Mexico Hydrocarbons Negative Wave 2 - Gonzaga 2013

Gonzaga Debate Institute 13 1
Brovero Lundeen Mexico Hydrocarbons Neg Supplement
***HYDROCARBONS NEG
SUPPLEMENT***
Page 1 of 121

Page 2 of 121

***Case***
Page 3 of 121

Inherency Answers
Page 4 of 121

THA Pass Now
Page 5 of 121

Will Pass Momentum

The THA will be passed in the status quo- there is momentum and members of Congress are
on board
Martin, Institute of the Americas at the University of California Energy Director, & Wood,
Woodrow Wilson Center for Scholars Mexico Institute Director, 13
[Jeremy and Duncan, 5-3-13, World Politics Review, U.S. Should Act Quickly on Transboundary
Hydrocarbon Agreement With Mexico, http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/articles/12923/u-s-should-actquickly-on-transboundary-hydrocarbon-agreement-with-mexico, accessed 7-10-13, MSG]
In the United States, meanwhile, progress stalled for more than a year. But just in time for yesterdays
bilateral meeting, the agreement is again under discussion as legislators revive the dormant ratification process,
which is good news for those eager to see its approval in the U.S. Indeed, according to the White House,
Obama spoke in positive terms yesterday about the recent progress made on the agreement: Both the House
Subcommittee on Western Hemisphere Affairs and the House Committee on Natural Resources recently held
hearings focused on the challenges and opportunities that approval of the accord would present for the United
States. On April 18, a bill was introduced in the House of Representatives that would make way for the
approval and implementation of the terms of the agreement.
These are all positive steps, and their progress will be monitored closely by U.S. and international observers,
especially Mexico. But it bears underscoring that further delay in U.S. adoption of the agreement makes little
sense. The agreement is not an overly polarizing issue domestically: in fact, quite the opposite. Several
lawmakers have described it as a win-win for both Mexico and the U.S.
As the U.S. Congress debates the deal, it is worth revisiting the four key reasons the agreement merits an
expeditious approval in the coming weeks.
First, approval of the deal in the U.S. would be an important sign of bilateral concord, particularly at the
outset of a new administration in Mexico and a second term for Obama. This is important, as it underscores
the two nations' increasing ability to work together and conclude complicated agreementsand cooperation
on binational issues unrelated to immigration or crime and drugs.
Second, this agreement makes clear that both nations are keenly aware of the energy potential of the Gulf,
particularly along the maritime border. But it also firmly establishes the issue of increased regulation and
standards for drilling in a bilateral agreement. Since the April 2010 Macondo accident, the largest oil spill in
U.S. history, the U.S. has been more concerned with drilling safety not just in the U.S. but also in neighboring
countries around the Gulf such as Cuba and Mexico. This agreement formalizes interaction in terms of r-
egulation and any responses to incidents along the maritime border.

Third, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was correct to emphasize the commercial opportunity and energy
security element of the accord when it was first announced. The agreement provides the possibility for U.S.
firms to join with Mexicos national oil company, Pemex, to exploit deep-water oil resources in the Gulf of
Mexico along the countries' maritime boundaries. This could provide important opportunities for U.S.
companies, including exciting joint venture opportunities with Pemex long thought impossible.
Finally, the agreement is relevant and worthy of attention in both the U.S. and Mexico because of the
important role of Mexican oil in the U.S. energy security equation, and the importance of the U.S. market for
Mexican oil exports and revenue.
During her remarks at the signing ceremony, Clinton called the agreement part of a commitment to improve
energy security for both countries and to ensure safe, efficient, responsible exploration of the oil and gas
reservoirs in the Gulf of Mexico.
This last point has echoed throughout the congressional hearings on the topic, while members of Congress from
both parties and from across the country have focused on the importance of collaboration with our neighbors,
shared technology and the opportunity to boost energy security on both sides of the border.
The presidents visit to Mexico and the accompanying surge in interest in the agreement provide the necessary
momentum to facilitate passage of the bill and take the critical first steps toward implementation.
Page 6 of 121

THA will pass now- it is bipartisan and the White House is on board
Geman, The Hill, 6-25-13
[Ben, 6-25-13, The Hill, White House cannot support House US-Mexico drilling bill,
http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/e2-wire/307769-white-house-cannot-support-house-us-mexico-drilling-bill,
accessed 7-10-13, MSG]
The White House statement, however, stops short of a veto threat despite saying it "cannot support" the
measure. It says the administration looks forward to working with Congress on an implementing bill.
Click here for much more on the House bill and its controversial exemption from rules required under the
2010 Dodd-Frank financial overhaul law.
The Senate version of the implementing bill, sponsored by the bipartisan leadership of the Senates energy
committee, does not include the exemption from the Securities and Exchange Commission payment disclosure
rules.
But proponents of the House measure say the carve-out is needed to prevent a collision with confidentiality
provisions in the U.S.-Mexico accord.
The underlying 2012 U.S.-Mexico accord, which has support from Republicans and the administration, is
designed to enable cooperation in development of oil-and-gas along a maritime boundary in the Gulf of
Mexico.
Implementing this Agreement will offer significant opportunities for responsible and efficient exploration and
development of hydrocarbon resources in an expanded area along the U.S.-Mexico maritime boundary as well
as significant new opportunities for U.S. companies, the White House said.
Page 7 of 121

Energy Security/Production Answers
Page 8 of 121

Link Answers
Page 9 of 121

Turn US Retrenchment
US oil dependence is good retrenchment is impossible because lower prices would lead to
increased instability and counterbalancing
New York Times 4/27/13
(Benjamin Alter and Edward Fishman, Foreign Affairs editors, The Dark Side of Energy Independence,
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/28/opinion/sunday/the-dark-side-of-energy-independence.html?
pagewanted=all&_r=0, Accessed 7/12/13, JC)
Last March, President Obama said that new energy sources and technologies would make America less dependent on
whats going on in the Middle East. The Romney campaign, meanwhile, argued that energy independence would
mean that the nations security is no longer beholden to unstable but oil-rich regions halfway around the world.
But that is a fantasy. While the latest energy revolution will be a boon to Americas economy, it will in no way
allow the United States to turn its back on the rest of the world.
Thats because Americas oil and gas bonanza will drive down global energy prices, undercutting the foundations
of petrostates everywhere. According to Francisco Blanch, the head of commodities research at Bank of America
Merrill Lynch, oil could fall to just $50 a barrel within the next two years, which could unleash unrest in regions
crucial to American interests. Far from releasing the United States from the burden of global leadership, this process
would force Washington to assume an even greater international role than it currently plays.
If theres one part of the world that America would like to be less encumbered by, its the volatile and oil-rich Middle
East. But energy independence will not spell the end of American engagement in that region. On the contrary,
lower energy prices will undermine the stability of the Persian Gulf monarchies, whose hefty oil revenues have
allowed them to win their populations loyalties through patronage and a lack of taxation. These countries do
not always share American values or help advance American interests, but anything that destabilizes them would
create problems that Washington could not afford to ignore.
Consider Bahrain, which earns 70 percent of its revenues through petroleum production and refining. The small island
monarchy has undergone deeply destabilizing protests since the start of the Arab Spring. A drop in global energy
prices would hurt the already weak government, breathing new life into opposition forces. A populist revolution
in Bahrain could empower the countrys long-repressed Shiite majority, who already resent Washingtons
support for the ruling Sunni al-Khalifa family. A new regime in Bahrain might even seek to expel the Navys Fifth
Fleet, complicating Americas efforts to protect international shipping lanes, fight piracy and check Irans
regional ambitions.
Even more alarming is the prospect of instability in Saudi Arabia. In 2011, the Saudi royal family was able to head
off an Arab Spring-style revolution because of its enormous oil revenues, doling out $130 billion in benefits to pacify
the countrys younger and poorer inhabitants. Should lower oil prices make such patronage impossible in the
future, the kingdom could face domestic unrest making the country a far less reliable partner for America in
fighting terrorism and countering Iran. Moreover, if Saudi Arabia has less of its own money to spend on regional
security, Washington will have to make up for the shortfall.
US presence in the Middle East is stabilizingpullout would force Asian oil consumers to
enter conflict over contested oil reserves
Thompson, Lexington Institute COO, 12
(Loren, chief operating officer at the Lexington Institute [non-profit public-policy think tank] 12/3/12, Forbes, What
Happens When America No Longer Needs Middle East Oil?
http://www.forbes.com/sites/lorenthompson/2012/12/03/what-happens-when-america-no-longer-needs-middle-eastoil/, Accessed 7/12/13, JC)
Even if it were, Washingtons options for insulating U.S. energy markets from global price swings are multiplying as
domestic production grows. If you know the history of global oil in the years before World War Two, then you
realize there is nothing new about America enjoying energy independence as Asia worries about its own needs.
Page 10 of 121

What definitely is new, though, is that in the near future there might be no western nation capable of or willing to
police the Persian Gulf.
Britain carried that burden from the late 1700s until World War Two, but its circumstances were so diminished in the
wars aftermath that it soon exited all of its military bases East of Suez. As Britain receded in the Middle East,
Americas role there grew especially after successive energy crises engineered by members of the Organization of
Petroleum Exporting Countries alerted Washington to its growing dependence on foreign oil. So the Pentagon
became accustomed to assuring the security of oil passing through the Strait of Hormuz, maintaining a continuous
naval presence in and around the Gulf while periodically deploying ground forces to protect fragile oil-producing
states.
Nothing lasts forever, though, and now a combination of energy independence and economic necessity may lead
Washington to become more insular in its outlook, the same way London did after the war. With less need for foreign
oil and an increasingly urgent requirement to rein in federal borrowing, it doesnt take a genius to figure out
where the political system will be inclined to cut spending. It will be in distant places that have ceased having an
impact on how elections turn out.
With the prospect of OPEC-induced energy shortages off the table, at least in America, political leaders are sure to
begin asking why the U.S. Navy is carrying the burden of making sure China has secure sources of oil. The
answers they get from Pentagon strategists arent likely to be well received in a nation where economic growth has
slowed to a crawl due in no small part to Chinese mercantilism.
So theres a real possibility that Washington will go through the same East-of-Suez debate that London did in the
1960s. The Obama Administrations new Asia-Pacific military posture may be the first, tentative sign that
America is losing its enthusiasm for securing Middle East oil supplies. Of course, everyone in the administration
will vigorously reject any such interpretation. But just for fun, lets ask the question of who wins and who loses if
America decides its had enough of being the policeman on the beat in the Persian Gulf.
The biggest losers would be the Arab oil states grouped in the Gulf Cooperation Council, most of which are
monarchies kept in power by a combination oil dollars and American military power. Despite their oil revenues,
none of these countries except Saudi Arabia has the wherewithal to defend itself against military pressure from
Iran if America leaves the stage or for that matter from Iraq, which has repeatedly laid claim to oil fields in Kuwait
and other nearby states. The vacuum created by an American departure would force nations like Bahrain and Qatar
to seek new military protectors, either by submitting to the influence of bigger regional powers or by reaching out
to China.
The second category of losers would be the economies of East Asia, which the International Energy Agency says will
be the main consumers of Persian Gulf oil in the years ahead. China, Japan, South Korea and Taiwan are heavily
dependent on the flow of oil passing through the Strait of Hormuz, and yet do little to assure that flow is not
disrupted by local tensions. If America pulls out of the Gulf, the nations of East Asia will either have to play a
bigger military role in the Middle East, or find other sources of oil. America might have sufficient new-found
reserves of fossil fuel to supply Japan and South Korea in an emergency, but concern about access to Persian
Gulf oil would undoubtedly exacerbate tensions over who owns contested oil reserves in the South China Sea
and elsewhere.
Page 11 of 121

Impact Answers
Page 12 of 121

No Impact Asia War

No Middle Eastern resource warsAsia isnt a threat and status quo solves US natural gas
and oil
Barnett, Senior Strategic Researcher and Professor in the Warfare Analysis & Research
Department at the U.S. Naval War College, 12
(Thomas P. M. Barnett, Ph.D in Political Science from Harvard, Assistant for Strategic Futures in the Office of Force
Transformation in the Department of Defense, Senior Managing Director of Enterra Solutions, a contributing editor
for Esquire magazine, and a Distinguished Scholar and Author at the Howard H. Baker, Jr. Center for Public Policy at
the University of Tennessee; 5/29/12, Time, Death to Resource Wars! http://nation.time.com/2012/05/29/death-toresource-wars/, Accessed 7/12/13, JC)
Nice Washington Post piece on Saturday about how the center of gravity in global oil exploration and production is
shifting to the Western hemisphere. No, the bulk of global conventional oil reserves still sits in the Persian Gulf, but
the larger point is worth exploring: we no longer project global futures where East and West logically fight over
Middle East energy reserves. Those expected long-term dynamics are collapsing right now before our eyes.
Its not just the new conventional oil finds in the Americas, but the lifting of unconventional reserves (so-called
tight oil). Then theres the fracking revolution in natural gas that favors the Western Hemisphere in a big, big
way, because four of the top seven reserves in the world (U.S., Argentina, Mexico, Canada) are found here. The
fracking revolution kicks off two additional mini-revolutions in energy: the accelerated shift to natural gas-powered
vehicles, reducing the oil demand even further, and the displacement of coal in electricity generation frees up the
cleanest and most high-quality coal in the world for export to Asia, where electricity demand is skyrocketing.
So heres the geo-strategic reality shaping up: the Western Hemisphere doesnt need the Persian Gulf, which is
source #5 to the U.S. market, after the U.S. itself, North America, South America and Africa. But not only is the
U.S. increasingly less worried about the Persian Gulf and more willing logically to let that become Asias
problem to manage (its their oil after all, as more than half of it heads their way now, and that percentage will
only grow), it also becomes a trusted and important energy supplier to Asia (liquid natural gas and coal over time).
Toss in Chinas growing food reliance on the Western Hemisphere, which only grows with that nations middle
class, and the climate change that makes it harder to grow food over there, and were looking at a global future in
which China and the U.S. are intertwined in basic resource dependencies: they need our food and energy, and
we need their savings. Those realities are already firmly in place: the Western hemisphere largely feeds the
Eastern one in terms of major grain flows (reflecting underlying water-resource realities), and Asia has been the
primary saver in the global financial system for several decades now.
So no, there is no civilizational fight over the Middle East. All that imagined nonsense falls by the wayside.
Likewise, the strategic pivot pursued by the U.S. today is a complete whiff in strategic terms. Globalization
has already conquered East Asia, creating the vast and inescapable interdependencies described here. That
battle, however you want to describe it, is already over.
Page 13 of 121

