1AC Plan Text

Text: The United States federal government should substantially increase its ocean desalination
development.

1AC Water Justice Advantage
Federal policy on water accessibility ignores and excludes low-income communities and
communities of coloronly federal resources and regulation can correct discrimination in water
policy
Vanderwarker 13 (Amy, outreach coordinator for the Environmental Justice Coalition for Water, a coalition of
community groups and advocacy organizations that addresses water injustices, A Twenty-First Century U.S. Water
Policy, pp. 56-57)

As a result, low-income communities and communities of color may experience the cumulative impacts of exposure to a wide
variety of contaminants or disproportionate lack of access to resources. According to NEJAC, the idea of cumulative risks and
impacts is the matrix of physical, chemical, biological, social and cultural factors which result in certain communities
and sub-populations are being more susceptible to environmental toxins, being more exposed to toxins, or having
compromised ability to cope with and/or recover from such exposure (NEJAC 2004, i). There are many barriers to achieving change for EJ
in communities. More affluent communities have an array of privileges that help ensure healthier environments, including
more political influence and resources to fight unwanted environmental hazards (Brulle and Pellow 2006). An Institute of Medicine
report on EJ and public health found that there are identifiable communities of concern that experience a certain type of double
jeopardy in the sense that they (1) experience higher levels of exposure to environmental stressors in terms of both
frequency and magnitude and (2) are less able to deal with these hazards as a result of limited knowledge of exposures
and disenfranchisement in the political process (Committee on Environmental Justice 1999, 6). These problems extend to water resources.
Water injustices within federal water policy include: Instances where low-income communities and communities of
color are disproportionately burdened by water hazards, ranging from lack of clean drinking water to higher exposure to
fish contamination; Legacies of discrimination in land-use planning and housing that perpetuate water inequities,
such as exposure to lead contamination in drinking water; Inequalities in the enforcement of water-specific policies
and regulations; Gaps in existing regulations around water policy and a lack of regulations around critical water
justice issues; Cumulative risks and impacts to low-income communities and communities of color that are
overlooked; Community voices and water needs that have been excluded from federal water policy. Regional studies and
stories from across the country document the water struggles of low-income communities and communities of color and demonstrate that there is much progress to
be made before water justice is achieved in the United States. Accurate data on water quality and water use do not exist in many places and is not comprehensively
collected nationwide (see chapter 1). There is also a lack of data com- paring water issues in the context of race and income. For example, the US Census once
collected information on individual sources of drinking water, but the question is no longer asked, making it difficult to assess questions of inequitable access to
water (GWTF 2007)..
The status quo is holding back large scale desalination projectsa high initial capital investment is
necessary for successful desalination infrastructure
AMTA 7. American Membrane Technology Association Future of Desalination in the United States *http://www.amtaorg.com/wp-
content/uploads/11_FutureofDesal.pdf] [MG]

As the nations population and industrial development grows, so does fresh water use. Along with this increase in water use, the availability of traditional water
supplies is declining while the costs of these supplies are on the rise. According to a former director of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administrations Office
of Hydrology, As we move toward the 21st century, short supplies of clean water could rival expensive oil as one of the
nations most serious concerns. Traditional surface water development sites: dams, reservoirs and aqueducts have
already been used, and many proposed projects are not feasible due to significant environmental concerns, lack of
funding or the high initial capital investments required. There are, however, several options for augmenting, increasing or extending existing
freshwater supplies. Conservation has been, and will continue to be, the easiest and most cost-effective means of managing water demands. However, there are
limitations with the amount of water that may be conserved. Recycled treated wastewater, or water reuse can sometimes replace existing freshwater supplies for
non-potable and some limited indirect potable uses. The need for additional water supplies has forced water agencies to look for new
sources of supply, such as the ocean and brackish groundwater aquifers. Ocean water desalination is a vast water source that
remains untapped in significant quantities in the United States. Over three-quarters of the earths surface is covered by
water too salty to sustain human life or farming. Also, many freshwater-short areas have access to brackish (moderately salty) water. Desalting, or
desalination, is a process used to create new freshwater supplies by separating salt and other dissolved minerals from sea water or brackish water. Other
contaminants, such as dissolved metals, arsenic, pathogens, organic matter and radio-nuclides, are also removed by membrane methods.
Water scarcity is comingDesalination of the worlds oceans is critical to prevent horrific living
conditions that will spread globally
Larson 12. Rhett B. Larson, Visiting Assistant Professor of Law at Arizona State University's Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law. J.D. University of Chicago, MSc
Oxford University, B.A. Brigham Young University Innovation and International Commons: The Case of Desalination Under International Law 2012 Utah L. Rev. 759
[MG]

The potential importance of desalination is evident in a passing glance at a globe. While water itself is not scarce, 97% of
the Earth's water is salt water, and 2.7% of the remaining fresh water is virtually inaccessible in the polar ice caps or
deep underground aquifers. n2 The abundance of salt water and relative scarcity of freshwater has made the pursuit of technology to remove salt from
water a centuries-old quest for the Holy Grail of water supply. n3 Indeed, Aristotle was one of the first scientists to experiment with desalination technology. n4
Technology that could tap into the blue vastness of the globe may hold the key to avoiding water resource conflict in
the future. Desalination has developed rapidly since Aristotle's early experiments, particularly in recent decades. What was once an impractical and costly
experiment has become a viable water supply and remediation tool. As a result of recent innovations, the cost of desalination in many
instances has decreased by as much as 90%. n5 In some areas, these innovations have made desalinated water [*760]
economically competitive with other traditional potable water sources. n6 As of 2005, over ten thousand large-scale desalination plants
were in place in nations such as Saudi Arabia, the United States, Australia, Spain, Japan, Iran, China, Israel, India, Italy, and Mexico. n7 As reliance on
desalination grows and desalination costs continue to decrease, this technology will have correspondingly greater implications for
international relations. Desalination has an indisputable role to play in addressing water scarcity and water pollution.
Currently, 2.3 billion people live without access to adequate water supplies, 1.1 billion live without safe drinking water, and
approximately six thousand children under the age of five die every day from water-related diseases. n8 In 2000, the United
Nations (UN) established its Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), which included halving, by 2015, "the proportion of the population without sustainable access to
safe drinking water and basic sanitation [from 1990 levels]." n9 Despite improvements spurred by the MDG initiative, the UN predicts that two-thirds of
the world's population, or 5.5 billion people, will live in areas of "water stress" by 2025 - the result of growing
populations, increased water contamination, and climate change. n10 Population growth, economic development leading
to increased consumption, and climate change will make water stress a preeminent challenge of the coming decades.
Scarcity uniquely affects rural populations and the urban poorthe impact is disease, pollution,
and poverty
Koppen et al 00 International Water Management Institute Randolph Barker Barbara van Koppen and Tushaar Shah Water Scarcity and Poverty
[http://www.bvsde.paho.org/bvsacd/cd27/global.pdf?origin=publication_detail] [MG]

