is threatening the survival of polar bears. Yet the fact is that polar bear numbers have doubled since the 1980s. Moreover, Antarctic sea ice is growing and has been setting records for much of the past year. If global warming is causing receding polar ice, then why is Antarctic sea ice setting growth records? Bova asserts measurements ... show that the rise in global temperatures matches quite closely the increase in carbon dioxide. Yet the fact is that solar scientists at Harvard and other leading universities have published research in the worlds leading scientific journals showing that temperatures
match solar output much more closely than carbon dioxide, even in the 20th century. Bova asserts that as a result of global warming much of our crop land turns to desert. Yet, the fact is that global precipitation and global soil moisture have increased during the 20th century, and the Sahara Desert and other deserts around the world are in retreat.
Bova asserts we run the risk of a breaching a tipping point or a greenhouse cliff where the global climate shifts too rapidly for us to protect ourselves from its drastic effects. Yet, the fact is that in
a recent survey of more than 500 climate scientists from around the world, less than half agreed that assuming climate change will occur, it will occur so suddenly that a lack of preparation could result in devastation of some areas of the world. Bova asserts that in
Californias Yosemite National Park warmer temperatures are allowing mice and pine trees to live at higher altitudes than a century ago. Yet, the fact is that fossilized trees exist at altitudes above the current California tree line, showing that temperatures were significantly warmer 1,000 years ago than today. Plant and animal species are migrating to higher elevations only in comparison to the abnormally cold temperatures of the little ice age that ended just over a century ago. For most of the past 10,000 years, warmer temperatures enabled mice and trees to live at altitudes significantly higher than is possible today. Global-warming activism is long on unsubstantiated assertions and short on objective facts. Only by comparing todays temperatures to the abnormal cold of the little ice are and by completely ignoring the warmer temperatures that predominated during most of the past 10,000 years can global-warming activists paint a picture of a planet suffering a global warming crisis. Moreover, sound
science has thrown cold water on each and every one of the alleged globalwarming crises, such as endangered polar bears, melting ice caps, etc., alleged to result from global warming.
105284591.doc
DDW 2011
1 Warming Good
Warming good for the economyaff exaggerates harms Thomas Gale Moore, CATO Institute senior fellow, 3/25/98. Climate of Fear: Why We Shouldnt Worry About Warming http://www.stanford.edu/~moore/Climate_of_Fear.pdf As an economist, I will not attempt to judge the argument over the effect of greenhouse gases on the climate. The contention that more of those gases will lead to warming seems plausible, but the magnitude of the change appears uncertain. Every few years the major forecasts of warming over the next century have been revised downward. This book assumes that warming may occur over the next hundred years and will focus, consequently, on evaluating the effects of possible changes in climate and the costs of various strategies to slow any shifts in weather patterns. Although some Cassandras have projected rising greenhouse gas emissions for the next two or three hundred years to depict the dire consequences of scorching temperatures, this book will ignore such very, very long run potential apocalypses. We have no idea what the world will be like in a hundred years, much less two or three hundred. There is no sensible way to plan for such periods. Furthermore, history and research support the proposition that a warmer climate is beneficial. Past warm periods have seen dramatic improvements in civilization and human well-being. Fortunately, President Clinton is wrong: our modern industrial economy is less affected by weather than are societies heavily dependent on nature. Higher average temperatures can bring many benefits, including longer growing seasons, a healthier and longer-lived population, and reduced transportation and communication costs. Although not everyone will find a warmer climate in his or her interest, the evidence shows that most individuals, especially those living in higher latitudes, will experience a gain. Climate change will probably be small in tropical areas, so the population of equatorial regions will be largely unaffected.
105284591.doc
DDW 2011
105284591.doc
DDW 2011
On Dec. 13, 2007, 100 scientists jointly signed an Open Letter to Ban Ki-Moon, Secretary-General of the United Nations, requesting they cease the man-made global warming hysteria and settle down to helping mankind better prepare for natural disasters. The final signature was from the President of the World Federation of Scientists. So what's really causing the endless cycles of warming and cooling, if it isn't a constantly changing "Greenhouse Effect" - with man to blame? Man wasn't producing much CO2 in the past million years, so he hasn't simply been turning the greenhouse up and down at will. Just look up - one of the most likely culprits is our old friend, the Sun. Our satellites are pretty good at measuring overall ocean temperatures from afar, and CO2 measurements are being taken daily around the globe. The best results we have been able to turn up so far is that measurable CO2 increases appear about 9 months after an upswing in ocean temperatures. The data is messed up a bit every time a volcano decides to blow its top, because that's the mother of CO2 producers, bar none. And a buffalo emits about the same amount of methane (CH4) as driving your automobile about 8,000 miles - which can combine with O2 in a highly exothermic reaction ( gives off heat ) to produce CO2 and H2O as end products.
105284591.doc
DDW 2011
after "Modern Times" first appeared, Mr. Johnson is perhaps the most eminent living British historian, and big government as problem-eliminator is back with a vengeancealong with trillion-dollar deficits as far as the eye can see. I visited the 82-year-old Mr. Johnson in his West London home this week to ask him whether America has once again set off down the path to self-destruction. Is he worried about America's future? "Of course I worry about America," he says. "The whole world depends on America ultimately, particularly Britain. And also, I love Americaa marvelous country. But in a sense I don't worry about America because I think America has such huge strengthsparticularly its freedom of thought and expressionthat it's going to survive as a top nation for the foreseeable future. And therefore take care of the world." Pessimists, he points out, have been predicting America's decline "since the 18th century." But whenever things are looking bad, America "suddenly produces these wonderful thingslike the tea party movement. That's
cheered me up no end. Because it's done more for women in politics than anything elseall the feminists? Nuts! It's brought a lot of very clever and quite young women into mainstream politics and got them elected. A very good little movement, that. I like it." Then he deepens his voice for effect and adds: "And I like that ladySarah Palin. She's great. I like the cut of her jib." The former governor of Alaska, he says, "is in the good tradition of America, which this awful political correctness business goes against." Plus: "She's got courage. That's very important in politics. You can have all the right ideas and the ability to express them. But if you haven't got guts, if you haven't got courage the way Margaret Thatcher had courageand [Ronald] Reagan, come to think of it. Your last president had courage tooif you haven't got courage, all the other virtues are no good at all. It's the central virtue."
105284591.doc
DDW 2011
1
1NC Leadership 2/2 4. US leadership doesnt solve war.