No Impact Resource Wars

No Middle Eastern resource warscurrent foreign policy proves that US interests call for
stable region
Kugler, Center for Technology and Natural Security distinguished research professor, 11
(Richard L. Kugler, National Defense University senior consultant, advisor at the Office of Secretary of
Defense (OSD), PhD from MIT, former director of Department of Defense's (DOD) Strategic Concepts Development
Center, former senior executive in the Office of Secretary of Defense, and professor at RAND, Georgetown
University and George Washington University in Security Policy Studies; July 2011, Institute for National Strategic
Studies, New Directions in U.S. National Security Strategy, Defense Plans, and Diplomacy, p. 6,
http://www.ndu.edu/CTNSP/docUploaded/New%20Directions.pdf, Accessed 7/12/13, JC)
Proclaiming that the United States has important interests in the Greater Middle East that include stable security
affairs and political-economic progress, the NSS 2010 calls for an American engagement that is both
comprehensive and strategic and that extends beyond near-term threats to include long-term development. In
Iraq, it calls for a responsible transition to full Iraqi responsibility as U.S. forces withdraw by the end of 2011.
As the war in Iraq ends, it promises strong U.S. civilian support for the country, led by the State Department,
coupled with a regional diplomacy aimed at ensuring that Iraq emerges as stable, secure, and prosperous with a
competent, democratic government.
The NSS 2010 also calls for vigorous efforts to promote Arab-Israeli peace rooted in a two-state solution for
Palestine and Israel, as well as better Israeli relations with Syria and Lebanon. To promote a responsible Iran, the
NSS 2010 calls for a U.S. policy of engagement in hope that Iran will switch course away from threatening behavior
and toward constructive participation in regional and global affairs. But it also warns that if Iran fails to respond
positively, it will face even greater isolation.
Through the lens of the NSS 2010, the practice of investing in the capacity of strong and durable partners
refers to efforts aimed at helping failed and failing states to surmount their internal problems, achieve
political-economic progress, and resist radicalization and extremism. This agenda has three components:
fostering security and reconstruction in the aftermath of conflict, pursuing sustainable and responsible
security systems in at-risk states, and preventing the emergence of conflict by promoting long-term
development. The desired outcome is not only restored stable states but also close friends and partners of the
United States. The NSS 2010 cites Iraq and Afghanistan as the top near-term priorities for this type of involvement,
but its open-ended discussion suggests potential involvements elsewhere when failing states have strategic
importance. The implication is that even if the United States ultimately withdraws from Iraq and Afghanistan, it
will be in the business of stabilization, reconstruction, and comprehensive approaches for a long time.
Page 14 of 121

Production Bad
Page 15 of 121

Production Bad Warming

Increased fossil fuel production entrenches our reliance on fossil fuels - this accelerates
warming and makes a transition to renewables impossible
Oil Change International, No Date
[Oil Change International, The Price of Oil: Global Warming, http://priceofoil.org/thepriceofoil/global-warming/,
accessed, 7-10-13 AMS]
Oil Companies and Climate Change
If we hope to maintain a stable climate, the world cannot afford to burn more than one quarter of the carbon
contained in already identified fossil fuel reserves so why on earth is the oil and gas industry spending in
excess of $150 billion each year looking for new reserves?
Current reserves of oil alone are more than enough to take us into full-blown climate chaos. Natural gas, often
touted for its supposed ecological benefits, is not much better. A glance at the total global coal reserves is enough
to induce despair. Any strategy to address climate change must by definition involve the phase out of these fossil
fuels, and just transition strategies need to be negotiated for the labor forces and communities that currently
produce them.
The oil companies with the highest profile on the climate change issue are BP, Shell and ExxonMobil. While all
three companies now publicly admit that climate change exists (a marked change for ExxonMobil in recent years),
their level of commitment to pursuing alternatives remains extremely low.
To be clear, these are oil companies. And BP and Shell are among the most ambitious companies in the world in
their targets for increasing their rate of extraction of oil and gas, Shell by 5 per cent a year, and BP by between 5.5
and 7 per cent.
In 2009, Oil Change International released a report with Friends of the Earth (International, Europe, U.S. and The
Netherlands), PLATFORM, and Greenpeace UK that rates the carbon intensity of the top international oil companies,
revealing that Shell is now the most carbon intensive oil company in the world based on its total resources.
Investments in tar sands and oil shale, reliance on liquefied natural gas (LNG) and continued gas flaring in
Nigeria all contribute to high carbon emissions just to produce oil that will release more carbon dioxide when
it is consumed!
Increased offshore drilling is bad frequent spills, small reserves, small market share, and
accelerates warming
Southern Alliance for Clean Energy 8
(Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, nonprofit energy organization, 2008, Offshore Drilling: A False Answer to
Energy Prices, http://www.usclimatenetwork.org/resource-database/offshore-drilling-a-false-answer-to-energy-prices,
Accessed 7/13/13) Note: Date based on most recent reference
Drilling will not lead to energy independence.
The amount of oil available offshore (in the Atlantic and Eastern Gulf) would only last the United States
about 13 months at present rates of consumption.
The United States is responsible for 24% of total global oil consumption, but we only provide 6% of total world oil
production and hold only 2.5% of the worlds oil reserves.
The United States imports more than two-thirds of our daily oil needs. Drilling will not lower gas prices.
The Department of Energy says it will take nearly a decade for new offshore wells to come online. Peak production
from any new offshore leases would not be reached until 2030.
Over the past eight years, drilling permits for oil companies have increased more than 361% while the price
of gasoline has doubled.
Page 16 of 121

The price of oil is based on the international market, so additional oil from offshore drilling would have an
insignificant effect on prices here at home. With only 2 to 3% of global oil reserves, the United States cannot
significantly affect global oil supply or prices. Drilling is dirty and unsafe.
Each year, U.S. drilling operations spill an average of 880,000 gallons of oil into the ocean. More drilling
would mean more oil spills, and the new leases would be near shores that are critical to the livelihoods of
millions who work in the tourism industry.
In 2005, Hurricanes Katrina and Rita destroyed 113 oil platforms, damaged 457 pipelines, and spilled 9
million gallons of petroleum products in the Gulf of Mexico.
Drilling will create more global warming pollution.
More offshore drilling wont decrease our dependence on foreign oil or lower prices at the pump, but using
that oil will generate more than 340 million tons of additional carbon dioxide, the main type of global warming
pollution.
Page 17 of 121

Natural Gas Answers
Page 18 of 121

Agriculture Answers
Page 19 of 121

Alt Causes Weak Industry

Multiple prerequisites to a globally prominent Mexican agriculture sector
Carvallo, Negocios, 2012
[Sergio Carvallo, September 2012, Mexicos Food and Agriculture Sector, Mexican agriculture: An Arable Land of
Opportunity,
http://www.promexico.gob.mx/archivos/promx_Magazine/26/pdfFile_26_NE0912_WEB_SPREADS.pdf, pg. 12-13
accessed 7-12-13, UR]
Mexico has an important natural resource that is fundamental for agriculture: the sun. Furthermore, the floating
exchange rate is a plus for the agribusiness sector as are government-sponsored marketing programs and contract
agriculture in the case of corn, barley and other crops. An untapped treasure of idle agricultural land can also be found,
particularly in Mexicos southern tropical areas.
However, in order for Mexicos agribusiness sector to reach its full potential, some challenges must be faced.
For instance, those related to promoting a more productive use of the land. There are certain farmers
organizations that need to adopt a more market-oriented approach and introduce
available technologies into their production processes to improve their productivity. The inefficient use and scarcity
of water in certain regions also needs to be tackled in order to prevent production losses. Addition- ally, the
production of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) has to be addressed to improve productivity in the
countryside, strengthening Mexicos food security.
Mexican agriculture industry doesnt have the resources or efficiency to substantially influence
the global market
Mexico Agribusiness Report, 8
[October 27, 2008, Business Monitor International, Mexico, Lexis, accessed 7-12-13, UR]
With the final phasing out of tariffs and quotas on agricultural trade between Mexico and the US in January
2008, the Mexican agriculture industry will be open to competition from her giant northern neighbour. In BMI's
new Mexico Agribusiness Report for Q1 2009, we examine how prepared the country is to deal with this challenge.
Restrictions on trade first started to be lifted back in 1994 and since then food imports have soared. However, the
increased imports have not necessarily come at the expense of Mexican domestic production, which has also seen
strong growth across a number of sectors. The real driver of the rise in imports has been the growth in Mexican
demand for food products as per capita incomes have risen over the last decade or more.
Despite this, within a month of the final quotas being lifted on January 1 2008, farmers took to the streets of Mexico
City, burning a tractor and corralling dairy cows outside the stock exchange to show their displeasure at the North
American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Many Mexican farmers are worried that they will be unable to
compete with US goods as farms north of the border tend to be far more efficient and so can produce more
cheaply. Since its inception, NAFTA has been an easy scapegoat for many of the failings in Mexican agriculture.
Despite lobbying on both sides of the border, most noticeably from US sugar producers, it does not look like the
agreement is going to go away. This will mean that Mexican farmers will have to work to improve efficiency if they
are to remain afloat, especially if domestic demand growth, which so far has driven increases in both imports and
domestic production, were to falter. The rise of corn imports, which now amount to around 10mn tonnes a year, has
been a particularly emotive issue, in spite of domestic corn production having also risen by a third over the last decade.
Much of this rise in corn imports come in the form of US yellow corn used for animal feed in Mexico's growing
livestock industry. The rise of meat and livestock imports has also come under criticism from many in Mexico. Despite
Mexican poultry production growing by two thirds since 1998, and pork and beef production expanding by
24% and 11%, respectively, domestic production has again failed to keep pace with demand growth causing
imports to rise.
Though the removal of protection from US imports may well be painful for many small-scale Mexican farmers, if it
spurs consolidation and investment in improving efficiency it could well bring long-term gain to Mexican agriculture
and allow the country to move back in the direction of self-sufficiency with some products. The burden of improving
Page 20 of 121

agricultural efficiency should not fall on farmers alone, however. The government will also have a role to play in
reducing factors that lead to Mexican products being more expensive than their US counterparts, such as the often
shoddy state of infrastructure in the country.
Alt cause Mexican agriculture wont thrive globally without better transport, higher
efficiency, greater land availability and government support
CompaniesandMarkets.com, 6-7-13
[databases of market research reports and company profiles from leading global publishers and industry analysts,
Newstex, Mexico Agribusiness Report Q3 2013, Lexis, accessed 7-12-13, UR]
We are forecasting production and consumption growth across the entire agricultural complex out to 2017, although
growth rates will vary widely. In general, we are very positive regarding the longterm growth story in Mexico, which
we believe will be driven in part by a strong consumer story. Indeed, only consumption of whole milk powder
(considered an inferior good in the country) is forecast to grow by less than 1% over our forecast period.
Despite this, we have relatively subdued production forecasts as the sector suffers broadly from high feed prices,
comparatively poor transport, and few export opportunities given the country's proximity to the US, the world's
largest grain and livestock exporter. Indeed, over the forecast period, we see the country remaining a net importer
of virtually all agricultural commodities except for coffee and sugar. Other constraints, such as reduced land
availability (corn) and extensive government influence (sugar) will also contribute to constrain production.
Alt cause low insurance subsidies prevent the rise of a successful Mexican agriculture
industry
Business News Americas, 13
[January 3, 2013, Mexico's agriculture insurance subsidies lack funding, says OINFA, Lexis, accessed 7-12-13, UR]
Mexican agriculture insurance agency OINFA's president Elas Macas Vzquez said the 1.27bn pesos
(US$99.3mn) allotted to 2013 agriculture insurance subsidies is not enough to cover demand.
"The amount is insufficient. We proposed 2bn pesos and think that would be enough to cover fully cover subsidies,"
Vzquez was quoted as saying in a report by local newspaper El Economista.
Mexico was unable to supply all agriculture insurance subsidy requests last year, despite the government's
provision of 1.35bn pesos in funding. Additionally, 750mn pesos worth of subsidies are still owed to local farmers
from 2012. The unfulfilled insurance subsidies will be paid out of this year's funding, further affecting supply, the
report said.
Increasing demand for insurance subsidies is part of a growing appetite for agricultural insurance following last year's
historically bad droughts. "Insurance demand is related to existing climate change problems that have inflicted
huge losses. Producers are looking to protect their crops from natural phenomena," Vzquez was quoted as saying.
Additionally, development bank loan policies that demand that borrowers be insured have boosted demand. But
at the same time farmers are feeling the squeeze from rising insurance policy prices, Vzquez was quoted as
saying.
"The price increase was very steep. In the case of Sinaloa state it rose 120-200% in 2012, while the cost of reinsurance
increase more that 300%."
Page 21 of 121