As we approach the next century, it is widely recognized that many countries (in contrast to eastern India and Bangladesh) are entering an era of
severe water shortage. IWMI has undertaken a long-term program to improve the conceptual and empirical basis for the analysis of water in major river
basins of the world (Seckler, Molden, and Barker 1998). The initial findings of this study project that in the first quarter of the next century 2.7 billion people or a third
of the worlds population will experience severe water scarcity. The bulk of this population will reside in the semiarid regions of Asia and in sub-Saharan Africa. Due to
overexploitation of groundwater, food production will be adversely affected in the semiarid regions, which include two of Asias major breadbasketsthe Punjab and
the North China Plain. In northwestern India, the rise of tube-well irrigation crowded out manual water-lifting devices used by smallholders during the 1960s. In
western and peninsular India, besides competitive lowering of groundwater tables, excessive pump irrigation has also resulted in fluoride contamination of
groundwater, which has been the mainstay of the poor for their domestic water needs. What are the implications of these findings for the poor? Water is both a
commodity and a natural resource and a perceived human entitlement. When Nobel Laureate, Amartya Sen (1981) wrote about poverty and famines in Bengal, he
spoke of entitlements in terms of purchasing power for food. The primary people affected by the famines were the landless rural poor. But in todays
environment of growing water scarcity the problem is more pervasive. An increasing number of the poor rural and
urban consumers, rural producers, and rural laborersare coming to view access or entitlement to water as a more
critical problem than access to food, primary health care, and education. The typical urban household uses water for drinking and
sanitation. But rural areas use water for a wide range of purposes. Even in irrigated areas water is used not only for the main field crops but also for domestic use,
home gardens, trees and other permanent vegetation, and livestock (Bakker et al. 1999). Other productive uses include fishing, harvesting of aquatic plants and
animals, and a variety of other enterprises such as brick making. In addition, irrigation systems can have a positive or negative effect on the environment. Thus, the
withdrawal of water affects the rural household, rural economy, and environment in a number of ways. Water scarcity is exemplified by situations such
as: the need to carry heavy pots of water several kilometers every day to meet household needs; the destitution of farmers who lose their lands or of
the landless who lose their jobs because of lack of irrigation water; the loss of wetlands or estuaries because of upstream water depletion;
and increases health problems due to water pollution and a rise in incidence of water-borne diseases. Experts in the field agree
that the quantity of water is even more important than the quality in terms of its impact on human health. However, water
scarcity leads to declining water quality and pollution, which has an especially adverse impact on the poor. Many (perhaps
most) of the poorest people in developing countries are forced to drink water that is unfit for human consumption. They
suffer from a range of skin related and other health problems.

This form of environmental injustice outweighs any impact on probability and magnitude-we have
an obligation to change our decision-making process.
Verchick in 1996 [Robert, Assistant Professor, University of Missouri -- Kansas City School of Law. J.D., Harvard Law
School, 1989, IN A GREENER VOICE: FEMINIST THEORY AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE 19 Harv. Women's L.J. 23+