Conry 97 (Barbara, Foreign Policy Analyst Cato, Policy Analysis No. 267, 2-5, U.S. Global Leadership: A Euphemism for World Policeman, http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-267.html) Other proponents of U.S. political and military leadership do not point to particular benefits; instead, they warn of near-certain disaster if the United States relinquishes its leadership role. Christopher paints a bleak picture: Just consider what the world would be like without American leadership in the last two years alone. We would have four nuclear states in the former Soviet Union, instead of one, with Russian missiles still targeted at our homes. We would have a full-throttled nuclear program in North Korea; no GATT agreement and no NAFTA; brutal dictators still terrorizing Haiti; very likely, Iraqi troops back in Kuwait; and an unresolved Mexican economic crisis, which would threaten stability at our border. [55] Gingrich has pronounced a future without American leadership "a big mess." [56]And former British prime minister Margaret Thatcher has warned, What we are possibly looking at in 2095 [absent U.S. leadership] is an unstable world in which there are more than half a dozen "great powers," each with its own clients, all vulnerable if they stand alone, all capable of increasing their power and influence if they form the right kind of alliance, and all engaged willy-nilly in perpetual diplomatic maneuvers to ensure that their relative positions improve rather than deteriorate. In other words, 2095 might look like 1914 played on a somewhat larger stage. [57] In other words, if America abdicates its role as world leader, we are condemned to repeat the biggest mistakes of the 20th century--or perhaps do something even worse. Such thinking is seriously flawed, however. First, to assert that U.S. leadership can stave off otherwise inevitable global chaos vastly overestimates the power of any single country to influence world events. The United States is powerful, but it still can claim only 5 percent of the world's population and 20 percent of world economic output. Moreover, regardless of the resources Americans might be willing to devote to leading the world, today's problems often do not lend themselves well to external solutions . As Maynes has pointed out, Today, the greatest fear of most states is not external aggression but internal disorder. The United States can do little about the latter, whereas it used to be able to do a great deal about the former. In other words, the coinage of U.S. power in the world has been devalued by the change in the international agenda. [58] Indeed, many of the foreign policy problems that have confounded Washington since the demise of the Soviet Union are the kinds of problems that are likely to trouble the world well into the next century. "Failed states," such as Somalia, may not be uncommon. But, as the ill-fated U.S. and UN operations in that country showed, there is very little that outside powers can do about such problems. External powers usually lack the means to prevent or end civil wars, such as those in Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia, unless they are willing to make a tremendous effort to do so. Yet those types of internecine conflicts are likely to be one of the primary sources of international disorder for the foreseeable
future. Despite the doomsayers who prophesy global chaos in the absence of U.S. leadership, however, Washington's limited ability to dampen such conflicts is not cause for panic. Instability is a normal feature of an international system of sovereign states, which the United States can tolerate and has tolerated for more than two centuries. If vital American interests are not at stake, instability itself becomes a serious problem only if the United States blunders into it, as it did in Somalia and Bosnia. [59]
10
105284591.doc
DDW 2011
11
105284591.doc
DDW 2011
US aerospace is the strongest industry in American and is growing Select USA, a Federal Program designed to support US industry, 2011 The U.S. Aerospace Industry
http://selectusa.commerce.gov/industry-snapshots/aerospace-industry-united-states The U.S. aerospace industry is the largest in the world and the industry continued to show reasonable strength in 2010 despite the lingering effects of the global economic downturn. In 2010 the U.S. aerospace industry contributed $85 billion in export sales to the U.S. economy. The industrys positive trade balance of $44.1 billion is the largest trade surplus of any manufacturing industry and came from exporting 42 percent of all aerospace production and 72 percent of civil aircraft and component production. Foreign firms are attracted to the U.S. aerospace market because it is the largest in the world and has a skilled and hospitable workforce, extensive distribution systems, diverse offerings, and strong support at the local and national level for policy and promotion. According to a recent study by the U.S. Department of Commerce, aerospace supports more jobs through exports than any other industry. The U.S. aerospace industry directly employs about 500,000 workers in scientific and technical jobs across the nation and supports more than 700,000 jobs in related fields. Investment in the U.S. aerospace industry is facilitated by a large pool of well trained machinists, aerospace engineers, and other highly-skilled workers with experience in the aerospace industry. Industry estimates indicate that the annual increase in the number of large commercial airplanes over the next 20 years will be 3.2 percent per year for a total of 30,900 valued at $3.6 trillion. Applying a 3.3% annual growth rate over the next five years with 2010 exports as a base ($85B), 2015 aerospace exports are estimated at $99.98B, a 17.6 percent increase over 2010 exports.
12
105284591.doc
DDW 2011
1 ***Econ Frontline
1. Aviation is responsible for a number of emissions that add to the growth of climate change David Lee, Dalton Research Institute at Manchester Metropolitan University, NOAA Earth Systems Laboratory , 4/8/09, Aviation
and global climate change in the 21st century, http://www.tiaca.org/images/tiaca/PDF/IndustryAffairs/2009%20IPCC%20authors %20update.pdf /Ghosh] In the late 1980s and early 1990s, research was initiated into the effects of nitrogen oxide emissions (NOx 14 NO NO2) on the formation of tropospheric O3 (a greenhouse gas) and to a lesser extent, contrails, from the current subsonic fleet. The EU AERONOX and the US SASS projects (Schumann, 1997; Friedl et al., 1997) and a variety of other research programmes identified a number of emissions and effects from aviation, other than those from CO2, which might influence climate, including the emission of particles and the effects of contrails and other aviation-induced cloudiness (AIC, hereafter). In assessing the potential of anthropogenic activities to affect climate, aviation stands out as a unique sector since the largest fraction of its emissions are injected at aircraft cruise altitudes of 812 km. At these altitudes, the emissions have increased effectiveness to cause chemical and aerosol effects relevant to climate forcing (e.g., cloud formation and O3 production).
2. Aerospace growing & follows the overall economy not the other way around AMD, Aerospace Manufacturing & Design Magazine, FEBRUARY 2011, Positive predictions for 2011,
http://www.onlineamd.com/amd-0211-positive-predictions-2011.aspx What is ahead for the aerospace industry in 2011 and beyond? How can small and medium sized firms plan in todays narrow field of new weapon systems, a global economy in transition, and an ever changing challenge of new and advanced science and technology? The best way to plan is to trust your instruments, or the aerospace indicators. Based on todays data, the gauges and instruments are clear that 2011 will be a year of growth.According to the Aerospace Economic Report and Outlook 2010, recently published by Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University (Barr et. al.), major OEMs and primes like Boeing, Lockheed Martin, EADS, and others forecast the near and long term future of aerospace manufacturing on the growth of Gross Domestic Product (GDP). The underlying principal is that the economy changes first, either up or down, and then the industry simply follows suit. Tracking the GDP, one clearly sees the trend of the economy.
3. Economic collapse does not cause wartheir historical arguments are wrong FERGUSON 2006 (Niall, MA, D.Phil., is the Laurence A. Tisch Professor of History at Harvard University. He is a resident faculty member of the Minda de Gunzburg Center for European Studies. He is also a Senior Reseach Fellow of Jesus College, Oxford University, and a Senior Fellow of the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, Foreign Affairs, Sept/Oct)
Nor can economic crises explain the bloodshed. What may be the most familiar causal chain in modern historiography links the Great Depression to the rise of fascism and the outbreak of World War II. But that simple story leaves too much out. Nazi Germany started the war in Europe only after its economy had recovered. Not all the countries affected by the Great Depression were taken over by fascist regimes, nor did all such regimes start wars of aggression. In fact, no general relationship between economics and conflict is discernible for the century as a whole. Some wars came after periods of growth, others were the causes rather than the consequences of economic catastrophe, and some severe economic crises were not followed by wars.
13
105284591.doc
DDW 2011
1 Alt Cause
ITAR blocks U.S. space competitiveness and SSP development
NSSO, 7 (National Security Space Office,
Report to the Director, Space-Based Solar Power As an Opportunity for Strategic Security; Phase 0 Architecture Feasibility Study October 10, 2007, http://www.nss.org/settlement/ssp/library/final-sbsp-interim-assessment-release-01.pdf)
FINDING: The SBSP Study Group found in order to successfully address major world problems in energy, environmental and national security, the U.S. needs to identify and then reduce or eliminate all unnecessary barriers to effective international cooperation on, and private industry investment in, the development of SBSP. Regardless of the form of international cooperation, SpaceBased Solar Power will require modification or special treatment under International Trafficking in Arms Regulations (ITAR). Partnerships between U.S. and foreign corporations are often much easier to create and implement than government to government level partnerships, and more effective when the purpose is fostering economically affordable goods and services. Application of the International Traffic Arms Regulations (ITAR) may constitute a major barrier to effective partnerships in SBSP and negatively impact national security. Right now ITAR greatly restricts and complicates all spacerelated business, as it treats all launch and satellite technologies as arms. This has had the effect of causing Americas competitors to develop ITARfree products, and had a negative impact on our domestic space industries, which can no longer compete on level ground. Many participants in the feasibility study were very vocal that including satellite and launch technology in ITAR has had a counterproductive and detrimental effect on the U.S.s national security and competitivenesslosing control and market share, and closing our eyes and ears to the innovations of the competition while selling ourselves on a national illusion of unassailable space superiority. Effective collaboration, even with allies on something of this level, could not take place effectively without some special consideration or modification.