Alt Cause Climate Change

Climate change wrecks agriculture leading to greater food insecurity
Council on Food, Agriculture, and Resource Economics, 10,
[The Council on Food, Agricultural, and Resource Economics, 6-16-10, How will Climate Change Affect
Agriculture?, http://www.cfare.org/media_events/climate/files/climate_change_summary.pdf, pg. 1, accessed, 7-12-13
AMS]
Hydrologic: The hydrologic cycle now includes more frequent and intense droughts and floods in many agricultural
regions. These events can damage and at times even destroy crops.
Heat: Over the next 30-50 years, average temperatures will likely increase by at least 1.0 C. Anticipated regionally
dependent changes include increase number of heat waves and warm nights, a decreasing number of frost days, and a
longer growing season in temperate zones.
CO2: Over the next 30-50 years, CO2 concentrations will increase to about 450 parts per million by volume
(ppmv). The CO2 response is expected to be higher on C3 species (wheat, rice, and soybeans), which account for more
than 95% of worlds species than on C4 species (corn and sorghum). C3 weeds have responded well to elevated CO2
levels, symbolizing the potential for increase weed pressure and reduced crop yields.
Crop Biodiversity: The distribution of wild crop relatives, an increasingly important genetic resource for the
breeding of crops, will be severely affected leading to fragmentation of the distribution and even extinction.
Economic Consequences: Price will rise for the most important agricultural cropsrice, wheat, maize, and
soybeans. This, in turn, leads to higher feed and therefore meat prices. As a result, climate change will reduce
the growth in meat consumption slightly and cause a more substantial fall in cereals consumption, leading to
greater food insecurity.
Alt. cause to food insecurity climate change

Gunyon, OneWorld and Tread Softly managing editor, 13
[Bill, 1-13, Tread Softly, International Causes of Food Insecurity, http://treadsoftly.net/food-security/internationalcauses-of-food-insecurity/, accessed 7-12-13, HG]
Climate models predict that richer countries in temperate zones will benefit from higher crop yields within the
two degree temperature rise envisaged in international climate change negotiations.
By contrast, crop yields and grazing quality in tropical regions are already close to their limit of temperature
sensitivity. With temperatures in many parts of Africa rising faster than the global average, maize yields may be
affected even within the coming decade.
The development agency, ActionAid, has suggested that climate change could increase the number of people
experiencing chronic hunger by 500 million by 2050.
However, predictions of the impact of climate change on agriculture remain uncertain, both for slow onset events
such as desertification and temperature rise, and for extreme weather events such as flooding and cyclones.
Page 22 of 121

Alt Cause Industrial Farming Bad

Industrial farming destroys the environment and accelerates warming
Animal Welfare Approved 10
[3-05-10, Animal Welfare Approved, Industrialized Farming Leaves Behind More than a Bad Smell,
http://www.animalwelfareapproved.org/2010/03/05/industrialized-farming-leaves-behind-more-than-a-bad-smell/,
accessed 7-12-13 AMS]
Problems with the system
The system described works amazingly well. However, spread too much manure and things quickly start to get out
of hand. The soil life cannot cope and the manure is no longer absorbed into the soil. Instead, it sits on the
surface, creating increasingly toxic conditions for the friendly soil critters below. Exposed to the weather, the
soluble nutrients in the manure particularly nitrogen, potassium and phosphorous start to leech away,
finding their way into streams and waterways. And this is exactly what is happening on intensive livestock units
across the U.S. on a truly massive scale.
The trouble is that these industrial farming units arent designed to work with Mother Nature. Gone is the
concept of the natural nutrient cycleinstead, these industrial units, with their tens of thousands of housed pigs or
cattle, or hundreds of thousands of chickens, are now producing so much waste manure that they simply dont
know what to do with it. Its happening on a scale that is almost impossible to comprehend. And we are all paying for
it.
According to the National Hog Farmers latest State of the Industry Report, over 116 million hogs were slaughtered in
the U.S. last year. But even this figure is dwarfed by the total number of chickens raised for meat and egg production:
in 2007, U.S. farmers produced 8.9 billion broiler chickens, while the national flock produced over 90 billion eggs.
Smithfieldthe worlds largest pork processorslaughtered and processed over 27 million pigs in 2005 in the U.S.
alone. The Washington Post article reports that livestock produce three times more excrement than humans, so just one
of Smithfields 500,000 pig units will produce more excrement than the 1.5 million humans living in Manhattan. And
we are now learning that the way this manure is stored and managed is having a profound effect on the
environment.
Most factory farms collect their waste manure in huge nearby open tanks or cesspools. Some of these lagoons
are as big as several football fields, each holding hundreds of thousandsif not millionsof gallons of putrefying
manure. Being exposed to the elements, they emit toxic gases such as ammonia and hydrogen sulfide, as well as
methane, a key greenhouse gas.
As the waste is expensive to storeand even more expensive to transportsome industrial systems periodically pump
the waste out of the lagoons and spray it on the surrounding fields. The problem is that it is often sprayed at such
high ratesor at such frequenciesthat the soil and plants cannot even begin absorb it.
This over-application leads to run-off, where the water-soluble nutrients find their way into our waterways
and groundwater systems in vast quantities, polluting our drinking water and rivers, leaving our waterways
deadand directly contributing to the 230 recognized oxygen-deprived dead zones along the U.S. coast.
For various reasons, the regulatory system just hasnt been able to keep up. The industrial farming lobby is very
quick to pull out the financial threat to the family farm card and run cap in hand to the government whenever they
come under pressure to adopt more environmentally friendly techniques. Yet it is clear that most farming today is about
as far from the traditional family farm as you can get.
Page 23 of 121

Alt Causes Trade Regulations

Alt. cause to food insecurity world trade regulations
Gunyon, managing editor of OneWorld and Tread Softly, 13
[Bill, 1-13, Tread Soflty, International Causes of Food Insecurity, http://treadsoftly.net/food-security/internationalcauses-of-food-insecurity/, accessed 7-12-13, HG]
Outdated and hidebound, the worlds current trade regime for agriculture has failed to dampen price volatility
or to leverage a meaningful presence in global markets for poorer countries.
Determined to support the dominant profile of small family farms in the aftermath of the Second World War, the
European Common Agricultural Policy and the US Farm Bill both provided generous subsidies and protective tariffs.
These policies proved successful, generating colossal internal food surpluses.
Ambitions of the poorer countries of the modern world to copy this approach remain unfulfilled. This is largely
because they are bound by the system of open market rules adopted by the World Trade Organization (WTO) in
1995. At the same time, the richer countries refused to unravel their own protectionist model.
This hypocrisy remains a fundamental barrier to effective food security strategies in developing countries.
Domestic markets continue to be undercut by cheap food imports dumped by rich countries. As a result, almost
all the 49 Least Developed Countries are dependent on food imports, vulnerable to unpredictable world prices for 25%
of their total consumption on average.
During the recent years of crisis, WTO rules failed to prevent bans on food exports introduced by India, Russia and
other countries actions linked by most experts to subsequent price rises and panic measures. The suggestion by the
poorest countries that future export bans should not apply to them has not been accepted.
The total support paid by the US, Europe and other members of the richer OECD countries to their agriculture
producers in 2011 totalled $252 billion. Although falling in real terms, this subsidy remains more than five times the
UNs estimate of the annual cost of eradicating hunger by 2025.
Page 24 of 121

Alt Causes Biofuels

Alt. cause to food insecurity biofuels
Gunyon, OneWorld and Tread Softly managing editor, 13
[Bill, 1-13, Tread Soflty, International Causes of Food Insecurity, http://treadsoftly.net/food-security/internationalcauses-of-food-insecurity/, accessed 7-12-13, HG]
The US and the European Union have led other developed countries in providing state incentives for production
of biofuels. Ambitious mandated targets are bolstered by global subsidies that totalled $22 billion in 2010, more than
double the amount of foreign aid supporting agriculture. The European target for biofuels requires a land area twice the
size of Belgium, self-evidently unavailable within Europe.
The lure of biofuels for these governments is lower dependence on fossil fuels, together with reduction in carbon
dioxide emissions. However, the net saving in carbon dioxide emissions from maize-based ethanol has been
exposed as less than 20%.
For 2012, about 40% of the anticipated US corn (maize) crop was earmarked for ethanol. This represents 15% of world
maize production, sufficient to feed over 400 million people for a year. If the US ethanol mandate is inflexible to
any shortfall in corn yields, as in the 2012 drought, the knock-on effect on prices is accentuated.
The HLPE report, Price Volatility and Food Security, expresses disquiet about a future in which rich countries
seek national energy security through food-for-fuel, regardless of the state of global food security. Identifying
biofuels as a key driver of rising food prices, it recommended that global leaders should withdraw biofuel
targets and financial incentives.
Moves are under way in Europe to invite ministers to approve a measure halving the current mandate for the use of
biofuels in 2020 and eliminating subsidies by that date.
Alt. cause Increased biofuel production causes global food insecurity

Tenenbaum, U.S. National Library of Medicine, 8
[David, 6-8, U.S. National Library of Medicine, Food vs. Fuel: Diversion of Crops Could Cause More Hunger,
accessed 7-12-13, HG]
Eager to promote nonpetroleum energy sources to reduce dependence on oil imports and slow global warming due to
fossil fuel emissions, the United States, Brazil, and the European Union are promoting biofuels made from food
crops. Ethanol production (mainly in the United States and Brazil) tripled from 4.9 billion gallons to almost 15.9
billion gallons between 2001 and 2007, according to C. Ford Runge, a professor of agricultural economics at the
University of Minnesota. During that same period, biodiesel production (mainly for sale in the European Union)
rose almost 10-fold, to about 2.4 billion gallons, although further expansion is now uncertain. Biofuel production
has been prodded by government initiatives such as subsidies and tax incentives.
But action is not necessarily the same thing as progress, say some experts. We are witnessing the beginning of one of
the great tragedies of history, says Lester Brown, an analyst of global resources who founded the Worldwatch Institute
and now heads the Earth Policy Institute. The United States, in a misguided effort to reduce its oil insecurity by
converting grain into fuel for cars, is generating global food insecurity on a scale never seen before.
The head of Nestl, the worlds largest food and beverage company, agrees. As reported 23 March 2008 by Agence
France-Presse, chairman and chief executive Peter Brabeck-Letmathe said, If as predicted we look to use biofuels to
satisfy twenty percent of the growing demand for oil products, there will be nothing left to eat. To grant enormous
subsidies for biofuel production is morally unacceptable and irresponsible.
Even as growing quantities of corn and other grains are being diverted for use as biofuel feedstocks, newly
affluent peoplemainly in Asiaare eating more meat and dairy, which puts a further demand on animal feed
supplies. There are many signs of concern. On 14 April 2008, the online African Energy News Review news service
noted that food riots had killed five people in Haiti, adding, The diversion of food crops to biofuel production was
a significant factor contributing to global food prices rocketing by 83% in the last year, and causing violent
conflicts in Haiti and other parts of the world.
Page 25 of 121

In December 2007, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (UN FAO) calculated that world food prices
rose 40% in 12 months prior, and the price hikes affected all major biofuel feedstocks, including sugarcane, corn,
rapeseed oil, palm oil, and soybeans. On 17 December 2007, the International Herald Tribune quoted FAO head
Jacques Diouf warning of a very serious risk that fewer people will be able to get food, particularly in the
developing world. In the summary proceedings of the First FAO Technical Consultation Bioenergy and Food Security,
held 1618 April 2007 in Rome, authors from a group of UN agencies cautioned that possible income gains to
producers due to higher commodity prices may be offset by negative welfare effects on consumers, as their economic
access to food is compromised. (Welfare here refers to standard of living, not government payments.)
Page 26 of 121

Alt Causes Water Shortages

Water shortage makes food security inevitable
World Link Reader, 9
[8-9, University of San Diego, Causes of Food Insecurity, http://sites.sandiego.edu/wl_reader/toc/2010reader/chapter-4-food-security/causes-of-food-insecurity/, accessed 7-12-13, HG]
Water is an essential part of life; one example of this importance is that it is critical for growing crops. Since
early this millennium, the planet has experienced water shortages which in turn cause less harvest for farmers. As
examined by this article, the water deficit varies by country and has lasting effects far into the future of
agriculture. Writer Lester R. Brown evaluates the causes of emergency water shortage, as well as its devastating
effects on the world. It also provides statistics to those interested in the environmental portion of food insecurity.
Page 27 of 121

Non-Unique Petrochemical Industry Growing

Mexican petrochemical industry is on the rise secured a massive financing deal
Agencia EFE 12
[December 20, 2012, FoxNews Latino, Consortium secures $3.2 bn for petrochemical project in Mexico,
http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/news/2012/12/20/consortium-secures-32-bn-for-petrochemical-project-in-mexico/,
accessed 7-12-13, UR]
Brazilian-Mexican consortium Braskem-Idesa said it has reached a $3.2 billion financing deal for its Ethylene
XXI petrochemical project in Mexico.
The accord, which the consortium is calling "the largest project finance transaction in the history of the
petrochemical industry in the Americas," was signed with 17 state-run and commercial banks from several
countries.
Sumitomo Mitsui Banking and international law firm White & Case served as Braskem-Idesa's financial advisor and
legal counsel, respectively.
The consortium was created in 2010 as a joint venture between Brazil's Braskem, the largest manufacturer of
thermoplastic resins in the Americas, and Grupo Idesa, a leading Mexican petrochemical producer.
Ethylene XXI - which is being built in Nanchital, a town in the Gulf coast state of Veracruz - will be a private
petrochemical complex for the production of polyethylene.
Once it enters into operation in 2015 the complex will produce 1 million tons of polyethylene and replace up to $2
billion worth of imports, the consortium said.
The project will create 9,000 temporary jobs in the construction phase and some 3,000 permanent direct and
indirect jobs.
Construction is currently underway for a $4.5 billion petrochemical project in Mexico

Tullo, Chemical and Engineering News, Senior Editor, 4-18-13
[Alexander H. Tullo, 4-18-13, Chemical and Engineering News, Mexico: Firms Outline Petrochemical Plans At
Conference, http://cen.acs.org/articles/91/i14/Mexico-Firms-Outline-Petrochemical-Plans.html, accessed 7-12-13,
UR]
The emergence of shale gas has led to seven new multi-billion-dollar ethylene cracker projects, plus countless other
smaller expansions, in the U.S. But the countrys neighbor to the south isnt going to be left out of the building boom.
At the Latin American Petrochemical Networking Meeting, a gathering put on last month in Houston by the
chemical consultancy IntelliChem, executives from Brazilian petrochemical maker Braskem and Mexican state oil
company Pemex outlined the progress they are making in building much-needed petrochemical capacity in Mexico.
Braskem is a 75% partner, along with local chemical maker Idesa, in Ethylene XXI, a project to build a 1 millionmetric-ton-per-year ethane-based ethylene steam cracker with three downstream polyethylene plants in the Mexican
petrochemical hub of Coatzacoalcos.
The construction for the $4.5 billion project, according to Braskem Commercial Director Cleantho de Paiva Leite
Filho, is on target to be completed by 2015. Some 5,000 construction workers are already on the site, and the
company is hiring more hands at a clip of 800 people per month. Much of the sites structural members have
already been completed.
We are going to actually be the first big project in this new wave of advantaged ethane in North America, Filho
told the audience. The plants competitiveness should be similar to facilities in the U.S., he noted, with feedstock
prices set to the same benchmarks that U.S. Gulf Coast producers enjoy.
Page 28 of 121