Because risk assessment is based on statistical measures of risk, policymakers view it as an accurate and objective tool in
establishing environmental standards. n275 The scientific process used to assess risk purports to focus single-mindedly on only one feature of a
potential injury: the objective probability of its occurrence. n276 Risk assessors, who consider most value judgments irrelevant in determining statistical risk, seek to
banish them at every stage. n277 As a result, the language of risk assessment -- and of related environmental safety standards -- often carry an air of irrebuttable
precision and certainty. The EPA, for example, defines the standard acceptable level of risk under Superfund as "10<-6>" -- that is, the probability that one person in a
million would develop cancer due to exposure to site contamination. n278 [*76] Feminism challenges this model of scientific risk assessment on at least three levels.
First, feminism questions the assumption that scientific inquiry is value-neutral, that is, free of societal bias or prejudice. n279 Indeed, as many have pointed out,
one's perspective unavoidably influences the practice of science. n280 Western science may be infused with its own ideology, perpetuating, in the view of the
ecofeminists, cycles of discrimination, domination, and exploitation. n281 Second, even if scientific inquiry by itself were value-neutral, environmental regulation
based on such inquiry would still contain subjective elements. Environmental regulation, like any other product of democracy, inevitably reflects elements of
subjectivity, compromise, and self-interest. The technocratic language of regulation serves only to "mask, not eliminate, political and social considerations." n282 We
have already seen how the subjective decision to prefer white men as subjects for epidemiological study can skew risk assessments against the interests of women
and people of color. The focus of many assessments on the risk of cancer deaths, but not, say, the risks of birth defects or miscarriages, is yet another example of how
a policymaker's subjective decision of what to look for can influence what is ultimately seen. n283 Once risk data are collected and placed in a statistical form, the
ultimate translation of that information into rules and standards of conduct once again reflects value judgments. A safety threshold of one in a million or a preference
for "best conventional technology" does not spring from the periodic table, but rather evolves from the application [*77] of human experience and judgment to
scientific information. Whose experience? Whose judgment? Which information? These are the questions that feminism prompts, and they will be discussed shortly.
Finally, feminists would argue that questions involving the risk of death and disease should not even aspire to value neutrality. Such decisions -- which
affect not only today's generations, but those of the future -- should be made with all related political and moral
considerations plainly on the table. n284 In addition, policymakers should look to all perspectives, especially those of
society's most vulnerable members, to develop as complete a picture of the moral issues as possible. Debates about scientific
risk assessment and public values often appear as a tug of war between the "technicians," who would apply only value-neutral criteria to set regulatory standards,
and the "public," who demand that psychological perceptions and contextual factors also be considered. n285 Environmental justice advocates, strongly concerned
with the practical experiences of threatened communities, argue convincingly for the latter position. n286 A feminist critique of the issue, however, suggests that the
debate is much richer and more complicated than a bipolar view allows. For feminists, the notion of value neutrality simply does not exist. The debate between
technicians and the public, according to feminists, is not merely a contest between science and feelings, but a broader discussion about the sets of methods, values,
and attitudes to which each group subscribes. Furthermore, feminists might argue, the parties to this discussion divide into more than two categories. Because one's
world view is premised on many things, including personal experience, one might expect that subgroups within either category might differ in significant ways from
other subgroups. Therefore, feminists would anticipate a broad spectrum of views concerning scientific risk assessment and public values. Intuitively, this makes
sense. Certainly scientists disagree among themselves about the hazards of nuclear waste, ozone depletion, and global warming. n287 Many critics have argued that
scientists, despite their allegiance [*78] to rational method, are nonetheless influenced by personal and political views.
n288 Similarly, members of the public are a widely divergent group. One would not be surprised to see politicians, land developers, and blue-collar workers
disagreeing about environmental standards for essentially non-scientific reasons. Politicians and bureaucrats are two sets of the non-scientific community that affect
environmental standards in fundamental ways. Their adherence to vocal, though not always broadly representative, constituencies may lead them to disfavor less
advantaged socioeconomic groups when addressing environmental concerns. n289 In order to understand a diversity of risk perception and to see how attitudes and
social status affect the risk assessment process, we must return to the feminist inquiry that explores the relationship between attitudes and identity. 1. The Diversity
of Risk Perception A recent national survey, conducted by James Flynn, Paul Slovic, and C.K. Mertz, measured the risk perceptions of a group of 1512 people that
included numbers of men, women, whites, and non-whites proportional to their ratios in society. n290 Respondents answered questions about the health risks of
twenty-five environmental, technological, and "life-style" hazards, including such hazards as ozone depletion, chemical waste, and cigarette smoking. n291 The
researchers asked them to rate each hazard as posing "almost no health risk," a "slight health risk," a "moderate health risk," or a "high health risk." The researchers
then analyzed [*79] the responses to determine whether the randomly selected groups of white men, white women, non-white men, and non-white women differed
in any way. The researchers found that perceptions of risk generally differed on the lines of gender and race. Women, for instance, perceived greater risk from most
hazards than did men. n292 Furthermore, non-whites as a group perceived greater risk from most hazards than did whites. n293 Yet the most striking results
appeared when the researchers considered differences in gender and race together. They found that "white males tended to differ from everyone else in their
attitudes and perceptions -- on average, they perceived risks as much smaller and much more acceptable than did other people." n294 Indeed, without exception, the
pool of white men perceived each of the twenty-five hazards as less risky than did non-white men, white women, or non-white women. n295 Wary that other factors
associated with gender or race could be influencing their findings, the researchers later conducted several multiple regression analyses to correct for differences in
income, education, political orientation, the presence of children in the home, and age, among others. Yet even after all corrections, "gender, race, and 'white male'
[status] remained highly significant predictors" of perceptions of risk. n296 2. Explaining the Diversity From a feminist perspective, these findings are important
because they suggest that risk assessors, politicians, and bureaucrats -- the large majority of whom are white men n297 -- may be acting on attitudes about security
and risk that women and people of color do not widely share. If this is so, white men, as the "measurers of all things," have crafted a system of environmental
protection that is biased toward their subjective understandings of the world. n298 [*80] Flynn, Slovic, and Mertz speculate that white men's perceptions of risk may
differ from those of others because in many ways women and people of color are "more vulnerable, because they benefit less from many of [society's] technologies
and institutions, and because they have less power and control." n299 Although Flynn, Slovic, and Mertz are careful to acknowledge that they have not yet tested this
hypothesis empirically, their explanation appears consistent with the life experiences of less empowered groups and comports with previous understandings about
the roles of control and risk perception. n300 Women and people of color, for instance, are more vulnerable to environmental threat in
several ways. Such groups are sometimes more biologically vulnerable than are white men. n301 People of color are more likely to live near
hazardous waste sites, to breathe dirty air in urban communities, and to be otherwise exposed to environmental harm.
n302 Women, because of their traditional role as primary caretakers, are more likely to be aware of the vulnerabilities of their children. n303 It makes sense that such
vulnerabilities would give rise to increased fear about risk. It is also very likely that women and people of color believe they benefit less from the technical institutions
that create toxic byproducts. n304 Further, people may be more likely to discount risk if they feel somehow compensated for the activity. n305 For this reason,
Americans worry relatively little about driving automobiles, an activity with enormous advantages in our large country but one that claims tens of thousands of lives
per year. The researchers' final hypothesis -- that differences in perception can be explained by the lack of "power and control" exercised by women and people of
color -- suggests the importance that such factors as voluntariness and control over risk play in shaping perceptions. [*81] Risk perception research frequently
emphasizes the significance of voluntariness in evaluating risk. Thus, a person may view water-skiing as less risky than breathing polluted air because the former is
accepted voluntarily. n306 Voluntary risks are viewed as more acceptable in part because they are products of autonomous choice. n307 A risk accepted voluntarily is
also one from which a person is more likely to derive an individual benefit and one over which a person is more likely to retain some kind of control. n308 Some
studies have found that people prefer voluntary risks to involuntary risks by a factor of 1000 to 1. n309 Although environmental risks are generally viewed as
involuntary risks to a certain degree, choice plays a role in assuming risks. White men are still more likely to exercise some degree of choice in assuming
environmental risks than other groups. Communities of color face greater difficulty in avoiding the placement of hazardous
facilities in their neighborhoods and are more likely to live in areas with polluted air and lead contamination. n310
Families of color wishing to buy their way out of such polluted neighborhoods often are limited by housing
discrimination, redlining by banks, and residential segregation. n311 The workplace similarly presents workers exposed to toxic hazards (a
disproportionate number of whom are minorities) n312 with impossible choices between health and work, or between sterilization and demotion. n313 Just as
marginalized groups have less choice in determining the degree of risk they will assume, they may feel less control over the risks they face. "Whether or not the risk is
assumed voluntarily, people have greater [*82] fear of activities with risks that appear to be outside their individual control." n314 For this reason, people often fear
flying in an airplane more than driving a car, even though flying is statistically safer. n315 If white men are more complacent about public risks, it is perhaps because
they are more likely to have their hands on the steering wheel when such risks are imposed. White men still control the major political and business institutions in
this country. n316 They also dominate the sciences n317 and make up the vast majority of management staff at environmental agencies. n318 Women and people of
color see this disparity and often lament their back-seat role in shaping environmental policy. n319 Thus, many people of color in the environmental justice
movement believe that environmental laws work to their disadvantage by design. n320 [*83] The toxic rivers of Mississippi's "Cancer Alley," n321 the extensive
poisoning of rural Indian land, n322 and the mismanaged cleanup of the weapons manufacturing site in Hanford, Washington n323 only promote the feeling that
environmental policy in the United States sacrifices the weak for the benefit of the strong. In addition, the catastrophic potential that groups other than white men
associate with a risk may explain the perception gap between those groups and white males. Studies of risk perception show that, in general, individuals harbor
particularly great fears of catastrophe. n324 For this reason, earthquakes, terrorist bombings, and other disasters in which high concentrations of people are killed or
injured prove particularly disturbing to the lay public. Local environmental threats involving toxic dumps, aging smelters, or poisoned wells also produce high
concentrations of localized harm that can appear catastrophic to those involved. n325 Some commentators contend that the catastrophic potential of a risk should
influence risk assessment in only minimal ways. n326 Considering public fear of catastrophes, they argue, will irrationally lead
policymakers to battle more dramatic but statistically less threatening hazards, while accepting more harmful but more
mundane hazards. n327 [*84] At least two reasons explain why the catastrophic potential of environmental hazards must be given weight in risk assessment.
First, concentrated and localized environmental hazards do not simply harm individuals, they erode family ties and community relationships. An onslaught of
miscarriages or birth defects in a neighborhood, for instance, will create community-wide stress that will debilitate the neighborhood in emotional, sociological, and
economic ways. n328 To ignore this communal harm is to underestimate severely the true risk involved. n329 Second, because
concentrated and localized environmental hazards tend to be unevenly distributed on the basis of race and income
level, any resulting mass injury to a threatened population takes on profound moral character. For this reason, Native Americans
often characterize the military's poisoning of Indian land as genocide. n330 [*85] 3.