14
105284591.doc
DDW 2011
Solar energy is also in the midst of a painful transformation from being the poster child for alternative energy to one in which a number of companies have folded and many others are in deep trouble. Large solar power firm LDK Solar (LDK) posted poor quarterly results and its stock lost almost one-fifth of its value in a day. The recession has cut investment in alternative energy and there is still only limited proof that solar technology can be deployed broadly enough to be a substantial, global new source of energy. One or both of these issues has decreased demand enough so that there is an oversupply of unsold solar panels. Solar energy companies are being squeezed by both falling sales and worsening gross margins.
15
105284591.doc
DDW 2011
1
1NC Oil Dependence 2/5 3. No impact---no chance we would let a hostile rival rise up AND loss of readiness from energy costs can be addressed by latent power Wohlforth, Olin Fellow in International Security Studies at Yale University, 2007 William, Harvard International Review, The Rules of Power Analysis, Vol. 29, Spring, http://hir.harvard.edu/index.php?page=article&id=1611&p=3, accessed 6/27 TR)
Rule No. 4: Consider Latent Power US military forces are stretched thin, its budget and trade deficits are high, and the country continues to finance its profligate ways by borrowing from abroadnotably from the Chinese government. These developments have prompted many analysts to warn that the United States suffers from imperial overstretch. And if US power is overstretched now, the argument goes, unipolarity can hardly be sustainable for long. The problem with this argument is that it fails to distinguish between actual and latent power. One must be careful to take into account both the level of resources that can be mobilized and the degree to which a government actually tries to mobilize them. And how much a government asks of its public is partly a function of the severity of the challenges that it faces. Indeed, one can never know for sure what a state is capable of until it has been seriously challenged. Yale historian Paul Kennedy coined the term imperial overstretch to describe the situation in which a states actual and latent capabilities cannot possibly match its foreign policy commitments. This situation should be contrasted with what might be termed self-inflicted overstretcha situation in which a state lacks the sufficient resources to meet its current foreign policy commitments in the short term, but has untapped latent power and readily available policy choices that it can use to draw on this power. This is arguably the situation that the United States is in today. But the US government has not attempted to extract more resources from its population to meet its foreign policy commitments. Instead, it has moved strongly in the opposite direction by slashing personal and corporate tax rates. Although it is fighting wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and claims to be fighting a global war on terrorism, the United States is not acting like a country under intense international pressure. Aside from the volunteer servicemen and women and their families, US citizens have not been asked to make sacrifices for the sake of national prosperity and security. The country could clearly devote a greater proportion of its economy to military spending: today it spends only about 4 percent of its GDP on the military, as compared to 7 to 14 percent during the peak years of the Cold War. It could also spend its military budget more efficiently, shifting resources from expensive weapons systems to boots on the ground. Even more radically, it could reinstitute military conscription, shifting resources from pay and benefits to training and equipping more soldiers. On the economic front, it could raise taxes in a number of ways, notably on fossil fuels, to put its fiscal house back in order. No one knows for sure what would happen if a US president undertook such drastic measures, but there is nothing in economics, political science, or history to suggest that such policies would be any less likely to succeed than China is to continue to grow rapidly for decades. Most of those who study US politics would argue that the likelihood and potential success of such power-generating policies depends on public support, which is a function of the publics perception of a threat. And as unnerving as terrorism is, there is nothing like the threat of another hostile power rising up in opposition to the United States for mobilizing public support. With latent power in the picture, it becomes clear that unipolarity might have more built-in self-reinforcing mechanisms than many analysts realize. It is often noted that the rise of a peer competitor to the United States might be thwarted by the counterbalancing actions of neighboring powers. For example, Chinas rise might push India and Japan closer to the United Statesindeed, this has already happened to some extent. There is also the strong possibility that a peer rival that comes to be seen as a threat would create strong incentives for the United States to end its self-inflicted overstretch and tap potentially large wellsprings of latent power.
16
105284591.doc
DDW 2011
1
1NC Oil Dependence 3/5 4. No internal linkUS Military already adopting green tech for military Zavis, Writer for Los Angeles Times, 2009 (Alexandra Zavis, April 2009, LA Times, http://articles.latimes.com/2009/apr/26/local/me-army-green26, June 28, 2011)
Inside a futuristic-looking dome that rises from the sandy wasteland of the high Mojave Desert, soldiers in plywood cubicles work at computers powered by solar panels and a towering wind turbine. Plug-in cars shuttle the troops across the vast expanses here at Ft. Irwin in San Bernardino County. At night, tents lined with insulating foam provide a cool retreat at the end of a 100-degree day. The desert base, which houses the Army's premier training center for troops deploying to Iraq and Afghanistan, has become a testing ground and showcase for green initiatives that officials estimate could save the services millions, trim their heavy environmental "boot-print" and even save lives in the war zones, where fuel convoys are frequent targets. The Department of Defense is the single largest energy consumer in the United States. Last year it bought nearly 4 billion gallons of jet fuel, 220 million gallons of diesel and 73 million gallons of gasoline, said Brian Lally, deputy undersecretary of defense for installations and environment. American forces in Iraq and Afghanistan are using more fuel each day than in any other war in U.S. history. When oil prices spiked last summer, the Defense
Department's energy tab shot up from about $13 billion per year in 2006 and 2007 to $20 billion in 2008. The Army alone had to make up a halfbillion-dollar shortfall in its energy budget, said Keith Eastin, assistant secretary of the Army for installations and environment. "That was, I think, a grand wake-up call that we somehow had to get a handle on what is loosely called energy security," Eastin said. Defense officials now consider reducing consumption and embracing energy alternatives to be national security imperatives. At Ft. Irwin, commanders are experimenting with ways to power the desert training area -- which replicates austere combat conditions -- using wind, solar and organic waste-to-fuel technologies. When Brig. Gen. Dana Pittard took command of Ft. Irwin in 2007, he was stunned by the cost of housing troops in tents powered by generators, as they often are in Iraq and Afghanistan. A brigade of about 4,000 to 5,000 troops was spending about $3 million to rent the tents and keep the air conditioners humming during a month-long rotation, Pittard said. By building tents covered with two to three inches of insulating foam and a solar- reflective coating, they reduced the generator requirements by 45% to 75%, a technique that is now being used at some larger bases in the war zones. Estimates are that a $22-million investment to replace all the rented tents at Ft. Irwin with insulated, semi-permanent ones would pay for itself within nine months and could save the Army $100 million over five years, said Eric Gardner, a logistics management specialist at the base. By reducing generator use, Ft. Irwin also expects to cut carbon emissions by 35 million pounds each year -- equivalent to taking 3,500 vehicles off the road, Gardner said. This year, for the first time, the facility did not need a waiver allowing it to exceed the state of California's emissions standards in the training area, Pittard said. Some kinks still have to be worked out as the base increases its use of alternative energy. Although there is plenty of sunshine in the desert to keep solar systems running through the day, the military needs ways to store that energy for nighttime use. And although there is plenty of wind, the Air Force has expressed concern that turbines could interfere with its radar systems. Even so, Pittard, who left Ft. Irwin in March to become deputy chief of staff of the Training and Doctrine Command Headquarters at Ft. Monroe in Virginia, is convinced that within five years it will be possible to take Ft. Irwin off the electric grid. The
nearby Naval Air Weapons Station China Lake, also in the Mojave Desert, already is powered completely by geothermal energy generated by hot water below the surface. Producers and advocates of green technology are taking note. The Defense Department derives 9.8% of its power from alternative sources and is looking to expand use of wind, solar, thermal and nuclear energy. Some believe that the military has the potential to become a catalyst, helping to turn more expensive power sources into financially viable alternatives to coal and petroleum. "If the military were to go green, I think that this really could achieve some environmental goals, for a very simple reason: the military is so big," said Matthew Kahn, an environmental economist at the UCLA Institute of the Environment. Although that remains to be seen, Kahn noted that it would not be the first time the military has had a transforming effect on technology. Cellphones, the Global Positioning System and the Internet all have roots in the military. Some in the green energy sector hope that as the military adopts alternative power sources, the technology will gain broader acceptance among political conservatives.