Fertilizers Bad Fishing Dead Zones

Fertilizers cause dead zones hurts the fishing industry
Walsh, Time Magazine Senior writer, 6-19-13
[Bryan, 6-19-13, Time, This Years Gulf of Mexico Dead Zone Could Be the Biggest on Record,
http://science.time.com/2013/06/19/this-years-gulf-of-mexico-dead-zone-could-be-the-biggest-on-record/, accessed 712-13, MSG]
The nitrogen nutrients that flow into the Gulf, especially during the rainy spring season, encourages the
growth of explosive algal blooms, which feed on the nitrogen. Eventually those algae die and sink to the bottom,
and bacteria there get to work decomposing the organic matter. The bacteria consume oxygen in the water as
they do, resulting in low-oxygen (hypoxic) or oxygen-free (anoxic) regions in the bottom and near-bottom
waters.
Thats what a dead zonewater, essentially, without air. Sealifeincluding the valuable shellfish popular in
Gulf fisherieseither flee the area, much as you or I would if someone were to suck all the oxygen out of the
room, or die. Thats why the dead zone mattersthe larger it is, the greater the populations of fish that might
be affected. With commercial fisheries in the Gulf worth $629 million as of 2009and still recovering from the
impact of the 2010 oil spillthe dead zone means business.
Fertilizer wash off causes dead zones hurts the Gulf Coast economy and bottom-dwelling life
McCarrier, Texas A&M Public Affairs Manager, et al., 13
[Cindy, 7-9-13, Trade Only Today, Record-breaking Dead Zone Predicted in the Gulf of Mexico This
Summer, http://www.tradeonlytoday.com/images/stories/web/releases/deadzone0711.pdf, pg. 1-2 accessed
7-12-13, MSG]
The dead zone, is caused when nitrogen-based fertilizer washes off farm fields , in the Midwest corn-belt,
and ends up in the Mississippi River, which flows into the Gulf. Just as nitrogen-based fertilizer makes corn
grow, it also stimulates the growth of plants in the water, mainly algae. The algae bloom and eventually die
and decay. This process removes oxygen from the water, resulting in oxygen-depleted water where marine life
cant live.
This years dead zone is expected to be as large as 8,561 square miles along the Gulf coast which is a rich
breeding ground for fish, shrimp, oysters and crab. Its an area that accounts for about 18 percent of the total
commercial seafood sold in the United States. Shrimp and oyster supplies , in particular, are heavily
concentrated in the Gulf, making the seafood industry an important component of the Gulf Coast economy.
The hypoxia zones are not dangerous to fish, but cannot support bottom-dwelling life such as clams, crabs and
shrimp, said Montagna. Because fish avoid these areas, commercial shrimp boats and recreational
fisherman must go further out, to open water, to make their catch.
Dr. Larry McKinney, Executive Director of HRI, says this yearly threat to the Gulf is caused by one thing,
ethanol.
So what does the large size of this years hypoxia zone in the Gulf of Mexico have to do with ethanol,
made from corn grown in the Midwest? Corn prices are high right now, so farmers are planting more of it.
While you can grow many crops without fertilizer, corn requires it. The USDA estimates as much as 40
percent of last years corn crop was used to make ethanol.
Page 29 of 121

Impact Answer No Ag Wars

Resource scarcity doesnt lead to conflict
Salehyan, University of North Texas political science professor, 7
[Idean Salehyan, 8-14-07, Foreign Policy, The New Myth About Climate Change,
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2007/08/13/the_new_myth_about_climate_change?wp_login_redirect=0,
accessed, 7-12-13 AMS]
First, aside from a few anecdotes, there is little systematic empirical evidence that resource scarcity and changing
environmental conditions lead to conflict. In fact, several studies have shown that an abundance of natural
resources is more likely to contribute to conflict. Moreover, even as the planet has warmed, the number of civil wars
and insurgencies has decreased dramatically. Data collected by researchers at Uppsala University and the International
Peace Research Institute, Oslo shows a steep decline in the number of armed conflicts around the world. Between 1989
and 2002, some 100 armed conflicts came to an end, including the wars in Mozambique, Nicaragua, and Cambodia. If
global warming causes conflict, we should not be witnessing this downward trend.
Furthermore, if famine and drought led to the crisis in Darfur, why have scores of environmental catastrophes
failed to set off armed conflict elsewhere? For instance, the U.N. World Food Programme warns that 5 million
people in Malawi have been experiencing chronic food shortages for several years. But famine-wracked Malawi
has yet to experience a major civil war. Similarly, the Asian tsunami in 2004 killed hundreds of thousands of
people, generated millions of environmental refugees, and led to severe shortages of shelter, food, clean water,
and electricity. Yet the tsunami, one of the most extreme catastrophes in recent history, did not lead to an
outbreak of resource wars. Clearly then, there is much more to armed conflict than resource scarcity and natural
disasters.
Page 30 of 121

Bioterrorism
Page 31 of 121

No Impact Too Difficult

Too difficult to create biological weapons theres a reason that there has not been a successful
attack yet manufacturing and time required prove
Smithson, project director for biological weapons at that Henry L. Stimson Center, no date
[Amy, no date, Henry L. Stimson Center, Chemical and Biological Weapons Nonproliferation Project Information
Sheet, http://www.accem.org/pdf/terrorfaq.pdf, pg. 1, accessed 7-10-13, HG]
Chemical weapons formulas have been published and publicly available for decades. Mustard agents came of age
during World War I, and nerve agents were discovered in the mid-1930s. The production processes used over
seventy years ago are still viable. The ingredients and equipment a group would need to produce these agents
are readily available because they are also the same items that are used to make various commercial items that
we use everyday---from ballpoint pens to plastics to ceramics to fireworks. Scientists with a solid chemical
background could likely make certain agents in small quantities.
However, two factors stand in the way of manufacturing chemical agents for the purpose of mass casualty. First,
the chemical reactions involved with the production of agents are dangerous: precursor chemicals can be
volatile and corrosive, and minor misjudgments or mistakes in processing could easily result in the deaths of
would-be weaponeers. Second, this danger grows when the amount of agent that would be needed to successfully
mount a mass casualty attack is considered. Attempting to make sufficient quantities would require either a
large, well-financed operation that would increase the likelihood of discovery or, alternatively, a long, drawnout process of making small amounts incrementally. These small quantities would then need to be stored safely in a
manner that would not weaken the agents toxicity before being released. It would take 18 years for a basementsized operation to produce the more than two tons of sarin gas that the Pentagon estimates would be necessary
to kill 10,000 people, assuming the sarin was manufactured correctly at its top lethality.
Empirical examples prove that dispersal and spreading is highly unlikely

Smithson, project director for biological weapons at that Henry Stimson Center, no date
[Amy, no date, Henry Stimson Center, Chemical and Biological Weapons Nonproliferation Project Information
Sheet, http://www.accem.org/pdf/terrorfaq.pdf, pg. 1-2, accessed 7-10-13, HG]
The options for delivering poison gas range from high to low tech. Theoretically, super toxic chemicals could be
employed to foul food or water supplies, put into munitions, or distributed by an aerosol or spray method. Because of
safeguards on both our food and water supplies as well as the difficulty of covertly
disbursing sufficient quantities of agent, this method is unlikely to be an effective means to achieving terrorist
aims. Chemical agents could also be the payload of any number of specially designed or modified conventional
munitions, from bombs and grenades to artillery shells and mines. However designing munitions that reliably produce
vapor and liquid droplets requires a certain amount of engineering skill. Finally, commercial sprayers could be
mounted on planes or other vehicles. In an outdoor attack such as this, however, 90 percent of the agent is likely to
dissipate before ever reaching its target. Effective delivery, which entails getting the right concentration of agent
and maintaining it long enough for inhalation to occur, is quite difficult to achieve because chemical agents are
highly susceptible to weather conditions.
Would it be easy for terrorists to acquire biological agents?
Oftentimes, obtaining biological agents is portrayed as being as easy as taking a trip to the country. The
experience of the Japanese cult Aum Shinrikyo proves that this is not the case. Isolating a particularly virulent
strain in nature---out of, for example, the roughly 675 strains of botulinum toxin that have been identified---is no easy
task. Despite having skilled scientists among its members, Aum was unable to do so. Terrorists could also approach
one of the five hundred culture collections worldwide, some of which carry lethal strains. Within the United States,
however, much tighter controls have been placed on the shipment of dangerous pathogens from these collections in
recent years.
Page 32 of 121

Terrorists lack the technological ability to successfully deploy bioweapons past examples
prove
Smithson, project director for biological weapons at that Henry Stimson Center, no date
[Amy, no date, Henry Stimson Center, Chemical and Biological Weapons Nonproliferation Project Information
Sheet, http://www.accem.org/pdf/terrorfaq.pdf, pg, 2-3, accessed 7-10-13, HG]
Terrorists cannot count on just filling the delivery system with agent, pointing the device, and flipping the
switch to activate it. Facets that must be deciphered include the concentration of agent in the delivery system, the
ways in which the delivery system degrades the potency of the agent, and the rig ht dosage to incapacitate or kill
human or animal targets. For open-air delivery, the meteorological conditions must be taken into account.
Biological agents have extreme sensitivity to sunlight, humidity, pollutants in the atmosphere, temperature, and even
exposure to oxygen, all of which can kill the microbes.
Biological agents can be dispersed in either dry or wet forms. Using a dry agent can boost effectiveness because drying
and milling the agent can make the particles very fine, a key factor since particles must range between 1 to 5 microns
to be breathed into the lungs. Drying an agent, however, is done through a complex and challenging process that
requires a sophistication of equipment and know-how that terrorist organizations are unlikely to possess. The
alternative is to develop a wet slurry, which is much easier to produce but a great deal harder to disperse effectively.
Wet slurries can clog sprayers and undergo mechanical stresses that can kill 95 percent or more of the microorganisms.
Are terrorists trying to create genetically engineered biological agents to target certain ethnic groups?
It is impossible to know what is happening behind closed laboratory doors worldwide. However, this type of
sophisticated activity is likely to be carried out by governments (e.g., former Soviet Union), not terrorists just
beginning to explore bioweapons.
What places are terrorists likely to target for a chemical or biological agent attack?
Part of what terrorists count on to terrorize is that it is never really possible to know where they will strike next.
Conventional wisdom says that terrorists intent on causing mass casualties would target large buildings, sporting
arenas, or transit systems. Given my knowledge of how difficult it would be for terrorists to successfully execute a
poison gas or germ attack, I have no concern about frequenting such locations.
The pill in the water supply is a myth about chemical terrorism that is not true. All metropolitan water
supplies have certain safeguards in place between their citizens and the reservoir. Everyday, water goes through
various purification processes and is tested repeatedly. If terrorists were to attempt to poison a reservoir, they would
need to disperse tons of agent into the water---smaller amounts would be diluted--- and the vessels required for such a
feat would be difficult to miss. Many cities have implemented heightened security around their reservoirs in order to
further monitor any questionable activities.
Have terrorists been actively seeking chemical and biological weapons capabilities? If so, what have they been doing
with them?There have been reports in the media that a handful of terrorist organizations have been exploring chemical
and biological weapons. However, for the reasons discussed above, the technical hurdles to actually developing an
effective large-scale chemical or biological weapons program---as opposed to investigating or experimenting with
them---may well turn out to be so sizeable that terrorists would choose to remain reliant on more conventional means.
FINAL THOUGHT: The Japanese cult Aum Shinrikyo was brimming with highly educated scientists, yet the
cults biological weapons program turned out to be a lemon. While its poison gas program certainly made more
headway, it was rife with life-threatening production and dissemination accidents. After all of Aums extensive
financial and intellectual investment, the Tokyo subway attack, while injuring over 1,000, killed only 12 individuals.
In 96 percent of the cases worldwide where chemical or biological substances have been used since 1975, three
or fewer people were injured or killed.
Biological and chemical weapons are historically used by the state no risk of independent
terrorist organizations developing the weapon
ONeill, director of Spiked, columnist for the Big Issue and the Australian, 4
[Brendan, 8-19-4, Spiked, Weapons of Minimum Destruction, http://www.spikedonline.com/Articles/0000000CA694.htm, accessed 7-10-13, HG]
Page 33 of 121