Only development through legal and state institutions ensures effectiveness. Otherwise,
international disputes will moot any successful technological development.
Larson 12. Rhett B. Larson, Visiting Assistant Professor of Law at Arizona State University's Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law. J.D. University of Chicago, MSc
Oxford University, B.A. Brigham Young University Innovation and International Commons: The Case of Desalination Under International Law 2012 Utah L. Rev. 759
[MG]

Disputes over international commons between nations have the potential to boil over into serious conflict. n243 Indeed, it is
not coincidental that international security "hot spots" are often also areas of disputed international water rights. n244 India
and Pakistan are currently experiencing heightened tensions over sharing the Brahmaputra River, where the battle cry of some is that "water
must flow, or blood must flow." n245 In the Levant, the Jordan River and Mountain Aquifer have been the source of political,
diplomatic, and even military conflict. n246 With a regime change in Egypt and Libya and the rise of South Sudan, the fate of shared water sources like
the Nile and the Nubian Sandstone Aquifer are shrouded by the potential for conflict. n247 Turkey, Iraq, and Syria continue to experience diplomatic tension over the
Euphrates River, which also aggravates relationships with ethnic Kurds. n248 This tension over the Euphrates has become an issue in Turkey's possible accession to
the European Union. n249 [*812] However, international commons may also provide the locus for international collaboration, which
improves regional relations and facilitates sustainable development. n250 Recent treaty efforts on the Mekong River, the Guarani Aquifer, and Lake
Victoria show promise in promoting regional resource cooperation. n251 This Article proposes reforms to current approaches to international law governing
international commons like rivers and aquifers so that technological innovation will advance cooperation rather than result in conflict. This Article describes the RAM
model and its inadequacies and introduces the CAM model as an alternative for the management of international commons in the face of technological innovation.
These two models play complementary roles along the fairness continuum, with the CAM model's aims at collaboration and adaptation most essential to achieving
fair resource management capable of responding to technological innovation. More research and discussion is needed on how new governance approaches relate to
adversarial legalism like the RAM model, the role of new governance in international natural resource management, and how governance reforms can facilitate
responsible development and implementation of new technologies impacting resource use and allocation. Desalination is only one of many potential
technologies that could impact fair resource management between nations. The CAM model could be examined in the context of
technologies for water recycling or accessing deep fossil groundwater. Recent technological innovations have made wastewater treatment more affordable,
facilitating water recycling as a major national water supply strategy in Singapore. n252 Technological innovation in drilling techniques has also made new
groundwater resources available, with potential implications for arid regions like Jordan and Saudi Arabia. n253 The CAM model could also be applied to international
basins where these innovations impact water quality and water rights. [*813] Water, however, is only one type of resource shared by nations that technological
innovation could impact. Technological innovation could impact the allocation and use of other shared transboundary resources, including air, minerals, or ecosystem
services. These shared resources could also be evaluated by applying an analysis similar to that used in this Article. Transboundary geologic forma7tions capable of
serving as sites of carbon sequestration could also prove to be important international commons impacted by technological innovation, as nations increasingly move
toward climate change mitigation measures. Additionally, international law is not the only area of law in which these issues are raised. Intranational,
interjurisdictional natural resource governance also would benefit from reform to better respond to and responsibly facilitate technological innovation. Such
instances include interstate water management in the United States and interprovince water management in Australia. In each instance, a CAM model approach
would respond best to new technologies, though in each case the question will remain at what level the international governance institution is best established.
Sharing scarce and vital resources across international borders is one of the great challenges of the coming decades.
Legal institutions and regulatory regimes governing international commons must adapt to technological innovation to
avoid conflict over resources and encourage collaborative development of beneficial new technologies. The CAM model
proposed in this Article is aimed at responding to the coming changes in climate, population, and technology, at facilitating cooperation in resource development, and
at avoiding resource disputes.

Clearly desalinization is not one size fits all but the plans support and focus ensures that local
communities are empowered to make environmentally just policy decisions that address the water-
climate-energy matrix of inequality
Craig 10 *Robin K. Craig, Attorneys Title Professor of Law and Associate Dean for Environmental Programs, Florida State University College of Law, Tallahassee,
Florida. T Water Supply, Desalination, Climate Change, and Energy Policy*, 2010 / Water Supply, Desalination, Climate Change, and Energy Policy | prs+

Conversely, water is relatively easy to store, and suggests two potential future paths for linking energy policy and water
policy. First, in the balancing of tradeoffs, and especially while electricity storage problems are still being resolved, alternative energy technologies might be
productively directed toward water desalination. Such use might provide real-world facilities for testing and improving alternative energy technologies free from
the supply issues that arise in trying to inject wind and solar electricity production into standard electricity grids. Second, in addition to desalinating water, such
projects may discover ways to store solar and wind energy in the form of waterfor example, by pumping water to uphill storage facilities, where the water
then can be used as needed to generate electricity through more standard hydroelectric operations. Thinking about water policy and energy
policy together, in other words, may generate new and creative ways of thinking about both. Water supply issues in
particular may provide opportunities for thinking outside the traditional energy policy constraints. While water crises
are (or are about to become) real in many parts of the world, they cannot be addressed in isolation of our energy crisis.177
Desalination is such a potentially viable water supply option that countries such as Australia and the United States are
increasingly employing to avert acute water crises and to supplement more traditional water supplies. Like all watersupply
technologies, however, desalination encompasses a series of potential trade-offs among a traditional constellation of
factorswater needs, energy supply, economic costs, environmental impacts, social benefits, and the relatively new
consideration of climate change mitigation and adaptation. How exactly these factors trade off against each other will
vary considerably from location to location, rendering desalination an attractive option in some locations and a
wasteful option in others. And that is precisely the point, not just for desalination but for all water supply decisions. Identifying and
discussing the tradeoffs, variables, and variations inherent in providing fresh water in different locations should be an
integral part of combined water and energy policies. As with most complex human problems, there are unlikely to be universal
first-best panaceas for resolving the water supply/energy/climate change matrix. Yet desalination, like all other water supply
technologies from buckets to pumps, must be on the tableif only because it may help inspire comprehensive and creative
approaches to resolving these complexities in socially productive and environmentally productive ways.

1AC Water Conflicts Advantage
Its not just thirst, water stress is a threat multiplier that enflames all hot spotsits at the
intersection of all conflict and is a key factor in understanding the complexity of threats
Dinar et al 12. SHLOMI DINAR is associate professor in the Department of Politics and International Relations and associate director of the School of
International and Public Affairs at Florida International University. LUCIA DE STEFANO is associate professor at Complutense University of Madrid and researcher at
the Water Observatory of the Botn Foundation. JAMES DUNCAN is consultant on natural resource governance and geography with the World Bank. KERSTIN STAHL is
senior scientist at the Institute of Hydrology in the University of Freiburg. KENNETH M. STRZEPEK is research scientist with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change. AARON T. WOLF is a professor of geography in the College of Earth, Ocean, and Atmospheric Sciences at
Oregon State University, Foreign Affairs, October 18, 2012, "No Wars for Water", http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/138208/shlomi-dinar-lucia-de-stefano-
james-duncan-kerstin-stahl-kenneth/no-wars-for-water?page=show