5. No peakempirics
Michael Lynch (Asian Energy and Security at the Center for International Studies at MIT former director), 8/24/09. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/25/opinion/25lynch.html When the large supply disruptions of 1973 and 1979 led to skyrocketing prices, nearly all oil experts said the underlying cause was resource scarcity and that prices would go ever higher in the future. The oil companies diversified their investments Mobil even started buying up department stores! and President Jimmy Carter pushed for the development of synthetic fuels like shale oil, arguing that markets were too myopic to realize the imminent need for substitutes. All sorts of policy wonks, energy consultants and Nobel-prize-winning economists jumped on the bandwagon to explain that prices would only go up even though they had never done so historically. Prices instead proceeded to slide for two decades, rather as the tide ignored King Canute.
17
105284591.doc
DDW 2011
1
1NC Oil Dependence 4/5 6. No shift to SPSnot sustainable or permanent
Donald Simanek (Lock Haven University professor), 98. The Hazards of Solar Energy, 1998, http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/solar.htm These scientists, and the big corporations that employ them, stand to profit greatly from construction of solar-power stations. No wonder they try to hide the dangers of the technology and suppress any open discussion of them. Proponents of solar energy present facts, figures and graphs to support their claim that energy from the sun will be less expensive, as conventional fuel supplies dwindle and technology of solar energy systems improves. But even if this is so, what will stop the solar energy equipment manufacturers and solar power companies from raising prices when they achieve a monopoly and other fuel sources disappear? Of course every technology has risks. We might be willing to tolerate some small riskif solar energy really represented a permanent solution to our energy problems. But that is not the case. At best, solar energy is only a temporary band-aid. Recent calculations indicate that the "Sun Will Go Out in a Billion Years As Its Fuel Runs Out" (Source: newspaper headline) As that calculation was made a year ago, we now have only nine-hundred ninety-nine million, nine-hundred ninety-nine thousand, nine-hundred and ninety-nine years left during which we could use solar energy. Wouldn't it be better to put our human resources and scientific brains to work to find a safer and more permanent solution to our energy needs?
18
105284591.doc
DDW 2011
19
105284591.doc
DDW 2011
1
1NC Oil Dependence 5/5 10. Scarce Resources dont cause warcooperation, international treaties, empirically denied
David Brooks (Senior Advisor in the International Development Research Centre) and Jamie Linton (water issues freelance writer), July 2K. Globe and Mail Drinking (Water) With Your Enemy, http://idl-bnc.idrc.ca/dspace/bitstream/10625/18677/1/116118.pdf As Israelis and Palestinians approach final status talks, water is high on the agenda. As Israelis and Syrians jockey for negotiating room the waters of the Golan and of the Sea of Galilee are points of contention. Yet, tough as these issues are, there is little danger that inter-state conflict will erupt over water. Even in the Middle East, where water is scarcer than anywhere else in the world, water has served as a greater cause for cooperation than for conflict. Cooperation not conflict The notion of cooperation over international water resources will strike most readers as anomalous. Have we not all heard that "the wars of the 21 st century will be about water," as World Bank vice president Ismail Serageldin stated a few years ago. Or that water was the only conceivable reason for Jordan to go to war with Israel, as the late King Hussein is alleged to have said. There is, however, very little evidence that disputes over water have led or are about to lead to international conflict. (Nor has anyone been able to document King Hussein's remarks about going to war with Israel over water.) Though some have asserted that Arab-Israeli warfare has been motivated in part by the desire to assert control over water resources, historical evidence shows that water was not a factor in strategic planning by either side during the hostilities of 1948, 1967, 1978, or 1982. Water problems If water wars are unlikely, does this mean that we need not be concerned about conflict over water? Not at all. Worldwide water use went up more than six fold in the 20th century and it continues to grow twice as fast as the increase in population. Problems associated with water scarcity and control over water resources are all too common. However, they are much more likely to occur within countries such as the competition for water between urban dwellers seeking drinking water and farmers seeking water for irrigation than between countries. The violence that erupted earlier this year in Cochabamba, Bolivia, following tariff increases for municipal water illustrates the kind of water conflict that we can expect to see. (see Globe and Mail, May 9 and 18, 2000) Experience shows that the presence of water on an international border is more likely to provide a catalyst for cooperation than conflict between the countries that depend on it. Researchers at the University of Oregon have compiled a Transboundary Freshwater Dispute Database. In examining the cases generally considered to be examples of international water conflict, they have arrived at a surprising conclusion: Instead of fighting, countries that share water resources tend to maintain dialogue and negotiation leading to treaties for joint management of water. Jordan River The Jordan River forms much of the boundary between Israel and Jordan and is one of the world's most hotly contested waterways. Even while these two countries were legally at war, they maintained informal contacts on managing the river. As a result, when the Jordan-Israel Peace Treaty was signed in 1994, it was possible to include a well-developed annex devoted "to achieving a comprehensive and lasting settlement of all the water problems between [Israel and Jordan]." What has been true for surface water on an international border also seems to be true for aquifers underlying a border. Prior to the signing of their historic agreement in 1993, Israeli and Palestinian academics and officials began holding discussions on joint management of the Mountain Aquifer, an extremely important source of groundwater underlying both Israel and the West Bank. The success of these discussions has helped forge a climate within which the broader peace process can take place. India-Pakistan collaboration Examples of collaboration over water are not restricted to the Middle East. Despite three wars and numerous skirmishes since 1948, India and Pakistan have managed to negotiate and implement a complex treaty on sharing the waters of the Indus River system. During periods of hostility, neither side has targeted the water facilities of the other nor attempted to disrupt the negotiated arrangements for water management. In Africa too, where eleven countries share the basin of the Nile, cooperation over water is more evident than conflict. "Perhaps the weight of history lies too heavy in the silt of the Nile valley," writes historian Robert Collins, "but man will always need water; and in the end this may drive him to drink with his enemies." Closer to home, the International Joint Commission, which manages waters shared by Canada and the United States, is considered such a model of success that it is being emulated by other nations. Minor skirmishes Approximately 40% of the world's population lives in the 264 river basins shared by more than one country. Put another way, almost half the world's land area is found in international water basins. And yet there have been only seven minor skirmishes over international waters in modern history, and even these involved factors in addition to water. Meanwhile, hundreds of international treaties have been negotiated to deal with water management, about 150 in the past century alone. There is no doubt that humanity faces a worldwide water crisis. Growing demand for drinking water and the much higher demand for irrigation water are placing enormous pressures on available fresh water supplies. At the same time, increasing pollution is reducing the usefulness of available water. The threats that these conditions pose for the poor and for the environment can not be overstated. Nevertheless, it is far more useful to consider the role of water in promoting cooperation rather than conflict, particularly in international relations. As the opening quote suggests, those who are inclined to belligerence may look to water as a reason for fighting. But for most of us, water's greatest value may be the way it brings people together.
20
105284591.doc
DDW 2011
It is widely assumed that our consumer society can move from using fossil fuels to using renewable energy sources while maintaining the high levels of energy use to which we have become accustomed. This book details the reasons why this almost unquestioned assumption is seriously mistaken.Chapters on wind, photovoltaic and solar thermal sources argue that these are not able to meet present electricity demands, let alone future demands. Even more impossible will be meeting the demand for liquid fuel. The planet's capacity to produce biomass
is far below what would be required. Chapter 6 explains why it is not likely that there will ever be a hydrogen economy, in view of the difficulties in generating sufficient hydrogen and especially considering the losses and inefficiencies in distributing it. Chapter 9 explains why nuclear energy is not the answer.The discussion is then extended beyond energy to deal with the ways in which our consumer society is grossly unsustainable and unjust. Its fundamental twin commitments to affluent living standards and economic growth have inevitably generated a range of alarming and accelerating global problems. These can only be solved by a transition to The Simpler Way, a society based more on simpler, self-sufficient and cooperative ways, within a zero-growth economy. The role renewable energy might play in enabling such a society is outlined.