'We know that nukes are massively destructive, there is a lot of evidence for that', says
Rapoport. But when it comes to chemical and biological weapons, 'the evidence
suggests that we should call them "weapons of minimum destruction", not mass
destruction', he says.
Chemical weapons have most commonly been used by states, in military warfare.
Rapoport explored various state uses of chemicals over the past hundred years: both sides
used them in the First World War; Italy deployed chemicals against the Ethiopians in the
1930s; the Japanese used chemicals against the Chinese in the 1930s and again in the
Second World War; Egypt and Libya used them in the Yemen and Chad in the postwar
period; most recently, Saddam Hussein's Iraq used chemical weapons, first in the war
against Iran (1980-1988) and then against its own Kurdish population at the tail-end of the
Iran-Iraq war.
In each instance, says Rapoport, chemical weapons were used more in desperation than
from a position of strength or a desire to cause mass destruction. 'The evidence is that
states rarely use them even when they have them', he has written. 'Only when a military
stalemate has developed, which belligerents who have become desperate want to break, are
they used.' (5) As to whether such use of chemicals was effective, Rapoport says that at best
it blunted an offensive - but this very rarely, if ever, translated into a decisive strategic shift
in the war, because the original stalemate continued after the chemical weapons had been
deployed.
He points to the example of Iraq. The Baathists used chemicals against Iran when that nasty
trench-fought war had reached yet another stalemate. As Efraim Karsh argues in his paper
'The Iran-Iraq War: A Military Analysis': 'Iraq employed [chemical weapons] only in vital
segments of the front and only when it saw no other way to check Iranian offensives.
Chemical weapons had a negligible impact on the war, limited to tactical rather than
strategic [effects].' (6)
According to Rapoport, this 'negligible' impact of chemical weapons on the direction
of a war is reflected in the disparity between the numbers of casualties caused by
chemicals and the numbers caused by conventional weapons. It is estimated that the use
of gas in the Iran-Iraq war killed 5,000 - but the Iranian side suffered around 600,000 dead
in total, meaning that gas killed less than one per cent.
The deadliest use of gas occurred in the First World War but, as Rapoport points out, it still
only accounted for five per cent of casualties. Studying the amount of gas used by both
sides from 1914-1918 relative to the number of fatalities gas caused, Rapoport has written:
'It took a ton of gas in that war to achieve a single enemy fatality. Wind and sun regularly
dissipated the lethality of the gases. Furthermore, those gassed were 10 to 12 times as likely
to recover than those casualties produced by traditional weapons.' (7)
Indeed, Rapoport discovered that some earlier documenters of the First World War had a
vastly different assessment of chemical weapons than we have today - they considered the
use of such weapons to be preferable to bombs and guns, because chemicals caused fewer
fatalities. One wrote: 'Instead of being the most horrible form of warfare, it is the most
humane, because it disables far more than it kills, ie, it has a low fatality ratio.' (8)
'Imagine that', says Rapoport, 'WMD being referred to as more humane'. He says that
the contrast between such assessments and today's fears shows that actually looking at
the evidence has benefits, allowing 'you to see things more rationally'.
Page 34 of 121

No Impact Overblown
The impacts of bioweapons are overblown not nearly as big a threat as other WMD
Macfarlane, MIT Security Studies Program, 5
[Allison, 2005, MIT Center for International Studies, All Weapons of Mass Destruction Are Not Equal,
http://web.mit.edu/cis/pdf/Audit_6_05_Macfarlane.pdf, pg. 2 accessed 7-10-13, HG]
Some experts consider biological andnuclear weapons to be the true weaponsof mass destruction.15 The higher end
ofthe lethality range of biological weaponsis certainly in the realm of the threatposed by nuclear weapons, but the
rangeitself is troubling. If a nuclear weapongoes off in a densely populated area, itwill kill tens of thousands of
people. It isnot possible to make the same assertionfor biological weapons. The extremelyuncertain estimates of
deaths from bioweapons rely on simulations that use limited datasets. For instance, one significant source of
uncertainty is the lethality of the agent such as anthrax and modified (genetically or antibiotic-resistant) agents. These
simulations describe worst-case scenarios and do not consider the ameliorating effects of defenses such as a
good public health system. A bioweapon attack on the heart of a poor, overcrowded, third world city may indeed
result in the high death rates suggested in some models. But is the United States as vulnerable? Hardly. It has an
extensive public health system and has invested in biological weapons defenses. At this time, there is simply not
enough data to suggest that biological weapons should occupy the same policy category as nuclear weapons.
Page 35 of 121

Cyber-terrorism Answers
Page 36 of 121

Cyber-terror Inevitable
Chinese cyber-terror is inevitable
Alter, Money Morning, 2-19-13
[Diane Alter, 2-19-13, Money Morning, China's Cyber Attacks on the United States Will Only Get Worse,
http://moneymorning.com/2013/02/19/chinas-cyber-attacks-on-the-united-states-will-only-get-worse/, accessed 7-1213 AMS]
"Right now there is no incentive for the Chinese to stop doing this ," said Rep. Mike Rogers, R-MI, the House
intelligence chairman. "If we don't create a high price, it's only going to keep accelerating."
That's why the increasingly bold attacks on America's cyber turf are a direct call for immediate and severe
action.
As sequestration talks loom, the Mandiant report underscores what Patalon stressed: "This is no time to cut defense
related spending that will promote cybersecurity and combat cyber-terrorism."
Page 37 of 121

No Impact to Cyber-terror
Their impacts are exaggerated cyber terrorists lack the resources to inflict significant harm
Singer, Center for 21st Century Security and Intelligence, Director 12
[Peter W. Singer, November 2012, Brookings Institute, The Cyber Terror Bogeyman,
http://www.brookings.edu/research/articles/2012/11/cyber-terror-singer, accessed, 7-12-13 AMS]
About 31,300. That is roughly the number of magazine and journal articles written so far that discuss the phenomenon
of cyber terrorism.
Zero. That is the number of people that who been hurt or killed by cyber terrorism at the time this went to press.
In many ways, cyber terrorism is like the Discovery Channels Shark Week, when we obsess about shark
attacks despite the fact that you are roughly 15,000 times more likely to be hurt or killed in an accident
involving a toilet. But by looking at how terror groups actually use the Internet, rather than fixating on nightmare
scenarios, we can properly prioritize and focus our efforts.
Part of the problem is the way we talk about the issue. The FBI defines cyber terrorism as a premeditated, politically
motivated attack against information, computer systems, computer programs and data which results in violence against
non-combatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents. A key word there is violence, yet many
discussions sweep all sorts of nonviolent online mischief into the terror bin. Various reports lump together
everything from Defense Secretary Leon Panettas recent statements that a terror group might launch a digital Pearl
Harbor to Stuxnet-like sabotage (ahem, committed by state forces) to hacktivism, WikiLeaks and credit card fraud. As
one congressional staffer put it, the way we use a term like cyber terrorism has as much clarity as cybersecurity
that is, none at all.
Another part of the problem is that we often mix up our fears with the actual state of affairs. Last year, Deputy
Defense Secretary William Lynn, the Pentagons lead official for cybersecurity, spoke to the top experts in the field at
the RSA Conference in San Francisco. It is possible for a terrorist group to develop cyber-attack tools on their own or
to buy them on the black market, Lynn warned. A couple dozen talented programmers wearing flip-flops and
drinking Red Bull can do a lot of damage.
The deputy defense secretary was conflating fear and reality, not just about what stimulant-drinking programmers are
actually hired to do, but also what is needed to pull off an attack that causes meaningful violence. The requirements
go well beyond finding top cyber experts. Taking down hydroelectric generators, or designing malware like
Stuxnet that causes nuclear centrifuges to spin out of sequence doesnt just require the skills and means to get
into a computer system. Its also knowing what to do once you are in. To cause true damage requires an
understanding of the devices themselves and how they run, the engineering and physics behind the target.
The Stuxnet case, for example, involved not just cyber experts well beyond a few wearing flip-flops, but also experts
in areas that ranged from intelligence and surveillance to nuclear physics to the engineering of a specific kind of
Siemens-brand industrial equipment. It also required expensive tests, not only of the software, but on working versions
of the target hardware as well.
As George R. Lucas Jr., a professor at the U.S. Naval Academy, put it, conducting a truly mass-scale action
using cyber means simply outstrips the intellectual, organizational and personnel capacities of even the most
well-funded and well-organized terrorist organization, as well as those of even the most sophisticated
international criminal enterprises.
Lucas said the threat of cyber terrorism has been vastly overblown.
To be blunt, neither the 14-year-old hacker in your next-door neighbors upstairs bedroom, nor the two- or threeperson al-Qaida cell holed up in some apartment in Hamburg are going to bring down the Glen Canyon and Hoover
dams, he said.
We should be crystal clear: This is not to say that terrorist groups are uninterested in using the technology of
cyberspace to carry out acts of violence. In 2001, al-Qaida computers seized in Afghanistan were found to contain
models of a dam, plus engineering software that simulated the catastrophic failure of controls. Five years later, jihadist
websites were urging cyber attacks on the U.S. financial industry to retaliate for abuses at Guantanamo Bay.
Nor does it mean that cyber terrorism, particularly attacks on critical infrastructure, is of no concern. In 2007, Idaho
National Lab researchers experimented with cyber attacks on their own facility; they learned that remotely changing
the operating cycle of a power generator could make it catch fire. Four years later, the Los Angeles Times reported that
white-hat hackers hired by a water provider in California broke into the system in less than a week. Policymakers must
Page 38 of 121

worry that real-world versions of such attacks might have a ripple effect that could, for example, knock out parts of the
national power grid or shut down a municipal or even regional water supply.
But so far, what terrorists have accomplished in the cyber realm doesnt match our fears, their dreams or even
what they have managed through traditional means.
The only publicly documented case of an actual al-Qaida attempt at a cyber attack wouldnt have even met the
FBI definition. Under questioning at Guantanamo Bay, Mohmedou Ould Slahi confessed to trying to knock offline the
Israeli prime ministers public website. The same goes for the September denial-of-service attacks on five U.S.
banking firms, for which the Islamist group Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Cyber Fighters claimed responsibility. (Some
experts believe the group was merely stealing credit for someone elses work.) The attacks, which prevented
customers from accessing the sites for a few hours, were the equivalent of a crowd standing in your lobby blocking
access or a gang of neighborhood kids constantly doing ring and runs at your front doorbell. Its annoying, to
be sure, but nothing that would make the terrorism threat matrix if you removed the word cyber. And while it
may make for good headlines, it is certainly not in the vein of a cyber 9/11 or digital Pearl Harbor.
Even the 2007 cyber attacks on Estonia, the most-discussed incident of its kind, had little impact on the daily life
of the average Estonian and certainly no long-term effect. Allegedly assisted by the Russian government, and hence
well beyond the capacity of most terror organizations, the attacks merely disrupted public-facing government websites
for a few days. Compare that with the impact of planes crashing into the center of the U.S. financial system, the
London subway attacks or the thousands of homemade bomb attacks that happen around the world each year.
Even when you move into the what if side the damage potential of cyber terror still pales compared with other
types of potential terror attacks. A disruption of the power grid for a few days would certainly be catastrophic
(though its something that Washington, D.C., residents have lived through in the last year. Does the Pepco power
company qualify as a cyber threat?). But, again, in strategic planning, we have to put threats into context. The
explosion of just one nuclear bomb, even a jury-rigged radiological dirty bomb, could irradiate an American city for
centuries. Similarly, while a computer virus could wreak havoc in the economy, a biological attack could change our
very patterns of life forever. As one cyber expert said, There are [cyber] threats out there, but there are no threats
that threaten our fundamental way of life.
Cyber terrorism wont cause death their authors are all hype
Green, Washington Monthly editor, 2
[Joshua Green, November 2002, The Washington Monthly, The Myth of Cyberterrorism,
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2001/0211.green.html, accessed, 7-12-13 AMS]
It's no surprise, then, that cyberterrorism now ranks alongside other weapons of mass destruction in the public
consciousness. Americans have had a latent fear of catastrophic computer attack ever since a teenage Matthew
Broderick hacked into the Pentagon's nuclear weapons system and nearly launched World War III in the 1983 movie
WarGames. Judging by official alarums and newspaper headlines, such scenarios are all the more likely in today's
wired world.
There's just one problem: There is no such thing as cyberterrorism--no instance of anyone ever having been
killed by a terrorist (or anyone else) using a computer. Nor is there compelling evidence that al Qaeda or any
other terrorist organization has resorted to computers for any sort of serious destructive activity. What's more,
outside of a Tom Clancy novel, computer security specialists believe it is virtually impossible to use the Internet
to inflict death on a large scale, and many scoff at the notion that terrorists would bother trying. "I don't lie awake at
night worrying about cyberattacks ruining my life," says Dorothy Denning, a computer science professor at
Georgetown University and one of the country's foremost cybersecurity experts. "Not only does [cyberterrorism] not
rank alongside chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons, but it is not anywhere near as serious as other potential
physical threats like car bombs or suicide bombers."
Page 39 of 121

Hegemony Answers
Page 40 of 121

No Great Power War

Litany of dispute resolution mechanisms and global barriers to conflict solve
Robb, US Navy Lieutenant, 12
[Doug, May, US Naval Institute, Now Here This Why The Age of Great Power War is Over,
http://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2012-05/now-hear-why-age-great-power-war-over, accessed: 7/12/13,ML]
Navy Lieutenant Commander Rachel Gosnell and Marine Second Lieutenant Michael Orzetti argue that the
possibility of great-power war [between the United States and China] cannot be ruled out. However, despite Chinas
rise, which potentially threatens to alter international polarity, a preponderance of evidence suggests that the
era of conventional large-scale war may be behind us. For the purposes of my argument, the United States and
China are defined as great powers because they have stable governments and large populations; influential
economies and access to raw materials; professional militaries and a nuclear arsenal. Prussian war theorist Carl
von Clausewitzs trinity, which characterizes the interrelationship between the government (politics), people (society
and the economy), and the military (in modern terms, deterrence and security), is useful to frame this debate. The 20th
century brought seismic shifts as the global political system transitioned from being multipolar during the first 40 years
to bipolar during the Cold War before emerging as the American-led, unipolar international order we know today.
These changes notwithstanding, major world powers have been at peace for nearly seven decadesthe longest
such period since the 1648 Treaty of Westphalia codified the sovereign nation-state . Whereas in years past, when
nations allied with their neighbors in ephemeral bonds of convenience, todays global politics are tempered by
permanent international organizations, regional military alliances, and formal economic partnerships. Thanks
in large part to the prevalence of liberal democracies, these groups are able to moderate international disputes
and provide forums for nations to air grievances, assuage security concerns, and negotiate settlementsthereby
making war a distant (and distasteful) option. As a result, China (and any other global power) has much to lose by
flouting international opinion, as evidenced by its advocacy of the recent Syrian uprising, which has drawn
widespread condemnation. In addition to geopolitical and diplomacy issues, globalization continues to transform the
world. This +interdependence has blurred the lines between economic security and physical security.
Increasingly, great-power interests demand cooperation rather than conflict. To that end, maritime nations such as
the United States and China desire open sea lines of communication and protected trade routes, a common
security challenge that could bring these powers together, rather than drive them apart (witness Chinas response
to the issue of piracy in its backyard). Facing these security tasks cooperatively is both mutually advantageous and
common sense. Democratic Peace Theorychampioned by Thomas Paine and international relations theorists such as
New York Times columnist Thomas Friedmanpresumes that great-power war will likely occur between a democratic
and non-democratic state. However, as information flows freely and people find outlets for and access to new
ideas, authoritarian leaders will find it harder to cultivate popular support for total waran argument advanced
by philosopher Immanuel Kant in his 1795 essay Perpetual Peace. Consider, for example, Chinas unceasing
attempts to control Internet access. The 2011 Arab Spring demonstrated that organized opposition to unpopular
despotic rule has begun to reshape the political order, a change galvanized largely by social media. Moreover, few
would argue that China today is not socially more liberal, economically more capitalistic, and governmentally
more inclusive than during Mao Tse-tungs regime. As these trends continue, nations will find large-scale
conflict increasingly disagreeable. In terms of the military, ongoing fiscal constraints and socio-economic
problems likely will marginalize defense issues. All the more reason why great powers will find it mutually
beneficial to work together to find solutions to common security problems, such as countering drug smuggling,
piracy, climate change, human trafficking, and terrorismmissions that Admiral Robert F. Willard, former
Commander, U.S. Pacific Command, called deterrence and reassurance. As the Cold War demonstrated, nuclear
weapons are a formidable deterrent against unlimited war. They make conflict irrational; in other words, the
concept of mutually assured destructionhowever unpalatableactually had a stabilizing effect on both
national behaviors and nuclear policies for decades. These tools thus render great-power war infinitely less
likely+ by guaranteeing catastrophic results for both sides. As Bob Dylan warned, When you aint got nothing,
you aint got nothing to lose.
Page 41 of 121