In short, predictions of a Water World War are overwrought. However, tensions over water usage can still exacerbate other existing regional
conflicts. Climate change is expected to intensify droughts, floods, and other extreme weather conditions that jeopardize
freshwater quantity and quality and therefore is a threat-multiplier, making shaky regions shakier. So what river basins constitute the biggest
risks today? In a World Bank report we published in 2010 (as well as a subsequent article in a special issue of the Journal of Peace Research) we analyzed the
physical effects of climate change on international rivers. We modeled the variability in river annual runoff in the past and for future
climate scenarios. We also considered the existence and nature of the institutional capacity around river basins, in the form of international water
treaties, to potentially deal with the effects of climate change. According to our research, 24 of the world's 276 international river basins are already
experiencing increased water variability. These 24 basins, which collectively serve about 332 million people, are at high risk of
water related political tensions. The majority of the basins are located in northern and sub-Saharan Africa. A few others are located in
the Middle East, south-central Asia, and South America. They include the Tafna (Algeria and Morocco), the Dasht (Iran and Pakistan), the Congo (Central Africa), Lake
Chad (Central Africa), the Niger (Western Africa), the Nile (Northeastern Africa), and the Chira (Ecuador and Peru). There are no strong treaties
governing the use of these water reserves in tense territories. Should conflicts break out, there are no good mechanisms
in place for dealing with them. By 2050, an additional 37 river basins, serving 83 million people, will be at high risk for feeding into political tensions. As is
the case currently, a large portion of these are in Africa. But, unlike today, river basins within Central Asia, Eastern Europe, Central Europe, and Central
America will also be at high risk within 40 years. Some of these include the Kura-Araks (Iran, Turkey, and the Caucasus), the Neman (Eastern Europe) Asi-
Orontes (Lebanon, Syria, Turkey), and the Catatumbo Basins (Colombia and Venezuela). CROSSING THE NILE Among the larger African basins, the Nile has the
greatest implications for regional and global security. Tensions over access to the river already pit Ethiopia and Egypt, two important
Western allies, against one another. Egypt has been a major player in the Middle East Peace Process and Ethiopia is an important regional force in the Horn of
Africa, currently aiding other African forces to battle Al-Shabbab in Somalia. Over the years, a number of international water treaties have made rules
for the basin, but they are largely limited to small stretches of it. In particular, only Egypt and Sudan are party to the 1959 Nile
River Agreement, the principal treaty regarding the river. Egypt, which is the furthest downstream yet is one of the most powerful countries in
the region, has been able to heavily influence the water-sharing regime. Upstream countries, such as Ethiopia and Burundi, have been left out, hard-pressed to
harness the Nile for their own needs. In 1999, with increasingly vitriolic rhetoric between Egypt and Ethiopia sidetracking regional development, the World Bank
stepped up its involvement in the basin. It helped create a network of professional water managers as well as a set of investments in a number of sub-basins. Still, the
drafting of a new agreement stalled: upstream countries would not compromise on their right to develop water infrastructure
while downstream countries would not compromise on protecting their shares. In 2010, Ethiopia signed an agreement
with a number of the other upstream countries hoping to balance against Egypt and Sudan. More recently, the country has also announced
plans to construct a number of large upstream dams, which could affect the stability of the region. By 2050, the environmental
state of the Nile Basin will be even worse. That is why it is important to create a robust and equitable water treaty now. Such a treaty would focus on ways to harness
the river's hydropower potential to satiate the energy needs of all the riparian states while maintaining ecosystem health. The construction of dams and reservoirs
further upstream could likewise help even out water flows and facilitate agricultural growth. Projects such as these, mitigating damage to ecosystem health and local
populations, would benefit all parties concerned and thus facilitate further basin-wide cooperation. UP IN THE ARAL Another water basin of concern is the
Aral Sea, which is shared by Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan. The basin consists of two major rivers, the Syr Darya and Amu
Darya. During the Soviet era, these two rivers were managed relatively effectively. The break-up of the Soviet Union, however, ended that. The major dispute
now is between upstream Kyrgyzstan and downstream Uzbekistan over the Syr Darya. During the winter, Kyrgyzstan needs flowing .water to
produce hydroelectricity whereas Uzbekistan needs to store water to later irrigate cotton fields. The countries have made several attempts to
resolve the dispute. In particular, downstream Uzbekistan, which is rich in fuel and gas, has provided energy to Kyrgyzstan to compensate for keeping water in
its large reservoirs until the cotton-growing season. Such barter agreements, however, have had limited success because they are easily
manipulated. Downstream states might deliver less fuel during a rainy year, claiming they need less water from upstream reservoirs, and upstream states might
deliver less water in retaliation. Kyrgyzstan, frustrated and desperate for energy in winter months, plans to build mega hydro-electric plants in its
territory. And another upstream state, Tajikistan, is likewise considering hydro-electricity to satiate its own energy needs. Meanwhile, Uzbekistan is
building large reservoirs. Although these plans might make sense in the very near term, they are inefficient in the medium and long term because they don't
solve the real needs of downstream states for large storage capacity to protect against water variability across time. In fact, both Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan, along
with Kazakhstan, will see substantial increases in water variability between now and 2050. And so, the need to share the benefits of existing large-capacity upstream
reservoirs and coordinate water uses through strong and more efficient inter-state agreements is unavoidable. A stabilized Aral Sea basin would also benefit the
United States. With its withdrawal from Afghanistan, Washington has been courting Uzbekistan as a potential alternative ally and provider of stability in the region.
The Uzbek government seems willing to host U.S. military bases and work as a counter-weight to Russia. Kyrgyzstan is also an important regional player. The Manas
Air Base, the U.S. military installation near Bishkek, is an important transit point. The country is also working with the United States to battle drug trafficking and
infiltration of criminal and insurgent groups. Regional instability could disrupt any of these strategic relationships. If the past is any indication, the
world probably does not need to worry about impending water wars. But they must recognize how tensions over water can easily fuel larger
conflicts and distract states from other important geopolitical and domestic priorities. Since formal inter-state institutions are key to
alleviating tensions over shared resources, it would be wise, then, for the involved governments as well as the international community to negotiate sufficiently
robust agreements to deal with impending environmental change. Otherwise, freshwater will only further frustrate stability efforts in the world's
volatile regions.
These conflicts will go global
Reilly 2 Kristie, Editor for In These Times, a nonprofit, independent, national magazine published in Chicago. Weve
been around since 1976, fighting for corporate accountability and progressive government. In other words, a better
world, NOT A DROP TO DRINK, http://www.inthesetimes.com/issue/26/25/culture1.shtml)

*Cites environmental thinker and activist Vandana Shiva Maude Barlow and Tony Clarkeprobably North Americas
foremost water experts
The two books provide a chilling, in-depth examination of a rapidly emerging global crisis. Quite simply, Barlow and Clarke write, unless we dramatically change
our ways, between one-half and two-thirds of humanity will be living with severe fresh water shortages within the next quarter-century. The hard news is this:
Humanity is depleting, diverting and pollution the planets fresh water resources so quickly and relentlessly that every
species on earthincluding our ownis in mortal danger. The crisis is so great, the three authors agree, that the worlds next
great wars will be over water. The Middle East, parts of Africa, China, Russia, parts of the United States and several other
areas are already struggling to equitably share water resources. Many conflicts over water are not even recognized as
such: Shiva blames the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in part on the severe scarcity of water in settlement areas. As available fresh water on the planet
decreases, todays low-level conflicts can only increase in intensity.
Our impact is based on the best scholarship
Dinar 2 SAIS Review 22.2 (2002) 229-253 Water, Security, Conflict, and Cooperation Shlomi Dinar is a Ph.D. candidate
at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies. He is concentrating in environment,
negotiation, conflict, and cooperation. This paper is dedicated to the memory of Captain Jerome E. Levy. This paper
benefited from the Anna Sobol Levy Fellowship, a fellowship supported by Captain Levy. The author would also like to
thank Benjamin Miller, Emanuel Adler, and the editors of this journal for very constructive comments. This article was
originally inspired from an essay that originally appeared in International Negotiation. Shlomi Dinar, "Negotiation and
International Relations: A Framework for Hydropolitics," International Negotiation 5, no. 2 (2000).
The dichotomy of conflict and cooperation over water and its relationship to national and regional security reflects the reality of
hydropolitics. While military clashes have been associated with water, the concept of security does not end with nor does it only imply armed conflict. Because
the pursuit of peace, and thus conflict and cooperation, constitutes the flip side of security, water is indeed relevant to the concept of security. It is
this phenomenon that traditionalists have cast off as irrelevant and other rejectionists of the environment-security link have ignored. Linking security with
the environment does not increase the possibility that nations will engage in more armed action against other states for
the sake of natural resources such as water. Albeit minimal, evidence already exists as to the military skirmishes and military threats that have
taken place over water. Nations will engage in armed conflict and political disputes over water whether or not scholars
acknowledge the link between the environment and security. Similarly, the existence of more than 3,600 water treaties, the oldest dating to
805 AD, demonstrates a rich history of cooperation [End Page 239] over water regardless of scholarly debate on cooperation and the environment. The debate
regarding the link between water, conflict, and cooperation is thus futile and has become a scholarly debate marred by polemics and
semantics. Given its geographical attributes, freshwater truly straddles the notion of sovereignty that traditionalists
cherish so deeply and the international or regional conception that environmental globalists hold true. The problems
that arise from shared water resources are both national and regional in nature. Similarly, the solutions that are needed
to solve such problems are both national and regional. Most importantly for the debate on the environment and
security, however, the impediments to cooperation and the instigation of conflict over water are both national and
international in their sources. States in particular regions will continue to see water as a national security concern. Even
though a regional agreement may be the best solution to states' water problems, they will continue to couch their need
to access sufficient and clean freshwater in security and nationalist terms.