It is commonly assumed that greenhouse gas and energy problems can be solved by switching from fossil fuel sources of energy to renewables. However little attention has been given to exploring the limits to renewable energy. The main problems are to do with the magnitude of the supply tasks that would be set and the difficulties that would be encountered integrating large amounts of intermittent renewable energy into supply systems. [I] argue that wind, photovoltaic, solar thermal and biomass sources, along with nuclear energy and geo-sequestration of carbon could not be combined to provide sufficient energy to sustain affluent societies while keeping greenhouse gas emissions below safe levels. The case is strongest with respect to liquid fuels and transport. [There are also strong] reasons why a
hydrogen economy is not likely to be achieved.
21
105284591.doc
DDW 2011
1 A2: Dependency
No oil collapse and American fears make their impact inevitable-their cards are based on scant evidence Gholz and Press 7 (Eugene, Associate Professor at the LBJ School of Public Affairs at UTexas, Daryl G., PhD PoliSci MIT, Cato Institute, http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-589.pdf)
Each of those fears about oil supplies is exaggerated, and none should be a focus of U.S. foreign or military policy. Peak oil predictions about the impending decline in global rates of oil production are based on scant evidence and dubious models of how the oil market responds to scarcity. In fact, even though oil supplies will increasingly come from unstable regions, investment to reduce the costs of finding and extracting oil is a better response to that political instability than trying to fix the political problems of faraway countries. Furthermore, Chinese efforts to lock up supplies with long-term contracts will at worst be economically neutral for the United States and may even be advantageous. The main danger stemming from Chinas energy policy is that current U.S. fears may become a self-fulfilling prophecy of Sino-U.S. conflict. Finally, political instability in the Persian Gulf poses surprisingly few energy security dangers, and U.S. military presence there actually exacerbates problems rather than helps to solve them.
America has found an unlikely leader into a sustainable new future, and thats the U.S. military. From solar power to wind turbines, high efficiency LED lighting and even geothermal installations, the Department of Defense has been pulling out of fossil fuels and getting into clean energy and conservation. The latest foray is being lead by Fort Benning, Georgia, which is about to install two new power stations that will convert the
facilitys landfill gas to electricity
Oil collapse is empirically denied Gholz and Press 7 (Eugene, Associate Professor at the LBJ School of Public Affairs at UTexas, Daryl G., PhD PoliSci MIT, Cato Institute, http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-589.pdf, 6-27-11)
In the five major oil supply shocks caused by political disruptions in the past 30 years, market dynamics quickly mitigated the costs borne by consumers. 68 Figure 1 tracks the decline and recovery of world oil production in the five cases: (1) the Iranian oil industry strikes in 1978, (2) the collapse of the Iranian oil industry in 1979, (3) the start of the IranIraq war, (4) the 1990 Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, and (5) the 200203 strikes in the Venezuelan oil fields. 69 The cases reveal four key findings. First, in four of the five cases (the exception is the 1979 Iran disruption), major reductions in any countrys oil production quickly triggered compensating increases elsewhere. 70 In all cases, the disruption triggered intense efforts in the disrupted country to restore its output. 71 For example, in 1978 strikes in the Iranian oil industry deprived global markets of nearly 5 mb/d, which was then more than 4 percent of world production. But the world responded quickly, and global production had fully recovered in six months. The outbreak of the Iran-Iraq war removed 3.4 mb/d of Iranian and Iraqi oil from global markets (5.8 percent of global production), but total global supply did not fall by that full amount. Other producers increased their output within the same month, so net global supply only dropped by 4.2 percent. As adjustment efforts continued, the losses to the world market were nearly replaced in three months and fully replaced in five.
Oil collapse is gradual Gholz and Press 7 (Eugene, Associate Professor at the LBJ School of Public Affairs at UTexas, Daryl G., PhD PoliSci MIT, Cato Institute, http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-589.pdf, 6-27-11)
The United States does not need an activist foreign policy to ensure U.S. access to affordable energy. There is no need to pacify or democratize tumultuous oil-producing regions to ensure that they will sell us their crude. Large oil firms compensate for the risk of supply disruptions through diversification and insurance, which allow them to invest and provide a steady flow of oil despite periodic disruptions to particular sources of oil. The United States also does not need to confront China because of its energy policy; Beijings efforts will either merely shift around global consumption or perhaps even expand global supply (which would benefit all consumers). And there is no need for U.S. military forces to maintain peacetime deployments in the Persian Gulf region to protect Americas access to oil. At most, U.S. energy interests require an offshore air and naval presence nearby. Even imperfect markets like the oil market, threatened by political risk and distorted by cartel behavior, adapt to disruptions, and the adjustment process reduces the burden on the imperfect instruments of statecraft such as military
22
DDW 2011
Energy Sustainable
We'll never run out of resources - the free market creates incentives for substitutes Geddes 4 (Marc, Writer and Libertarian Analyst, The Monster Non-Socialist Faq, February 12, http://solohq.com/War/MonsterFAQ.shtml AD
6/28/11) AV
Answer: A significant disruption to supplies of critical resources can cause temporary problems, but in a free market, if resources start to become scarce, prices rise, leading to a search of substitutes and improved conservation efforts. The pool of resources is not fixed, because human ingenuity can find substitutes or new sources of resources. Supplies of most raw materials have been increasing throughout the 20th century, and the cost has been falling (See the entry on Natural resources). For instance, between 1950 and 1970, bauxite (aluminium source) reserves increased by 279 per cent, copper by 179 per cent, chromite (chromium source) by 675 per cent, and tin reserves by 10 per cent. In 1973 experts predicted oil reserves stood at around 700 billion barrels, yet by 1988 total oil reserves had actually increased to 900 billion barrels. Production of certain kinds of resources such as fossil fuels may finally be beginning to peak but there are renewable energy sources in development which can serve as substitutes. Simplistic thermodynamic analysis of energy production is misleading, because it's not the quantities of energy used or produced that determine economic value, but the utility, or usefulness if that energy to humans.
New discoveries will triple reserves new technology makes it cost effective CERA 06 (Cambridge Energy Research Associates ,Peak Oil Theory World Running Out of Oil Soon Is Faulty; Could Distort Policy &
Energy Debate, 11/14, http://www.cera.com/aspx/cda/public1/news/pressReleases/pressReleaseDetails.aspx?CID=8444 AD 6/28/11)
In contrast to a widely discussed theory that world oil production will soon reach a peak and go into sharp decline, a new analysis of the subject by Cambridge Energy Research Associates (CERA) finds that the remaining global oil resource base is actually 3.74 trillion barrels -- three times as large as the 1.2 trillion barrels estimated by the theorys proponents -- and that the peak oil argument is based on faulty analysis which could, if accepted, distort critical policy and investment decisions and cloud the debate over the energy future. The global resource base of conventional and unconventional oils, including historical production of 1.08 trillion barrels and yet-to-be-produced resources, is 4.82 trillion barrels and likely to grow, CERA
Director of Oil Industry Activity Peter M. Jackson writes in Why the Peak Oil Theory Falls Down: Myths, Legends, and the Future of Oil Resources. The CERA projection is based on the firms analysis of fields currently in production and those yet-to-be produced or discovered. The peak oil theory causes confusion and can lead to inappropriate actions and turn attention away from the real issues, Jackson observes. Oil is too critical to the global economy to allow fear to replace careful analysis about the very real challenges with delivering liquid fuels to meet the needs of growing economies. This is a very important debate, and as such it deserves a rational and measured discourse. This
is the fifth time that the world is said to be running out of oil, says CERA Chairman Daniel Yergin. Each time -- whether it was the gasoline famine at the end of WWI or the permanent shortage of the 1970s -- technology and the opening of new frontier areas has banished the specter of decline. Theres no reason to think that technology is finished this time.
23
105284591.doc
DDW 2011
1 ***NATURAL DISASTERS
1. SPS kills the environment
Gauray Bansal (writer for EcoFriend, a news agency about green energy), 5/23/11. The Good, the bad and the ugly: Space based solar energy, http://www.ecofriend.com/entry/the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly-space-based-solar-energy/ 1.Potential damage to Atmosphere: Till now microwave and other transmission methods that are adopted for all over the world are for communication and broadcast purposes only. However, for energy transmission, the wavelength has to very high which can be potentially dangerous to our atmosphere and will increase the risk of leukemia and cancer among humans. Suggested concentration and intensity of such microwaves at their center would be of 23 mW/cm2 and at periphery would be 1 mW/cm2 , which compares to the current United States Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) workplace exposure limits for microwaves. Similarly very high frequency used for such long distance propagation can be very dangerous and may lead to increase in radioactivity in earths environment.