Peacekeeping prevents instability

Goldstein, professor emeritus of international relations at American University, 11
[Joshua S., September/October 2011, Think Again: War, Foreign Policy,
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/08/15/think_again_war, accessed: 7/12/13,ML]
It does now. The early 1990s were boom years for the blue helmets, with 15 new U.N. peacekeeping missions
launched from 1991 to 1993 -- as many as in the U.N.'s entire history up to that point. The period was also host to
peacekeeping's most spectacular failures. In Somalia, the U.N. arrived on a mission to alleviate starvation only to
become embroiled in a civil war, and it quickly pulled out after 18 American soldiers died in a 1993 raid. In Rwanda
in 1994, a weak U.N. force with no support from the Security Council completely failed to stop a genocide that
killed more than half a million people. In Bosnia, the U.N. declared "safe areas" for civilians, but then stood by
when Serbian forces overran one such area, Srebrenica, and executed more than 7,000 men and boys. (There were
peacekeeping successes, too, such as in Namibia and Mozambique, but people tend to forget about them.) In
response, the United Nations commissioned a report in 2000, overseen by veteran diplomat Lakhdar Brahimi,
examining how the organization's efforts had gone wrong. By then the U.N. had scaled back peacekeeping
personnel by 80 percent worldwide, but as it expanded again the U.N. adapted to lessons learned. It
strengthened planning and logistics capabilities and began deploying more heavily armed forces able to wade
into battle if necessary. As a result, the 15 missions and 100,000 U.N. peacekeepers deployed worldwide today
are meeting with far greater success than their predecessors. Overall, the presence of peacekeepers has been
shown to significantly reduce the likelihood of a war's reigniting after a cease-fire agreement. In the 1990s, about
half of all cease-fires broke down, but in the past decade the figure has dropped to 12 percent. And though the
U.N.'s status as a perennial punching bag in American politics suggests otherwise, these efforts are quite
popular: In a 2007 survey, 79 percent of Americans favored strengthening the U.N. That's not to say there isn't room
for improvement -- there's plenty. But the U.N. has done a lot of good around the world in containing war.
Page 42 of 121

Pharmaceuticals Answers
Page 43 of 121

Non Unique Growing Now

Mexicos pharmaceutical industry is growing and will continue
Deloitte 12
[September 1, 2012, 2013 Global life sciences outlook: Optimism tempered by reality in a new normal
http://www.deloitte.com/assets/Dcom-Ireland/Local%20Assets/Documents/Life%20sciences/2013%20Global%20Life
%20Sciences%20Sector%20Report.pdf, p. 15, accessed 7-12-13, UR]
Mexicos pharmaceutical market in 2010 was $14.9 billion.56 The market is projected to grow 4.4 percent from
2011-2016 to $19.5 billion.57 Domestic production (by both local and multinational manufacturers) accounts for
around 80 percent of pharma sales and imports contribute the remainder. A significant export industry also
exists.58
Mexicos favorable regulatory environment and increased health care access are expected to drive life sciences
industry growth in the coming years. For example, in November 2011, the government introduced a bill to foster
public-private partnerships, enhance hospital construction activities, and improve provisions.
In addition to its positive regulatory environment, Mexicos aging population and increased consumer spending are
projected to spur pharmaceutical sales. By 2016, around 7.3 percent of the Mexican population will be age 65 or
older, placing a greater strain on public health care services. As a result, per-capita health spending is projected to grow
at six percent CAGR through 2011-16.59 This increase in public health spending is reflected directly in Mexicos
active pharmaceutical market: between 2005 and 2011, public spending on medicines increased by 86 percent.
According to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Mexico has the second-highest
spending on medications as a percentage of total health spending (28.3 percent), much higher than the OECD average
(17.2 percent).60 Furthermore, spending on medications as a percentage of GDP (1.7 percent) is also higher than the
OECD average (1.4 percent).61
In response to considerable growth opportunities, local drug manufacturers are investing in R&D and foreign
players are growing their generics presence through acquisitions. Mexicos regulatory environment is expected to
boost generic sales, with consumption of generic medicines in the private sector projected to increase considerably
between 2011 and 2019. As well, a number of patents for best- selling drugs will expire in the coming years, and
this will likely accelerate generic market growth.62
Page 44 of 121

Status Quo Solves US Investment

Billions of dollars invested into the pharmaceutical industry to stop bioterrorism and disease
Goozner, former NYU journalism professor, 12
[Merrill, inner of numerous journalism awards, his freelance writing in recent years has appeared in various
publications including the New York Times, Washington Post, Columbia Journalism Review, The Nation, The
American Prospect and the Washington Monthly, 3/20/12, Billions to Stem an Unlikely Bioterror Attack,
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2012/03/30/Billions-to-Stem-an-Unlikely-Bioterror-Attack.aspx#page1,
accessed: 7/12/13, ML]
But Republicans and Democrats agreeing on industrial policy for the pharmaceutical industry to develop drugs
and vaccines to combat bioterror agents? It not only passed by unanimous consent in the Senate earlier this month, it
will likely be approved by the conference committee that will soon consider the $4.5 billion Pandemic and AllHazards Preparedness Act (PAHPA), the reauthorization of the 2006 law coordinating the nations decade-long
effort to prepare for a terrorist biological warfare attack.
Despite the reality that the only bioterrorist attack that has ever taken place on U.S. soil (one week after 9/11) was
launched by a rogue U.S. scientist who had worked in the Cold War biological weapons program and was one of the
worlds few experts in weaponizing anthrax, the nation has spent an estimated $66 billion in the past decade
preparing for the next assault. Tens of billions of dollars have been poured into basic science and applied research to
develop vaccines and drugs to combat diseases like anthrax, smallpox (a disease that no longer occurs naturally on
earth), botulism and plague.
Billions more has gone into beefing up the public health systems ability to respond to emergency health crises.
Hospitals have been paid to expand their capacity to respond to surges of patients stricken by a pandemic or a terrorist
attack. These nationwide grant programs have helped build a broad base of political support for the programs.
And now, in the reauthorization bill sponsored by Sen. Richard Burr, R-N.C., Congress has earmarked $50 million
for a strategic investor venture capital fund to invest in start-up biotechnology companies that are developing drugs
and vaccines that combat bioterror pathogens. Structured as a public-private partnership outside the government, the
goal is to bring more private funding into the hunt for new countermeasure products. It will be added to the
$450 million a year the government already doles out in grants to companies through the Biomedical Advanced
Research and Development Authority (BARDA) and the $2.9 billion earmarked over the next five years for
procurement of new drugs and vaccines for government stockpiles.
As the votes in Congress attest (the House version of the bill also passed on a voice vote), the massive commitment to
biodefense spending in the 2000s has won broad support from the nations research and scientific establishment. The
National Institute for Allergies and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), headed since the 1980s by Anthony Fauci, receives
over $1 billion a year for bioterror-oriented scientific research. The National Cancer Institute, by comparison, receives
about $5 billion to look for cures for the tumors that kill over a half million Americans annually.
Officials at NIAID and legislators on Capitol Hill say the massive investment in preventing and curing diseases that
rarely if ever occur naturally is providing a huge boost to the moribund U.S. effort to develop new antibiotics to
fight the drug resistant bacterial strains that are causing tens of thousands of deaths annually in U.S. hospitals.
The goal of this basic research is to lay the groundwork for developing broad-spectrum antibiotics and
antiviralsdrugs that can prevent or treat diseases caused by multiple types of bacteria or virusesand multiplatform technologies that potentially could be used to more efficiently develop vaccines against a variety of infectious
agents, the agency says on its website.
Page 45 of 121

No Impact Disease Inevitable

Disease spread inevitable only detected after human infection
Sky News 8
[Sky News, 7-21-08, Warning Over Deadly New Diseases, http://news.sky.com/story/620061/warning-over-deadlynew-diseases, accessed, 7-12-13 AMS]
In a highly critical new report, the committee said there was an "urgent need" for a better global surveillance system to
identify diseases before they infect large numbers of people.
It noted that three-quarters of newly-emerging human infections come from animals - but found many are only
detected once they have made humans ill.
Experts estimate a devastating pandemic outbreak of a new disease such as SARS or the H5N1 strain of flu could
claim anything between two and 50 million lives.
In evidence to the House of Lords Intergovernmental Organisations Committee inquiry, the Government said there had
been no pandemic disease outbreaks since 1968.
However, it warned another pandemic outbreak was "inevitable".
Committee chairman Lord Soley said: "The last 100 years have seen great advances in public health and disease
control through the world, but globalisation and changes in lifestyles are giving rise to new infections and
providing opportunities for them to spread rapidly throughout the world.
"We have been impressed by the increased international resources and commitment which are now being devoted to
controlling infectious diseases, and we hope this will continue and grow.
"However, for that to be effective it is vital that there is sufficient surveillance of disease outbreaks to limit their
spread.
"We were particularly concerned about the link with animal health. Three quarters of new human infectious
diseases start in animals.
"We urgently need better surveillance systems to deal with this problem."
The committee has called on the World Health Organisation to take a leadership role in improving coordination of the
surveillance and response effort.
But it warned the UN agency needed to be "better organised and resourced" to do this.
Page 46 of 121

No Impact Disease Burnout

Diseases kill too quickly prevents effective spread
Morse, Center for Public Health Preparedness, Director, 4
[Stephen S. Morse, May 2004 ,Emerging and Reemerging Infectious Diseases: A Global Problem,
http://www.actionbioscience.org/newfrontiers/morse.html, accessed, 7-12-13 AMS]
How do infectious diseases become pandemic?
Morse: A pandemic is a very big epidemic. It requires a number of things. There are many infections that get
introduced from time to time in the human population and, like Ebola, burn themselves out because they kill too
quickly or they dont have a way to get from person to person. They are a terrible tragedy, but also, in a sense, it
is a lucky thing that they dont have an efficient means of transmission. In some cases, we may inadvertently
create pathways to allow transmission of infections that may be poorly transmissible, for example, spreading HIV
through needle sharing, the blood supply, and, of course, initially through the commercial sex trade. The disease is not
easily transmitted, but we provided, without realizing it, means for it to spread. It is now pandemic in spite of its
relatively inefficient transmission. We also get complacent and do not take steps to prevent its spread.
No extinction from disease- Medical technology and dangerous infections kill the host too
quickly to spread
Posner, University of Chicago Law School Senior Lecturer, 4
[Richard, Catastrophe: Risk and Response, page 23-4, CB]
Yet the fact that Homo sapiens has managed to survive every disease to assail it in the 200,000 years or so of its
existence is a source of genuine comfort, at least if the focus is on extinction events. There have been enormously
destructive plagues, such as the Black Death, smallpox, and now AIDS, but none has come close to destroying the
entire human race. There is a biological reason. Natural selection favors germs of limited lethality; they are
filler in an evolutionary sense because their genes are more likely to be spread if the germs do not kill their
hosts loo quickly. The AIDS virus is an example of a lethal virus, wholly natural, that by lying dormant yet infectious
in its host for years maximizes its spread. Yet there is no danger that AIDS will destroy the entire human race, that is,
its host population.
The likelihood of a natural pandemic that would cause the extinction of the human race is probably even less
today than in the past (except in prehistoric times, when people lived in small, scattered bands, which would have
limited the spread of disease), despite wider human contacts that make it more difficult to localize an infectious
disease. The reason is improvements in medical science. But the comfort is a small one. Pandemics can still impose
enormous losses and resist prevention and cure: the lesson of the AIDS pandemic. And there is always a first time.
Page 47 of 121