Water scarcity causes Central Asian war
Priyadarshi 12 Nitish, lecturer in the department of environment and water management at Ranchi University in India, War for water is not a far cry, June
16, http://www.cleangangaportal.org/node/44

That's been a constant dilemma for the Central Asian states since they became independent after the Soviet break-up. Much of Central Asia's water flows
from the mountains of Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, leaving downstream countries Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, and
Turkmenistan dependent and worried about the effects of planned hydropower plants upstream. Tashkent fears that those two
countries' use of water from Central Asia's two great rivers -- the Syr Darya and Amu Darya -- to generate power will diminish the amount reaching Uzbekistan, whose
28 million inhabitants to make up Central Asia's largest population. After the collapse of communism in the 1990s, a dispute arose between Hungary and Slovakia
over a project to dam the Danube River. It was the first of its type heard by the International Court of Justice and highlighted the difficulty for the Court to resolve
such issues decisively. There are 17 European countries directly reliant on water from the Danube so there is clear potential
for conflict if any of these countries act selfishly. Experts worry that dwindling water supplies could likely result in
regional conflicts in the future. For example, in oil-and-gas rich Central Asia, the upstream countries of Kyrgyzstan and
Tajikistan hold 90 percent of the region's water resources, while Uzbekistan, the largest consumer of water in the
region, is located downstream.

The impact to Central Asian water conflict culminates in extinction
Blank 2k [Stephen J. - Expert on the Soviet Bloc for the Strategic Studies Institute, American Grand Strategy and the Transcaspian Region, World Affairs. 9-22]
Thus many structural conditions for conventional war or protracted ethnic conflict where third parties intervene now exist in the Transcaucasus
and Central Asia. The outbreak of violence by disaffected Islamic elements, the drug trade, the Chechen wars, and the unresolved
ethnopolitical conflicts that dot the region, not to mention the undemocratic and unbalanced distribution of income across corrupt
governments, provide plenty of tinder for future fires. Many Third World conflicts generated by local structural factors also have great
potential for unintended escalation. Big powers often feel obliged to rescue their proxies and proteges. One or another
big power may fail to grasp the stakes for the other side since interests here are not as clear as in Europe. Hence commitments involving the
use of nuclear weapons or perhaps even conventional war to prevent defeat of a client are not well established or clear as in Europe. For instance,
in 1993 Turkish noises about intervening on behalf of Azerbaijan induced Russian leaders to threaten a nuclear war in that case. Precisely because Turkey is a NATO
ally but probably could not prevail in a long war against Russia, or if it could, would conceivably trigger a potential nuclear blow (not a
small possibility given the erratic nature of Russia's declared nuclear strategies), the danger of major war is higher here than almost everywhere
else in the CIS or the "arc of crisis" from the Balkans to China. As Richard Betts has observed, The greatest danger lies in areas where (1) the
potential for serious instability is high; (2) both superpowers perceive vital interests; (3) neither recognizes that the other's perceived
interest or commitment is as great as its own; (4) both have the capability to inject conventional forces; and (5) neither has willing proxies capable of
settling the situation.(77)

1AC Solvency
Ocean desalination technology is economically feasible, sustainable, and provides a long-term
solution to drought-plagued communities
Griggs 14, Brandon, How oceans can solve our freshwater crisis, CNN, 6/9/14, http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/26/tech/city-tomorrow-desalination/