2. Hypercanes require temperatures that only happen during an asteroid impact when wed be dead anyways Masters, 07 Ph.D. in Meteorology (Jeff, 2007, Global Warming and Hurricanes, http://smrcinfo.com/smrc/index2.php?option=com_content&do_pdf=1&id=18) First off, the reader is hit with a dramatic full-page artist's depiction of the global super-hurricane of the future--a massive 5000mile diameter Caribbean storm the size of North America. The storm's 200-mile eye is wider than the Florida Peninsula! Whoa, I said when looking at the whopper "SciAmicane". No doubt many readers perusing the magazine, trying to decide whether to buy it, had the same reaction and plunked down their $5 to read about this grim threat. OK, lets talk reality here. The largest tropical cyclone on record, Supertyphoon Tip of 1979, had a diameter of 1380 miles-- less than one
third the size of the SciAmicane. A storm like the SciAmicane cannot physically exist on Earth unless the oceans were to super-heat to about 122 F (50 C). Only an asteroid impact or similar calamity could create such a hypercane. Even the most extreme global warming scenarios do not heat the oceans to 122, so the SciAmicane is there to sell magazines , not to illustrate what global
24
105284591.doc
DDW 2011
national security space field in no way represented Pentagon endorsement of the idea of space solar power. (Proof: DoD isnt building solar powersats.) The more general reason that space solar power has reemerged is that just like in the 1970s, space solar power fills a cultural, ideological, and yes, spiritual need among a certain type of person. It has nothing to do with the concept suddenly becoming technically or economically feasible, or gaining any credibility within the energy sector. Last month two groups held solar energy conferences separated by one week, 1700 miles, and a million light years. The first wasSOLAR 2010, the annual conference of the American Solar Energy
recognize that an unfunded study produced by an office that has zero clout within the Society held in Phoenix, Arizona. The second was the First National Space Society Space Solar Power Symposium held at the International Space Development Conference in Chicago, Illinois. The Space Solar Power Symposium featured approximately three dozen presentations on the subject, including individuals from Japan and India. The presentation topics ranged from the mundane (Prospects for microwave wireless power transmission) to the polemic (Why Space Solar Power is the Answer and the ONLY Answer to Our Long Term Energy Needs). But if you went to SOLAR 2010 a week earlier, you would have noticed something rather
Despite the attendance of hundreds of people, numerous companies, and the presentation of hundreds of technical papers; despite the presence of the United States best experts on energy policy, energy transmission, energy generation, and solar power technology there were no presentations on space solar power. Think about that for a moment. What does it say about space solar power? What it says is that space solar power is a fringe idea that is not even taken seriously within the niche field of solar power generation. What it also says is that the space solar power community doesnt play with the big boys. Its a community that talks to itself, that seeks the comfort of like-minded individuals, and doesnt even try to sell its message to the audience most likely to give it a fair hearing.
striking.
25
105284591.doc
DDW 2011
Solar satellites jam military communications, vulnerable for attack Wright 2008, Union of Concerned Scientists Author (David, Laura Grego, Lisbeth Gronlund, Technical Implications and General Conclusions, June 23, http://www.ucsusa.org/global_security/space_weapons/technical-implications-of-space-weapons-and-generalconclusions.html, accessed on July 12, 2008)
Interference can range from temporary or reversible effects to permanent disabling or destruction of the satellite. Many methods can be used to interfere with satellites, including electronic interference with communication systems, laser interference with imaging sensors, laser heating of the satellite body, high-power microwave interference with electrical components, collision with another object (kinetic-kill), and nuclear explosions. Because satellites can be tracked and their trajectories can be predicted, they are inherently vulnerable to attack. However, a satellites vulnerability to ASAT attack does not guarantee the effects of an attack will be predictable or verifiable, and this may limit the ASAT attacks usefulness. Jamming satellite ground stations (the downlinks) and the satellites receivers (the uplinks) is relatively simple to do on unprotected systems such as commercial communications satellites. Jamming protected systems, such as military communications satellites, is much harder. An adversary need not be technologically advanced to attempt a jamming attack. Ground-based lasers can dazzle the sensors of high-resolution reconnaissance satellites and inhibit observation of regions on the
Earth that are kilometers in size. With high enough power, ground- and space-based lasers can partially blind a satellite, damaging relatively small sections of the satellites sensor. A high-power laser can physically damage a satellite if its beam can be held on the satellite for long enough to deposit sufficient energy. This can result in overheating the satellite or damaging its structure.
26
105284591.doc
DDW 2011
1 SPS fails
SPS failsbeams are diverted
Keith Cowing (MA in biology specializing in biomedical studies and space, freelance writer, peer reviewed), 9/7/2k. "Congress Gets an Update on Solar Power Satellites", http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewnews.html?id=210. 6/30/11. Another concern in earlier SPS studies has been the efficiency with which power is transmitted from one point to another. Recent laser and microwave research has shown additional improvements in efficiency - this also lends support to the economic and engineering viability of the SPS concept. Mankind added that in addition to the power generating capabilities of SPS systems, large amounts of space-based, beamed power might also be required if large solar sail propulsion technologies are to be used for interstellar probes at the end of this century. The SPS concept was originally envisioned as being a relay system for power generated in space with microwaves used as the means of relaying power. This concept has expanded over the years to include the use of lasers instead of microwaves. One reason being that microwave beams tend to diverge as they traverse large distances whereas coherent sources such as lasers exhibit much less divergence. The more divergence in an energy beam, the larger the antennas need to be at the reception/reflection locations and the greater the potential for lost power during transmission. Use of lasers would tend to minimize this concern. The SPS concept has also expanded to use space based satellites to relay power generated on Earth from one location to another - perhaps from an equatorial desert region to a large city further from the equator. Ralph Nansen, President, Solar Space Industries, Inc. said that Use of SPS as a relay point of power from one region on earth to another may served an interim step in demonstrating the technical and economic viability of beamed power systems. He suggested that primary development of an SPS system should be commercial. But since this would be such large an effort, it should start as government/industry partnership. The government's role would be to set regulatory environment, provide loans and other funding for basic research, and be willing to accept the risk of buying the first SPS satellite. A lead agency should be designated according to Nansen. He felt that DOE is a natural choice with NASA providing support. Nansen said that a ground test program should be funded to demonstrate separate technologies and develop a small prototype of the system on the ground. Efforts should also be made obtain frequency allocation for microwave transmission systems and that support be given to developing a more efficient launch infrastructure including loan guarantees for RLV (Reusable Launch Vehicle) systems. Jerry Grey, from the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) spoke about a study nearing completion by the AIAA. The AIAA has had a continuing interest in the SPS concept since its first description in 1968. The AIAA study looked at SPS work being done outside the US; the prospects for multiple uses of SPS technology; and a technical assessment of SPS work done by NASA. According to Grey, the study does not address economic or environmental considerations since these are being handled by other research groups. While the draft AIAA assessment is still under review, Grey was able to say that the AIAA feels that SPS is a viable concept, and that it is one key area requiring an enhanced focus upon advanced launch system. He also said that the AIAA group has expressed a particular interest in using SPS concepts to augment the existing terrestrial power grid. This would involves relaying energy. Reflection of sunlight; reflection of sunlight and conversion to/from microwaves; and the use of lasers were all examined. It was felt that geostationary satellites are preferred over satellites in lower orbits for control reasons. Sunlight and microwave reflection via geostationary orbit is not feasible because of beam diversion. Lasers, however, have far less beam diversion and are very efficient.