Pharmaceuticals Fail Regulations

Vaccine development fails too many regulations and inconsistent trials
Hoskins, Pennsylvania Hospital, ALS Center, Coordinator 10
[Katelin Hoskins, University of Pennsylvania, M.A. Science in Nursing, July 2010, vaccineethics.org, Vaccines and
Bioterrorism II. Obstacles to Bioterror Vaccine Development,
http://www.vaccineethics.org/issue_briefs/bioterror_development.php, accessed, 7-12-13 AMS]
The clinical testing process presents significant obstacles to the production of bioterror vaccines.1-3 The Food
and Drug Administration (FDA) requires rigorous safety and efficacy standards which all vaccine candidates must
meet in order to be licensed. Furthermore, researchers involved in vaccine development must abide by certain ethical
guidelines, while Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) monitor the safety of human subjects and ensure that subjects are
not placed at undue risk.
The development of bioterror vaccines is complicated by the scarcity of such pathogens in nature. Typically, a
small number of research subjects naturally become infected with a target pathogen throughout the course of a new
vaccine's development: these infections are necessary to assess the clinical efficacy of the vaccine being studied. It is
unlikely, however, that subjects in bioterror vaccine clinical trials will naturally encounter those target
pathogens, however. While researchers can measure whether a new vaccine generates a robust immune response
in research subjects, such data are less valuable than evidence showing whether those vaccinated actually are
protected from infection. Obviously, legal and ethical regulations prohibit the deliberate exposure of research
subjects to dangerous pathogens, resulting in a significant challenge for assessing the efficacy of bioterror
vaccines in development.
Recognizing the difficulties inherent in the development of bioterror vaccines, in 2002 the FDA instituted a
regulatory exception permitting the licensure of certain vaccines and drugs without data from human efficacy studies.
The FDA amended its drug and biological product regulations so that certain pharmacological entities, those for which
typical human clinical testing is not possible or those intended to relieve or prevent severe or life-threatening
conditions, could be licensed based on "substantial evidence" of efficacy in two animal species. The "Animal Efficacy
Rule" contained the caveat that products would be withdrawn from the market if post-licensure evidence indicated
intolerable risk or lack of efficacy.4
While the Animal Efficacy Rule succeeded in addressing conflicts between the FDA and the Department of Defense
(DoD), the use of animal surrogates is an imperfect method of determining clinical efficacy in humans.5 The
specific immune responses that lead to protection in humans often cannot be determined through animal trials.
While the safety of a vaccine can generally be ascertained, efficacy cannot be assessed with confidence until
vaccinated humans are exposed to the target pathogen. While attempting to infer human response to a vaccine,
researchers may employ models that mimic patterns of human disease and statistical analyses that determine
immune correlates between species.6
Though it may sometimes be possible to approximate a human reaction through animal trials, some diseases-such as smallpox and dengue fever--only affect human beings, complicating vaccine development even further. An
alternate approach is needed for evaluating safety and efficacy when animal trials are impossible. Though the FDA
may resist pressure to relax testing requirements, bioethicist Jonathan Moreno suggests that, in the event of a severe
public health crisis, it might be ethical to expose fully informed volunteers to pathogens in order to test a
pharmaceutical or vaccine candidate.7
Page 48 of 121

Pharmaceuticals Fail No Incentive

Pharmaceutical companies wont solve theyre not economically inclined
Hoskins, Pennsylvania Hospital, ALS Center, Coordinator 10
[Katelin Hoskins, University of Pennsylvania, M.A. Science in Nursing, July 2010, vaccineethics.org, Vaccines and
Bioterrorism II. Obstacles to Bioterror Vaccine Development,
http://www.vaccineethics.org/issue_briefs/bioterror_development.php, accessed, 7-12-13 AMS]
The Role of the Pharmaceutical Industry in Defense
A group within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the Biomedical Advanced Research and
Development Authority (BARDA), manages the preparation and procurement of drugs, vaccines, and therapies for
potential public health crises.8 In 2004 BARDA implemented Project BioShield, an initiative dedicated to advancing
the development, production and purchase of "medical countermeasures" for chemical and biological threats.9 Though
Congress allocated over $5 billion to the project, the world's major pharmaceutical companies have nonetheless
largely eschewed government contracts for bioterror vaccine research and development. Such ventures promise
little profit potential and present a major financial risk.10 Vaccines for bioterror threats occupy a limited
market niche and their production involves substantial challenges such as establishing technical feasibility,
constructing manufacturing facilities, assuring containment, and successfully conducting clinical testing.
Furthermore, Project BioShield does not offer legal immunity to industry, and corporations are wary of
potential litigation, particularly regarding vaccines.11-12
Major pharmaceutical companies are also often reluctant to agree to federal contracts for the exclusive
development and purchase of drugs or vaccines.13 Government contracts typically yield low profit margins, as
there is little or no market competition. There is also concern that security restrictions might severely limit
information access and impede subsequent research and development. In the past, production costs have also been
vastly underestimated, leading to financing difficulties. In addition, while the prospect of bioterrorism is deeply
troubling, it is very likely that any particular threat will never materialize and that vaccines will go unused.
While this is desirable from a security perspective, it provides no rationale for long-term corporate investment.
Because of this, government contracts are generally awarded to smaller biotechnology companies eager for
research subsidies and the possibility of large payments upon product delivery.14 These companies tend to be
less established than larger corporations, with less product diversity and little record of developing and
producing successful vaccines.
Page 49 of 121

Pharmaceuticals Fail No Vaccines

Pharmaceutical companies wont solve pandemics economic interest prevent vaccine
dissemination to the poor
Shah, Global Issues, Editor, 2000
[Anup Shah, May 2000, Pharmaceutical Corporations and Medical Research,
http://www.globalissues.org/article/52/pharmaceutical-corporations-and-medical-research, accessed, 7-12-13 AMS]
Pharmaceutical companies have contributed to peoples improved health and prolonged life, generally speaking.
Research and development of drugs that are brought to market can be costly and there are strict regulations and
requirements that companies must follow in most countries. But the details reveal further concerns.
For example, marketing practices and priorities of the pharmaceutical industry have come under scrutiny for
many years. It seems that there is increasing emphasis on drugs that fit scare-mongering and over-medicalized
problems.
Testing and thorough clinical trials are fundamental to good medical drugs, but there are numerous accusations
of shortcuts, including pressuring for favorable results, testing on people without their proper approval, using
drugs for unapproved uses and much more.
Ideologically, many drug companies support the position of less government involvement, yet in the developing
world in particular, diseases and illnesses affect the poorest the most who cannot afford expensive (or even
sometimes cheap) treatments. In the past decade or so, pharmaceutical companies have therefore also been criticized
for ignoring this market because they cant pay.
Public announcements of drug donations to poor countries are often welcome, but sometimes the details reveal
murkier intentions; some of the drugs are close to, or even past, their expiry date (and are expensive to dispose,
adding more costs to recipient countries) for example.
Poorer countries encourage their drug companies to make cheaper generic alternatives to expensive branded
ones or use other tools available at their disposal to help bring the price of medicines down to more affordable
levels. But they face immense pressure from international institutions and multinational pharmaceutical
corporations, even when generics and other options pursued are legitimate under international rules. For these
multinationals, theyve poured billions into some of these drugs and therefore want a patent system that will protect
their investments for as long as possible.
For the developing and poorer countries, as remote as these issues may seem, patents and intellectual property rights
issues can mean life or death. (For example, at the end of the 1990s, the pharmaceutical industry lobbied the US
government to threaten sanctions on South Africa for trying to produce generic drugs to fight its growing AIDS
problem. It took huge public outcry to get the case dropped some 2 years later.)
Page 50 of 121

Mexican Manufacturing Answers
Page 51 of 121

Non-Unique Growth Now

Non-unique Mexican Manufacturing and energy ties are already strong
Energy and Capital 7/5/13
[Justin Williams, Staff writer, July 5th 2013, U.S. Natural Gas Fuels Mexican Manufacturing,
http://www.energyandcapital.com/articles/us-natural-gas-fuels-mexican-manufacturing/3596, Accessed 7/10/13, CB]
U.S. natural gas is shaping up to be a very important competitive advantage for manufacturers to the south. U.S.
natural gas exports to Mexico hit an all-time high last year, pushing down the countrys energy costs and the
industrial sector has been taking off ever since.
The cheap natural gas is being used to boost factory production, since Mexico is already competitive with places
like China when it comes to labor costs. Now, with low energy costs and it close proximity to the U.S., Mexico is
perfectly positioned to reap the rewards from the U.S. supply chain.
As U.S. natural gas production continues to soar, so too will manufacturing and industry in Mexico.
Mexicos industrial output has dipped slightly this year, but experts believe the data is not a true indication of
things to come proximity and costs make it simply too convenient, and it is expected to start shooting back up
this summer.
Viva Mxico!
Mexico seems to be doing everything in its power to utilize its position with the U.S. The advantage will be extended
with new pipelines to expand upon the growth in imports from the U.S. and to lock down its edge over the
competition.
But its Mexicos comparison to China that makes Mexico a cut above the rest, and this has a lot of U.S.
boardrooms excited Chinese manufacturing labor costs went higher than Mexicos last year as the rate of wages
increased, and its energy costs are significantly higher, making it almost impossible for the Eastern nation to
battle with Mexico for U.S. positioning.to open up for more business to the south.
\
Page 52 of 121

US Manufacturing Answers
Page 53 of 121

Status Quo Solves US Exports

US has the largest shale gas reserves in the world studies prove
Daly, chief analyst for Oilprice.com, 4/23/13
[John, PhD from U. of London, Oil Price EIA report - U.S. #1 in Shale Gas Reserves, Russia #1 in Shale Oil
Reserves, http://oilprice.com/Energy/Natural-Gas/EIA-report-U.S.-1-in-Shale-Gas-Reserves-Russia-1-in-Shale-OilReserves.html, accessed: 7/12/13, ML]
The U.S. governments Energy Information Agency (EIA) is a treasure trove of useful data for those willing to
navigate its less than friendly website.
The most interesting report to show up on the statistics-laden site is the World Shale Gas and Shale Oil Resource
Assessment, compiled by Advanced Resources International (ARI) under EIA sponsorship. The study is a gift to the
hydraulic fracturing (fracking) industry worldwide, as it advances some impressive data on global shale gas and
shale oil reserves, many of which have energy companies eager to develop. The report is highly significant in that it
represents the first time that the EIA has given statistics on foreign shale gas and oil deposits.
For Technically Recoverable Shale Gas Resources the report states that the world has an estimated 6,634 trillion
cubic feet (tcf) of recoverable shale gas, 7,795 tcf if U.S. reserves are added to the mix. The top three shale gas
recoverable reserves are found in the United States (1,161 tcf), China (1,115 tcf) and Argentina (802 tcf.)
The EIA Technically Recoverable Shale Oil Resources data lists global reserves as 287 billion barrels of shale oil,
335 billion barrels if U.S. reserves are factored in. The worlds three top reserves of shale oil are Russia (75 billion
barrels), the United States (48 billion barrels) and China (32 billion barrels).
While no such report can claim to be definitive, ARI in compiling its World Shale Gas and Shale Oil Resource
Assessment surveyed in-place and technically recoverable shale gas and shale oil in 95 shale basins and 137 shale
formations in 41 countries and also included its other assessments of U.S. shale gas and oil reserves from other
research.
What the report makes clear is that neither shale natural gas nor shale oil will be a bonanza for all countries, as it is
very unevenly distributed worldwide. Two-thirds of the assessed, technically recoverable shale gas resource is
concentrated in only six countries; the U.S., China, Argentina, Algeria, Canada and Mexico. A similar picture holds
for technically recoverable shale oil reserves, concentrated in six countries - Russia, the U.S., China, Argentina, Libya
and Venezuela.
The assessment concludes, New geologic and reservoir data collected by these industries and research drilling
programs will enable future assessments of shale gas and shale oil resources to progressively become more rigorous.
The report then adds the caveat, Significant additional shale gas and shale oil resources exist in the Middle East,
Central Africa and other countries not yet included in our study. Hopefully, future editions of this report will address
these important potential shale resource areas. Promoting its own expertise, ARI notes, Beyond the resource
numbers, the current EIA/ARI World Shale Gas and Shale Oil Resource Assessment represents a major step forward
in terms of the depth and hard data of the resource information assembled for 137 distinct shale formations and 95
shale basins in 41 countries. The report is indeed revolutionary, as it notes that the amount of known technically
recoverable oil from shale formations has increased by a factor of 10 in the past two years.
New studies show US reserves are larger than any other

Mead, Professor of Foreign Affairs and Humanities at Bard College, 12
[Walter Russel, 8/2/13, American Oil Reserves Jump, http://blogs.the-americaninterest.com/wrm/2012/08/02/american-oil-reserves-are-growing/, accessed: 7/12/13, ML]
Could Americas oil and gas reserves make it an energy producer on par with Saudi Arabia? That depends on
whether we can extract oil cheaply and easily, and whether these reserves will turn out to be as large as we hope.
There are already promising signs. A new report issued by the Energy Information Administration shows that
Americas proven oil and gas reserves in 2010 rose by 13 percent and 12 percent, respectively, which makes it the
largest such increase since the 1980s. As the Wall Street Journal reports:
The EIA estimates show 25.2 billion barrels of oil could be recovered in the U.S., up from the previous estimate of
22.3 billion barrels. Current U.S. petroleum consumption is about seven billion barrels annually.
Page 54 of 121