It's been a cruel irony for ancient mariners and any thirsty person who has ever gazed upon a sparkling blue ocean: Water, water everywhere, and not a drop to
drink. But imagine a coastal city of the future, say in 2035. Along with basic infrastructure such as a port, roads, sewer lines and an electrical grid, it's
increasingly likely this city by the sea will contain a newer feature. A desalination plant. Thanks to improved technology, turning ocean
water into freshwater is becoming more economically feasible. And a looming global water crisis may make it crucial
to the planet's future. The United Nations predicts that by 2025, two-thirds of the world's population will suffer water
shortages, especially in the developing world and the parched Middle East. Scientists say climate change is making the
problem worse. Even in the United States, demand for water in drought-ravaged California and the desert Southwest
is outpacing supply. This is why a huge desalination plant is under construction in Carlsbad, California, some 30 miles north of San Diego. When
completed in 2016, it will be the largest such facility in the Western Hemisphere and create 50 million gallons of freshwater a day. "Whenever a drought
exacerbates freshwater supplies in California, people tend to look toward the ocean for an answer," said Jennifer Bowles, executive director
of the California-based Water Education Foundation. "It is, after all, a seemingly inexhaustible supply." A growing trend Most desalination
technology follows one of two methods: distillation through thermal energy or the use of membranes to filter salt from water. In the distillation process,
saltwater is heated to produce water vapor, which is then condensed and collected as freshwater. The other method employs reverse osmosis to pump seawater
through semi-permeable membranes -- paper-like filters with microscopic holes -- that trap the salt while allowing freshwater molecules to pass through. The
remaining salty water is then pumped back into the ocean. Officials at the Carlsbad plant say they can covert two gallons of seawater into one gallon of
freshwater by filtering out 99.9% of the salt. There are some 16,000 desalination plants on the planet, and their numbers are rising. The amount of
desalted water produced around the world has more than tripled since 2000, according to the Center for Inland Desalination
Systems at the University of Texas at El Paso. "Desalination is growing in arid regions," said Tom Davis, director of the center. "We are
making progress in the USA, but the countries around the Persian Gulf are way ahead in the use of desalination,
primarily because they have no alternative supplies of freshwater." Israel, in an arid region with a coastline on the Mediterranean, meets half its freshwater
needs through desalination. Australia, Algeria, Oman, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates also rely heavily on the
ocean for their municipal water. In the United States, desalination projects are concentrated in coastal states such as California, Florida and Texas.
Some environmentalists are wary of desalination, which consumes large amounts of energy, produces greenhouse gases and kills vital marine organisms that are
sucked into intake pipes. But proponents believe the technology offers a long-term, sustainable solution to the globe's water
shortages. One entrepreneur has even built an experimental solar desalination plant in California's San Joaquin Valley. "When other freshwater
sources are depleted, desalination will be our best choice," said Davis, a UTEP professor of engineering. California dreaming
Within the United States, the water crisis is especially severe in California, which has been stricken by drought over the last three years. California's biggest
source of freshwater is the snow that falls in the Sierras and other mountains, where it slowly melts into creeks and makes its way into aquifers and reservoirs.
But if the planet continues to grow warmer, snow will increasingly fall as rain and will be harder to collect because it will swell creeks faster and create more
flooding, said Bowles of the Water Education Foundation. Seventeen desalination plants are being built or planned along the state's 840-mile coastline. City
officials in Santa Barbara recentlyvoted to reactivate their desalination plant, which was built in 1991 but shut after heavy rains filled nearby reservoirs in the
early 1990s. Another $200 million facility has been proposed for the Bay Area, although construction won't likely begin for several years. "The key question with
ocean desalination is how much are you willing to pay for it? The amount of energy required to desalt ocean water can be daunting," said Bowles, adding that
operating costs at the Santa Barbara plant alone are estimated at $5 million per year. But advocates believe the price of desalination will continue
to decrease as the process improves. This will be true of the massive Carlsbad plant, said Bob Yamada, water resources manager
with the San Diego County Water Authority. "The cost for this water will be about double what it costs us to import water into San Diego," Yamada said.
"However, over time we expect that the cost of desalinated water will equal, and be less than, the cost of imported
water. That may take 15 or 20 years, but we expect that to occur." Ultimately, experts say, municipalities will need to balance
desalination projects with conservation and water from more traditional sources, such as rivers, reservoirs and recycled wastewater. "You can't get all
your water from one source and have that source be hundreds of miles away," said Peter MacLaggan, senior vice president at Poseidon Resources Corporation,
which is leading development of the Carlsbad plant. "When and if the drought does come, and you don't have enough snowpack in the Sierras -- after 12 dry
years the Rockies are seeing the impact of that today -- you've got (water) sources here within the boundaries of San Diego County," he said. "We have a $190
billion economy in this region. It's dependent on water to sustain that economy. So the question you need to consider, is 'What's the cost of not
having enough water!!!!!!!!!!?'"
The plan is critical only federal oversight can enforce a focus on equity rather than profit and
creates a framework thats modeled internationally
Sellers 8 [Jefferey M. Sellers, Ph.D. in Political Science at Yale University (also J.D. and D.C.L. in Law, Yale University). Currently, Associate Professor of Political
Science with courtesy appoint- ments in Geography and the School of Policy, Planning and Development, University of Southern California, United States of
America. DESALINATION POLICY IN A MULTILEVEL REGULATORY STATE,
http://www.usc.edu/dept/polsci/sellers/Publications/Assets/Sellers%20ch%2014.pdf | prs]

Desalination in the United States stands at the threshold of a breakthrough that is likely to has far-reaching
consequences for the many regions of the world where future water needs are likely to prove more ex- tensive and
more severe, such as India and China. The new reverse osmosis plants being developed in California will mark the first
large-scale community water provision by this means in the United States, and have the potential to pioneer technical and organizational
solutions that could provide the foundation for a global market and a real solution to the looming world water crisis. In
the United States itself, desalination is forecast to provide no more than 10% of water, but in certain regions will emerge as a major supplement to overcome
droughts. Although cost considerations still limit the applicability of emerging desalination tech- nologies, public subsidies in
states like California and Texas now offer the prospect of profitability for firms contemplating investing in the new desalination
technologies. It seems likely that the further refine- ments that are likely to occur will finally bring desalination across the
threshold of cost-effectiveness, at least for certain types of communities with the right combination of seawater or
brackish water access and need. Indeed, local opposition on environmentalist grounds of the sort that arose in Huntington Beach has remained only
scattered. In poorer communities like Long Beach (California) or Brownsville (Texas), there has been no sign of regulatory challenges to
plans for desalination. Even the critical issue of energy use for desalination has rarely been framed as a greenhouse gas issue the way it has in Mexico or
even in other areas of U.S. environmental policy discussion. Instead, the energy problem has been framed mostly as a matter of added cost. Despite the much
more centralized context of policymaking toward desalination in Mexico and other developing countries, and the greater li- mits on resources to invest in these
technologies, substantial lessons can be drawn from this ongoing story. First, it appears likely that even before the cost of desalination has
fallen to make it marketable by itself, it can be made widely cost-effective with a combination of private investment
and public subsidy. Despite rising costs for the necessary energy, growing technical efficiencies are likely to continue to
chip away at the costs and energy requirements for desalination. More far reaching are the implications for the ways that any kind of
system for public or private provision of water through desalination should be organized. Private investment may be unavoidable above all for desalination to be
carried out in developing countries, as it is unclear how else adequate investment can be generate.d to make the more effi- cient larger scale reverse osmosis
projects feasible. To make privatized arrangements accountable, however, protections through regulation at multiple
levels, including local review, are critical. The presence of mechanisms for local accountability like those at work in Huntington Beach is a significant
virtue of the U.S. regulatory system. As the case of Huntington Beach also suggests, the localized, frag- mented process that has helped provide for this
accountability in the Uni- ted States also has major disadvantages. The localized nature of most regulation means that little attention is
given to equity among places. Not only was this issue almost entirely missing from debates at Huntington Beach, but the opposition centered partly on
objections that the water might be distributed beyond the limits of this wealthy town itself. Mo- reover, it is only in the most privileged communities like
Huntington Beach that the U.S. regulatory process has given rise to challenges that have forced more attention to environmental concerns. The problems of
fragmented governance extend beyond this question of social and environmental equity to issues of overall efficiency.
The implantation of desalination plants in the United States has largely follo- wed the patterns of public investment, gravitating toward the most subsi- dized state
of California. But beyond this tendency, however, public planning or more systematic collective decision-making has mostly been
missing. The placement of new plants has proceeded according to logics of private investment rather than policy
guidance. It is by no means clear that the current placement of plants corresponds to the public need for desalination
or even the demand of local consumers. Instead, investors like Poseidon appear to be focusing on communities with
greater ability to pay for the investments in plants and infrastructure for desalination technologies. Finally, the case of Tampa
and the debates in Huntington Beach sug- gest that private investment itself may still be too unreliable by itself to furnish the basis
for investment in desalination. State or federal regulation may ultimately be necessary to establish a stable basis for
market investments and accountability in desalination projects within the United States. In these respects as well,
current developments in the area in the U.S. provide a cautionary tale for other countries.