27
105284591.doc
DDW 2011
1
SPS Fails 2/2 SPS failslaunch infrastructure
Joseph Rouge (NSSO director), 10/10/07. " Phase 0 Architecture Feasibility Study, http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/nexgen/Nexgen_Downloads/SBSPInterimAssesment0.1.pdf. Space Solar Power Satellites are very large structures and require substantially greater lift and in space transportation than has ever previously been attempted. Consequently, they also require a significantly expanded supporting infrastructure. The International Space Station is currently the largest structure in space with a mass of 232 MT, at an orbit of only 333 km. It has the largest solar arrays in space, with a total power of approximately 112 kW. In contrast, a single Space Solar Power Satellite is expected to be above 3,000 MT, several kilometers across, and most likely be located in GEO, at 42,124km, likely delivering between 1 to 10 GWe From the perspective of todays launch infrastructure, this may seem unimaginably large and ambitious, but in another sense it is well within the relative scale of other human accomplishments which at their time also seemed astounding creations the Eiffel Tower is 8,045 Tons; the Sears Tower 222,500 tons; the Empire State Building 365,000 392,000 tons, the largest of our supertankers is 650,000MT, and the Great Pyramid at Giza is 5,900,000 MT. Contemplating a space solar power satellite today is probably analogous to contemplating the building of the large hydroelectric dams, which even today cause observers to marvel. Today the United States initiates less than 15 launches per year (at 25MT or less). Construction of a single SBSP satellite alone would require in excess of 120 such launches. That may seem like an astounding operations tempo until one considers the volume of other transportation infrastructure. For instance, in 2005, Atlanta International Airport saw 980,197 takeoffs & landings alone, an average of 1,342 takeoffs/day, or about 1 every minute 24 hours a day. In the same year, Singapores 41 ship cargo berths served 130,318 vessel arrivals (about 15 per hour), handling about 1.15 billion gross tons (GT), and 23.2 million twenty foot equivalent units (TFUs).
28
105284591.doc
DDW 2011
Congress hates the plancost, military stigma and lack of NASA backing Dwayne Day, Space Studies Board of the National Research Council Program Officer, 6/9/08. Knights in Shining Armor, http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1147/1
If all this is true, why is the space activist community so excited about the NSSO study? That is not hard to understand. They all know that the economic case for space solar power is abysmal. The best estimates are that SSP will cost at least three times the cost per kilowatt hour of even relatively expensive nuclear power. But the military wants to dramatically lower the cost of delivering fuel to distant locations, which could possibly change the cost-benefit ratio. The military savior also theoretically solves some other problems for SSP advocates. One is the need for deep pockets to foot the immense development costs. The other is an institutional avatarone of the persistent policy challenges for SSP has been the fact that responsibility for it supposedly falls through the cracks because neither NASA nor the Department of Energy wants responsibility. If the military takes on the SSP challenge, the mission will finally have a home. But theres also another factor at work: navet. Space activists tend to have little understanding of military space, coupled with an idealistic impression of its management compared to NASA, whom many space activists have come to despise. For instance, they fail to realize that the military space program is currently in no better shape, and in many cases worse shape, than NASA. The majority of large military space acquisition programs have experienced major problems, in many cases cost growth in excess of 100%. Although NASA has a bad public record for cost overruns, the DoDs less-public record is far worse, and military space has a bad reputation in Congress, which would never allow such a big, expensive new program to be started. Again, this is not to insult the fine work conducted by those who produced the NSSO space solar power study. They accomplished an impressive amount of work without any actual resources. But it is nonsensical for members of the space activist community to claim that the military supports space solar power based solely on a study that had no money, produced by an organization that has no clout.
29
105284591.doc
DDW 2011
1 Spending Links
Plan would spend between 11 and 320 billion not including the heavy maintenance required
QuestPoint Solar Solutions, 6/13/11. Solar Satellites: The Key To Green Energy, http://www.solarfeeds.com/questpoint-solarsolutions/17185-solar-satellites-the-key-to-green-energy Many governments claim there simply isnt any money in the budget for launching satellites into space, but in 2010, amid an economic crisis, the United States managed to find $426 million for nuclear fusion research and $18.7 billion for NASA, a five-per-cent increase from 2009. The most recent projections, made in the 1980s, put the cost of launching an SPS at $5 billion, or around 8-10 cents/ kWh. Nuclear power plants cost a minimum of $3 billion to $6 billion, not including cost overruns, which can make a plant cost as much as $15 billion. In the U.S., nuclear power costs about 4.9 cents/kWh, making SPS power supply only slightly more expensive. But these estimates are over two decades old and the numbers likely need to be re-examined. The idea for space-based solar energy has been around since the 60s; given the technological advancements since then, surely governments would have invested in making an SPS power supply more budget-friendly. That is not the case. Governments and investors are rarely willing to devote funding to something that doesnt have quick cash returns. The projected cost of launching these satellites once ranged from $11 billion to $320 billion. These figures have been adjusted for inflation, but the original estimates were made back in the 1970s, when solar technology was in its infancy, and may have since become grossly inaccurate. How long an SPS would survive in orbit is anybodys guess, given the maintenance due to possible damage to solar panels from solar winds and radiation. As for adding to the ever-expanding satellite graveyard in Earths orbit, most solutions to satellite pollution remain theoretical.
30
105284591.doc
DDW 2011
1 Militarization Links
SPS has dual capabilitieswill be perceived as a weapon
Kim Ramos, US Air Force Major PhD thesis, April 2K. Solar Power Constellations: Implications for the United States Air Force, for the AIR COMMAND AND STAFF COLL MAXWELL AIR FORCE BASE, http://handle.dtic.mil/100.2/ADA394928 United States Space Command developed four operational concepts to guide their vision. One of those operational concepts is global engagement. The USSPACECOM Long Range Plan defines global engagement as an integrated focused surveillance and missile defense with a potential ability to apply force from space.27 This application of force from space involves holding at risk earth targets with force from space.28 New World Vistas identifies several force application technologies. One of the technological issues associated with developing these space force application technologies is that they all require large amounts of power generation. A solar power satellite can supply the required power. Two technologies in particular would benefit from integration with a solar power satellite, directed energy weapons, such as lasers, and jamming devices. The space-based lasers currently under study accomplish ground moving target indication, and air moving target indication, which would be part of missile defense.29 The main difficulty with the laser is designing a power plant, which can produce the required energy in space without the enormous solar arrays required. By using a solar power satellite to beam power to the laser, this eliminates the problem. Another project, which would benefit from integration with a solar power satellite, is a device, which would beam RF power to a particular geographic location to blind or disable any unprotected ground communications, radar, optical, and infrared sensors.30 As with the laser and other directed energy applications, the limiting factor right now is generating enough power in space to energize the RF beam.
certain number of technologies that can be used for the peaceful exploitation of non-terrestrial natural resources carry also the potential of being used for warfare. This is true both in the case of the Solar Power Satellites that would exploit solar energy in Earth orbit, and in that of peaceful nuclear explosions that may be used in exploiting minerals from the Moon, asteroids and other celestial bodies. These "dual-use technologies" raise security issues that need to be analysed in detail. In the same time, important problems arise from the possible use of non-terrestrial mineral resources for the manufacture of weapons. >
31
105284591.doc
DDW 2011
1
Militarization Links 2/2
SPS dual use tech that could be used for space militarization
Pop, 2000
(Virgiliu Pop, Space Future,
http://www.spacefuture.com/archive/security_implications_of_non_terrestrial_resource_exploitation.shtml)
<The
prospective of exploitation of solar energy in the Geostationary Orbit and of mineral resources on the Moon and asteroids raises the issue of legality of the exploitation technologies to be used from their military point of view. "The development of a mineral resource regime
for the Moon" - considers Bilder - "is likely to have less immediate practical military (...) significance than has been the case with the general development of the Antarctic and Law of the Sea regimes"[1]. However, a certain number of technologies that can be used for the peaceful exploitation of non-terrestrial
natural resources carry also the potential of being used for warfare. This is true both in the case of the Solar Power Satellites that would exploit solar energy in Earth orbit, and in that of peaceful nuclear explosions that may be used in exploiting minerals from the Moon, asteroids and other celestial bodies. These "dual-use technologies" raise security issues that need to be analysed in detail. In the same time, important problems arise from the possible use of non-terrestrial mineral resources for the manufacture of weapons. >
SPS capable of mass destructionmakes it a space weapon Pop, staff writer for Space Future, 2000
(Virgiliu Pop, Space Future,
http://www.spacefuture.com/archive/security_implications_of_non_terrestrial_resource_exploitation.shtml)
Although Solar Power Satellites were envisioned as an energy program, their use raises significant military implications[2 ]. Concerns have been expressed regarding the lawfulness of solar power satellites ( SPS) under the Outer Space Treaty in the context of their possible use as weapons of mass destruction and under existing arms control treaties in the context of their use as prohibited means of warfare. At the same time, given the significant importance and value of a SPS system, its use raises also the issue of vulnerability[3], hence self defence[4].