Desalination provides sustainable water resources to poor communities
Durham et al No Date, Integrated Water Resource Management through Integrated Water Resource
Management, International Desalination Association, http://www.bvsde.paho.org/bvsacd/cwwa/bruc.pdf

VIII. ECOMOMIC BENEFITS TO THE COMMUNITY The economic benefits to the community have to be calculated based on local priorities and costs. A tailored
IWRM approach is needed to add the maximum benefit to the community. Typical benefits that support the economy include: ! Planning for a sustainable future
requires a reliable knowledge of resource available, recharge, future demand and a positive involvement of the community. ! Partnerships that provide
affordable water supplies to poor communities by building on local experience and skills. ! Increasing the availability of potable water and reducing the water
cost by repurifying wastewater for industry and irrigation. ! Providing a drought proof water resource through reuse. ! Growing cash crops and creating
employment in areas blighted by soil salinisation. ! Positively controlling saline ingress and recharge aquifers to create a sustainable water resource. ! Reducing
wastewater disposal to sea and protecting bathing beaches ! Supporting the tourism industry through irrigation of landscapes and golf industry with repurified
water. IX. CONCLUSION Integrated water resource management needs a holistic long-term approach. This must be supported by legislation, agreed quality
standards and international finance to enable projects to take place. This is helped where one government water agency is responsible for all water resource
issues - ranging from fresh water to wastewater treatment - rather than separate regulators responsible for a single part of the total solution. The only solutions
to water shortage are; to maximise the efficiency of water management, reuse, desalinate or import. The increasing global experience in large high efficiency
systems is continually reducing the production costs. The cost of power, finance, equipment and membranes are the key to maximising the opportunity for
sustainable projects. This is where Hybrid systems can provide a real benefit by taking advantage of the process synergy between power generation, desalination,
reuse and aquifer recharge in one system.

And, only desalination can curb that water shortages that megacities inflict on urban populations
Durham et al No Date, Integrated Water Resource Management through Integrated Water Resource
Management, International Desalination Association, http://www.bvsde.paho.org/bvsacd/cwwa/bruc.pdf

Global urbanisation, the growth of mega cities, shanty towns and poor rural communities continues to challenge the water industry. Extremes in weather
patterns and environmental disasters demonstrate the need for more robust and flexible water management strategies. Increased water demand from
population and economic growth, high dependency on irrigation for agricultural yields and over abstraction of groundwater resulting in seawater ingress and soil
salinisation are all factors that create water and food shortages, agricultural employment problems and urban growth. These problems are highly relevant as the
majority of the worlds population lives near to the sea. Desalination technology is an essential tool in providing rapid and reliable alternative water sources. The
majority of advanced reuse projects include desalination technology with brackish water reverse osmosis. However, it is essential to manage our ground and
surface water efficiently and recognise the real value of wastewater use for aquifer recharge, indirect potable use, food production and the demands of industry.

Federal government is key
a. Only coordinated federal investment solves
National Academies 8 (National Academy of Sciences, private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering
research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare, 2008, Desalination: A National Perspective, pp. 228-229, aps)

Federal Research Funding The optimal level of federal investment in desalination research is inherently a question of public policy. Although the decision should be
informed by science, it is notat its hearta scientific decision. However, several conclusions emerged from the committees analysis of current research and development funding
(see Chapter 2) that suggest the importance of strategic integration of the research program. The committee concluded that there is no integrated and strategic
direction to the federal desalination research and development efforts. Continuation of a federal program of research dominated by congressional earmarks and beset by
competition between funding for research and funding for construction will not serve the nation well and will require the expenditure of more funds than necessary to achieve specified
goals. To ensure that future federal investments in desalination research are integrated and prioritized so as to address the two major goals identified in this report, the federal
government will need to develop a coordinated strategic plan that utilizes the recommendations of this report as a basis. It is beyond the committees scope to recommend
specific plans for improving coordination among the many federal agencies that support desalination research. Instead, responsibility for developing the plan should rest with
the Office of Science and Technology Policys (OSTPs) National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) because this Cabinet-level Council is the principal means within
the executive branch can to coordinate science and technology policy across the diverse entities that make up the Federal research and development
enterprise.1 For example, the NSTCs Subcommittee on Water Availability and Quality has member-ship representing more than 20 federal agencies and recently released A Strategy
for Federal Science and Technology to Support Water Avail- ability and Quality in the United States (SWAQ, 2007). Representatives of the National Science Foundation, the Bureau of
Reclamation, the Environmental Protection Agency, the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, the Office of Naval Research, and the Department of Energy should
participate fully in the development of the strategic federal plan for desalination research and development. Five years into the implementation of this plan, the OSTP should evaluate
the status of the plan, whether goals have been met, and the need for further funding. A coordinated strategic plan governing desalination research at the federal level
along with effective implementation of the research plan will be the major determinants of federal research productivity in this endeavor. The committee cannot
emphasize strongly enough the importance of a well-organized, well-articulated strategically directed effort. In the absence of any or all of these preconditions,
federal investment will yield less than it could. Therefore, a well-developed and clearly articulated strategic research plan, as called for above, should be a
precondition for any new federal appropriations. Initial federal appropriations on the order of recent spending on desalination research (total appropriations of
about $25 million annually, as in fiscal years 2005 and 2006) should be sufficient to make good progress toward the overall research goals if the funding is strategically
directed toward the proposed research topics as recommended in this report. Annual federal appropriations of $25 million, properly allocated, should be sufficient to have
an impact in the identified priority research areas, given the context of expected state and private-sector funding. This level of federal funding is also consistent with
NRC (2004a), which recommended annual appropriations of $700 million for research supporting the nations entire water resources research agenda. Reallocation of current
spending will be necessary to address topics that are currently underfunded. If current research funding is not reallocated, the overall desalination research and
development budget will need to be enhanced. Nevertheless, support for the research agenda stated here should not come at the expense of other high-priority water resource
research topics, such as those identified in Confronting the Nations Water Problems: The Role of Research (NRC, 2004a).


b. Solves environment and cost concerns- state and private sector fail
National Academies 8 (National Academy of Sciences, private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering
research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare) Desalination: A National Perspective. Report in Brief., National Academy of
Sciences, 2008, http://dels.nas.edu/resources/static-assets/materials-based-on-reports/reports-in-brief/desal_final.pdf

In order for desalination to become a more attractive option for communities facing water shortages, two overarching long-term research goals need to be met:
1. Understand the environmental impacts of desalination and develop approaches to minimize these impacts relative to other water supply alternatives, and 2. Develop approaches to lower the
financial costs of desalination so that it is an attractive option relative to other alternatives in locations where traditional sources of water are inadequate. The report recommends that a
coordinated, strategic plan be developed to ensure that future federal investments in desalination are integrated and prioritized and address the topics in the federal
interest within the two major goals identified in this report (see Box 1). The report also recommends that environmental research be emphasized up front when implementing the research agenda, because this
research has the greatest potential for enabling desalination to help meet future U.S. water needs. The growth in desalination was made possible to a great extent by a major federal
investment in desalination research and development from the late 1950s to the early 1980s. Today, however, the private sector appears to be funding the majority of desalination research, with
estimated spending more than twice that of other sources of funding. Some states, specifically California, are investing in desalination research, but state funding is generally directed to site-specific or region-specific
problems, with a heavy emphasis on pilot and demonstration projects. Most of the federal funding for desalination R&D comes from Congressional earmarks which limit the ability
to develop a steady research program. Furthermore, federal investments in desalination research fell to $10 million in FY 2007, down from $24 million dollars in FY 2005 and 2006,
largely due to an absence of earmarks in FY 2007. Among the nine federal agencies and laboratories that currently fund desalination research, there is no integrated or
coordinated strategic research plan, and each agency or laboratory has its own research objectives. Continuation of a federal program of research dominated by congressional earmarks will not serve the
nation well. To ensure that future federal investments in desalination research are integrated and prioritized so as to address the two major goals identified in this report, the report recommends that the Office of
Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) take the lead in planning and coordinating federal research and development. Initial federal appropriations on the order of recent spending on
desalination research (total appropriations of about $25 million annually) should be sufficient to make good progress toward these goals, when complemented by ongoing non federal and
private- sector desalination research.