32
105284591.doc
DDW 2011
33
105284591.doc
DDW 2011
Japan will launch SPS- solves all of the case Aberdeen Press and Journal, February 5, 2001 SECTION: Business:Construction:Aggregates, Pg.17 HEADLINE: Japan
plans solar satellite BYLINE: By Iforsyth, l/n JAPAN has announced plans to build a solar power satellite by 2040 capable of transmitting a gigawatt of energy to Earth as microwaves or radio waves. The estimated weight of the satellite is 20,000 tonnes - add in the weight of the construction base, the work crew and their consumables and this project will require relatively cheap ac$-cess to space. This would make future mis$-sions to Mars and beyond far more feasible. Powersats, if they prove fea$-sible, would significantly reduce global warming by substituting for fossil fuels.
34
105284591.doc
DDW 2011
1 Privatization CP Solvency
Reward based incentives ensures innovation and production
Eligar Sadeh (Astroconsulting International LLC), 09. Space policy challenges facing the Barack Obama administration, Space Policy 25 (2009) 109e116 9.3. Policy choice for the USA Government Maintain a national space policy commitment to space commercial development or build upon that commitment by supporting publice private partnerships to foster commercial space development. Maintain a national space policy commitment to foster space commerce development. This entails a renewed commitment to encourage fixed-price and reward-based contacting, procurement of commercial services, as opposed to physical systems, and lending political support to legislative initiatives in the USA Congress that call for taxed-based incentives and prizes to encourage space commerce development. Presidential support for the following congressional initiatives furthers national space policy in the area of commercial space e the Space Tourism Promotion Act; the Zero Gravity Zero Tax Bill; the Invest in Space Now Act; and the Spaceport Equality Act. Support for an expansion of congressional funding of prizes, like the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agencys Grand Challenge and NASAs Centennial Challenges, advances national space policy directed at fostering space commerce development. A commitment to expanding publiceprivate partnerships in the space arena paves the way for space infrastructural development. One example is the contracting undertaken by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency with new space companies to develop technologies of interest to security space. NASA is implementing partnerships with the private sector as exemplified by the Commercial Orbital Transportation Services and Space Act Agreements with new space companies. A further expansion of such relationships and support for new publiceprivate partnerships fosters emerging space businesses and efforts in areas ranging from operationally responsive space, small satellites (smallsats) reusable launch vehicles, and space tourism to developing areas in space-based solar power, space-based zero-gravity manufacturing research, propellant depots, and point-to-point sub-orbital travel. These technologies, if supported and developed with the help of the USA Government, will be contributors to the long-term national security and prosperity of the USA, and will benefit global security concerns and the global economy.
35
105284591.doc
DDW 2011
36
105284591.doc
DDW 2011
1
1NC Oil DA 2/2
CONTINUED NO TEXT DELETED efficiency was once considered a long-term goal, efficiencies on the order of 40 percent already have been achieved. And the modularity and scalability of the systems needed to build an SSP platform make testing relatively straightforward. Even from its perch in low-Earth orbit, for example, the International Space Station could be used as a test bed for SSP components and even demonstrate low-level power transmission from orbit to Earth. The exposed facility on Japan's Kibo laboratory, due for launch in the first half of next year, could be used to test pointing and transmitting hardware, Mankins said, as well as to conduct space-exposure experiments on materials that might be used in building the large structures needed to collect sunlight in meaningful amounts. The Internet-based group of experts who prepared the report for the NSSO recommended that the U.S. government organize itself to tackle the problem of developing SSP; use its resources to "retire a major portion of the technical risk for business development; establish tax and other policies to encourage private development of SSP, and "become an early demonstrator/adopter/customer" of SSP to spur its development.
37
105284591.doc
DDW 2011
1 Oil DALinks
SPS ends dependence on foreign oilfinally competitive with fossil fuels
LA Times 10/11/07. Orbiting solar panels' day may be near http://articles.latimes.com/2007/oct/11/science/sci-spacesolar11 A new federal study released Wednesday concluded that continued increases in oil prices may finally make the generation of solar power in orbit economically competitive. The report urged the government to sponsor a demonstration of the technology to spur private investment in the concept. The orbiting power plants would reduce the nation's dependence on imported oil and help reduce the production of carbon dioxide that is contributing to global warming, according to the report led by the National Security Space Office, part of the Department of Defense. "This is a solution for all mankind," said former astronaut Buzz Aldrin, chairman of the spaceflight advocacy group, ShareSpace Foundation. Aldrin joined a group of other space advocacy organizations to unveil the report in Washington. Since the Space Age began 50 years ago, scientists have dreamed of launching acres of photovoltaic cells into orbit and beaming the electricity electromagnetically to Earth's surface but have stumbled over the project's high cost and the technical difficulties. The report estimated that in a single year, satellites in a continuously sunlit orbit could generate an amount of energy nearly equivalent to all of the energy available in the world's oil reserves. Mark Hopkins, senior vice president of the National Space Society, said spacebased solar energy could generate so much power that it could transform the United States from an energy-importing country into an energy-exporting nation. "It is the largest energy option which is available to us today in the sense that it would derive more power potentially than all of the other power sources combined," Hopkins said. NASA and the Department of Energy have spent $80 million in the last three decades to study space-based solar energy, but the effort faded in the mid-1990s.
38
105284591.doc
DDW 2011
39
105284591.doc
DDW 2011
1
Oil DAUnique Internal Links Extension 2/2 High oil prices drives the Russian equity marketkey to stabilizing overall interest rates and maintaining social spending thats the lynchpin of stability
Owain Bennallack (Develop executive editor), 3/3/11. The one market you can buy on higher oil prices http://www.fool.co.uk/news/investing/2011/03/03/the-one-market-you-can-buy-on-higher-oil-prices.aspx
Yes, we're talking about Russia. As Matthias Siller, Investment Manager at Baring Asset Manager explains: "There
is generally a close relationship between the performance of the Russian equity market and the oil price, with Russia lagging slightly. In a stronger oil price environment, it is our belief that the Russian market will gain upward momentum." The following graph
shows the relationship between the oil price and the Russian market very clearly: Source: Baring Asset Management / Datastream, as at 24 Feb 2011 You can clearly see that going on this prior trend, the Russian market could be about to shoot upwards. It's already started 2011 with a bang in comparison with most other emerging markets, which have wilted. More reasons to buy Russia We're not habitual graph followers at the Fool.
But there are very strong reasons why Russia rises when the oil price does -- principally, that the country is a huge exporter of oil, and its markets are stuffed to overflowing with oil producers. In the short term at least, higher oil prices will massively boost their profitability. It's estimated that a $150 barrel of oil would increase Russian oil firm's operating profitability by an average of 60-80%.
But Baring's Matthias Siller points to two other reasons to be optimistic about Russian equities in this climate: More taxes for the government: It's an election year in Russia, and incumbents flush with oil-fuelled tax receipts could well
increase infrastructural and social security spending, to the benefit of banks, construction firms, property companies, and retailers. A boost to oil production: Russian oil companies badly need to upgrade their facilities to get more of their reserves to market. A higher oil price would give the Russian authorities leeway to introduce better tax incentives to encourage this, which could enable Russia's producers to increase their output and profits. The Russian market is on a P/E of just 10 and forecast to fall to around 7,
40
105284591.doc
DDW 2011
41