Natural-gas reserves are estimated at 318 trillion cubic feet, up from the previous estimate of 284 trillion cubic
feet. Annual U.S. natural-gas consumption is about 24 trillion cubic feet.
And these were only the numbers for 2010. The following two years also saw an increasse in oil and gas
exploration as techniques like fracking gained currency. This year may well be only the first of many upward
revisions to Americas energy reserves. With estimates of trillions of barrels in shale oil, Americas potential
hydrocarbon wealth is close to unlimited.
US natural gas supplies are ample and they are capable of exporting
Hargreaves, staff writer for CNNMoney.com, 6/4/13
[Steve, CNN Money, U.S. steps up natural gas exports, http://money.cnn.com/2013/06/04/news/economy/naturalgas-exports/index.html, accessed: 7/12/13, ML]
The United States will soon start exporting more of its energy bounty. That's making oil and gas companies happy,
American manufacturers nervous, and some environmentalists livid.
Last month, the Energy Department approved a second application to export natural gas, this time from a facility
along the Gulf Coast partly owned by ConocoPhillips (COP, Fortune 500). The approval came two years after DOE
granted the first natural gas export license to Cheniere Energy (LNG), which also has a plant on the Gulf Coast.
The two-year gap was the result of DOE waiting for studies on how gas exports would impact the economy.
Would exports significantly raise prices for consumers? Would they cause manufacturers to leave, taking jobs with
them? Those studies -- along with several from the private sector -- are now done. The reports all generally said
exports would be a good thing.
So now there's every indication that the pace of export licenses will quicken. At a recent congressional hearing, a
DOE official told lawmakers that it took about two months to approve the most recent application. Although newly
appointed Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz said he'll review the permit process before the next application, analysts
took that to mean that new permits could start rolling out as fast as one every two months.
"Our view is that the Moniz review is most likely to be short and lead to the same conclusion as many reviewers of the
issue -- that LNG (liquefied natural gas) exports will provide a net benefit to the U.S," Whitney Stanco, an energy
analyst at Guggenheim Securities' Washington Research Group, wrote in a research note last week.
While many may believe exports will have a net benefit, that opinion is certainly not unanimous.
The bounty: The push to export natural gas stems from the fact that the country now has too much of it. Thanks to the
fracking-led energy boom, U.S. natural gas prices have collapsed. The flow of gas from many recently drilled wells
has actually been shut off, as pumping it out costs more than the gas can be sold for.
Prices in other parts are the world aren't nearly so low. In Europe, they are three times higher than in the United
States. In Japan they're nearly five times as high. That offers an incredible incentive for energy companies to put
their gas on a ship and send it abroad.
DOE currently has 20 export applications pending. Most of the applications are from smaller firms, but the facilities
could be used to ship gas for any of the big oil companies, such as Exxon Mobil (XOM, Fortune 500), Chevron (CVX,
Fortune 500) or BP (BCONQ).
DOE has so far taken a cautious approach. It commissioned two studies on exports -- one on prices from the Energy
Information Administration, and one on impacts to the overall economy from NERA Economic Consulting.
EIA said natural gas prices may rise by between 3% and 9% if exports are increased, with a corresponding 1% to 3%
rise in overall utility bills for residential consumers. The NERA study said any job losses in manufacturing should be
minimal, and more than offset by the positive economic effects of more drilling and greater export revenue.
Related: In U.S. energy boom, a growing tax dodge
Two recent studies from think-tank heavyweights basically said the same thing.
"There are ample domestic supplies of natural gas to meet future demand without significant price increases,"
the Bipartisan Policy Center wrote in a recent report.
"[DOE] should say yes, within prudent limits, and leverage U.S. exports for broader gain," Michael Levi, an energy
expert at the Council on Foreign Relations, wrote in a research paper.
US gas reserves are huge & can sustain increased demand

Blackmon, managing director of Strategic Communications for FTI Consulting, 6/4/13
Page 55 of 121

[David, Increased Demand for Shale Natural Gas Is Good For Us All,
http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidblackmon/2013/06/04/increased-demand-for-shale-natural-gas-is-good-for-us-all/,
A new report from Barclays Capital predicts a Tectonic Shift in demand for natural gas in the United States by
2020. While this report will no doubt be used by the prophets of peak gas theory as ammunition for the construction
of new strawman fright scenarios, the reality is this is nothing but good news for the American public.
The new reality of extremely abundant and reasonably priced natural gas has already led to significant national
benefits in the following areas:
lower carbon emissions in the power generation sector;
lower utility bills for consumers;
the creation of hundreds of thousands of new, high-paying jobs;
tens of billions of additional tax collections at the state, local and federal levels;
billions of dollars in royalty payments to hundreds of thousands of mineral owners;
massive new investments and new job creation by industries that use natural gas as a feedstock, such as plastics,
fertilzer and chemicals;
hundreds of billions in economic impact across the breadth and depth of the nation;
Thats all happened in just the last five years, and during a time in which the price for natural gas became quite
depressed, and the number of rigs actively drilling for natural gas wells fell from about 1600 in 2008 to around 400
today. The reality is that many of these deep, high pressure wells that typify many of the prolific shale plays in the U.S.
simply are not economic to drill at the $2 to $3 prices weve seen from 2010 through 2012. As a result, the great
majority of natural gas wells that were drilled during that time frame were wells operators were obligated to
drill in order to hold their leases by production.
As weve pointed out before, this means that there is an enormous amount of excess drilling capacity in the
system all over the country, given that lease obligation wells represent a small fraction of the potential wells that are
ultimately available to be drilled.
As the price has risen in recent months back to the $4 to $4.30 range, weve already begun to see leasing activity in dry
gas areas like the Haynesville Shale and the Eastern third of the Eagle Ford Shale begin to pick up, and will no
doubt begin to see increased natural gas rig counts if the price holds in that range, where so many more projects are
in fact economic to drill.
Barclays notes the need for the price to rise further in order to send the price signals that will result in the supply
response necessary to meet this coming new demand:
Importantly, by far the largest source of production growth in recent years has come from the Marcellus Shale, which
offers among the lowest cost gas in the nation, and remains profitable in the current price environment. Still, gas prices
matter, and if production has to grow to meet increasing consumption, prices would have to rise to entice a producer
response.
This passage from a June 3 report in NGIs Shale Daily lays out the supply response scenario Barclays sees playing
out:
Demand growth is now taking the leading role for natural gas markets, and we believe it will carry prices higher in
the next few years. We believe prices would have to rise from current levels for production growth to meet an average
annual incremental consumption of 2 Bcf/d in the next seven years.
A combination of factors to 2020 will require a magnitude of U.S. gas supply growth that opens the door for the bulls
to tout hefty, longer-term price forecasts. With the right price signals, producers stand ready to quell the heated
demand with a tidal wave of output. In the past five years, natural gas production has grown by an average of 2.64
Bcf/d each year, with cash prices averaging $4.80/MMBtu, said the analysts.
Prices at $4.50-5.00/MMBtu are high enough to motivate enough gas drilling to meet projected demand: a healthy
recovery from recent $2.00 prices, but still low enough to preserve a cost advantage in the U.S. relative to other
manufacturing economies. We expect natural gas prices to average $4.35/MMBtu in 2015, and $4.75/MMBtu in the
longer run.
Barclays projects rising demand in power generation, as natural gas continues to displace coal in that sector, in the
industrial sector, in transportation and in exports. The total potential demand increase ranges from 8 to 14 billion
cubic feet (bcf) per day, which represents an overall increase of between 11 to 20 percent above current levels. All
of this is achievable, thanks to all the excess capacity currently in the system, at very reasonable prices, as Barclays
notes.
Page 56 of 121

This is the difference between the situation with natural gas today, and the situation that existed a decade ago, before
the advent of all of this new, abundant shale gas. A decade ago, the doom and gloom purveyors of peak gas theory
would have had a legitimate point: such a significant increase in natural gas demand at that time would have sent the
natural gas price soaring, probably to double-digit levels.
But we live in a different world today, a world to which such fright merchants have not caught up. With natural gas
today, we are in a true manufacturing scenario, one in which natural gas producers are able to rapidly meet
increasing demand by activating hundreds of additional drilling rigs to create a corresponding new supply.
U.S. gas boom solves Mexican natural gas needs

Quartz, 7/2/13
[Tim Fernholz, Staff writer, July 2nd 2013, Quartz, That US natural-gas manufacturing boom? Its happening in
Mexico, http://qz.com/99940/that-us-natural-gas-manufacturing-boom-its-happening-in-mexico/, Accessed 7/10/13,
CB]
The shale gas boom has done a lot to boost the US economy. Its such a big deal you can see it from space. All
that new natural gas has lowered energy costs, which has led analysts to wonder if it could help make Americas
energy-heavy manufacturing businesses more competitive with countries that have low labor costs but over-burdened
energy infrastructure. But theres a lot standing in the way of that vision, including the potential for gas exports to
affect the value of the dollar, and the observation that maybe energy costs arent such a big deal.
But where the US is faltering, Mexico is taking advantage of all that cheap natural gas to boost factories; last
year, pipelines brought more natural gas across the border than ever before. Mexico is already successfully
competing with places like China on labor prices, but its energy costs are lower, too. Combine that with its
proximity to the United States and deep integration into the American supply chain, and youve got a recipe for
export-oriented success. Pemex, the countrys state-owned oil company, is spending $3.3 billion to build a new,
750-mile pipeline from Los Ramones, Mexico, near the countrys industrial heartland, to Agua Dulce, near
Texas shale oil fields.
Page 57 of 121

US Manufacturing Turn
Exporting hurts the manufacturing industry
Hargreaves, CNNMoney.com, 6/4/13
[Steve, CNN Money, U.S. steps up natural gas exports, http://money.cnn.com/2013/06/04/news/economy/naturalgas-exports/index.html, accessed: 7/12/13, ML]
Jittery nerves: American manufacturers are concerned that too many exports could drive up the price of natural
gas, a key energy source or material for making plastics and polymers, chemicals, steel, cement, fertilizer and other
industrial products. Natural gas plays a role in the supply chain for everything from iPhone casings to windmill
blades.
The industry says it has launched more than 100 new projects in recent years specifically designed to take
advantage of America's low natural gas prices, investing billions of dollars and creating 500,000 new jobs. Going
forward, manufacturers claim that up to 5 million jobs could be on the line if exports are not handled properly.
Right now, American manufacturers are cautiously comfortable with the fairly slow pace of export approval.
"We're pleased," said Kevin Kolevar, head of public policy at Dow Chemical (DOW, Fortune 500). "We advocate for a
balanced approach, and by every measure that's what they are doing."
But that won't be the case if DOE approves all 20 of its applicants. Kolevar said Dow would be comfortable with
an approval level of about a fifth of that.
Mexican manufacturing takes away from U.S. industrial production and jobs, especially in the
auto industry
The Washington Post, 7/7/13
[July 7th 2013, The Daily Herald, Mexican auto manufacturing boom creates new worries for US workers,
http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20130707/business/707079979/, Accessed 7/10/13, CB]
AMOS ARIZPE, Mexico In the division of labor that has long governed North American auto manufacturing,
the Big Three and other companies typically built their top moneymakers in the United States, using their
Mexican plants to produce smaller, cheaper cars with lower profit margins.
But that division is breaking down. As Mexico cranks out record numbers of vehicles and attracts billions in
new investment, Mexican autoworkers are increasingly able to match the skill and productivity of their U.S.
counterparts and at a fraction of the wages.
General Motors is making its iconic Silverado pickup trucks in central Mexico's Guanajuato state. Cadillac SUVs that
retail for $40,000 roll off the assembly line here in the sprawling industrial parks west of Monterrey. Audi has
announced it will put its new $1.3 billion North American plant in the state of Puebla, the first time luxury vehicles
will be built in Mexico.
The boom here is bringing worries to U.S. autoworkers and unions about the long-term prospects of car
manufacturing jobs in the United States, particularly after the $80 billion government bailout of GM and Chrysler.
On Mexican assembly lines, wages are often six or seven times lower than in the United States, and new motor
cities are rising across central and northern Mexico, fueled by a 50 percent increase in U.S. auto sales since
2009.
"The Mexican worker is a natural craftsman, and global investors are showing their confidence in Mexican labor," said
Alberto Rabago, a union official who started working for Chrysler in 1959 as a floor sweeper when the company made
Mexican versions of its DeSoto and Plymouth sedans for the local market.
Now Chrysler makes its muscular Hemi engines at the Saltillo Motors plant here in the deserts south of Texas.
At another Chrysler plant nearby, $35,000 Ram pickups fly off the assembly line at a rate of one every 80 seconds.
The average pay at his plant, Rabago said, is $3.20 an hour, but he insisted that wage comparisons to U.S. workers
miss a Mexican reality. "When I came here 20 years ago, people didn't even have indoor plumbing. Now they have
pickup trucks, satellite TV and send their kids to universities," he said.
Page 58 of 121

Overall, Mexico is making nearly 3 million vehicles a year, with output expected to increase 38 percent by 2016
as Nissan, Mazda and Audi add new plants and other manufacturers ramp up production. GM said last week it
will invest $691 million to boost its Mexican assembly lines.
Some of the vehicles built in Mexico are bought by the country's expanding middle class. But about 80 percent are for
export, primarily to the United States.
"Mexican auto factories and Mexican manufacturing offer first-world productivity and quality at third-world
wages," said Harley Shaiken, a professor of education and geography at the University of California at Berkeley who
has tracked Mexico's auto industry for decades. "That is an unusual combination, and right now it is a defining
combination."
That devastates U.S. military dominance- the industrial base is key to military technology
Ronis, Walsh College MBA Programs Director, 6
[Shiela R., PhD., July 17th 2006, Before the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission Hearing on
Chinas Impact on the U.S. auto and Auto Parts Industries,
http://origin.www.uscc.gov/sites/default/files/ronis_statement.pdf, pg. 2, Accessed 7/10/13, CB]
U.S. corporations increasingly act as large social systems with a global focus. But ask the CEOs of the Fortune
500 to describe the issues on their minds and, more than likely, national security or the disintegration of the U.S.
industrial base would not be among them. Under the American financial and regulatory system, public companies are
supposed to rank their shareholders at the top of the loyalty scale, except in times of emergency. A new vision of
national security is needed that includes cooperation between government and industry and includes the
economic element of national power merging with diplomacy and defense. National security requires a healthy
market-based economy, with a strong industrial base of globally competitive industries continuously
improving quality and productivity including the auto industry in its entirety.
The very ability of the United States to remain a superpower is at stake.
Offshoring the auto industry could make the U.S. military industrial base in the United States completely
unable to comply with American preference legislation because the erosion of the auto industrial base also
erodes defense. General Motors, Ford, Delphi, Northrop-Grumman, Boeing, Lockheed Martin they all share
the bottom of the industrial base.
The United States cannot sustain the kind of growth it has enjoyed for the last several decades if the industrial base
continues to steadily erode. Increasingly, a number of U.S. companies in specific industries find it impossible to
compete in world markets. This is of particular concern for the industrial base that supplies the U.S. military,
automotive and aerospace.
According to Alan Tonelson of the U.S. Business and Industry Council, import penetration rate data is a critical metric
that the U.S. Government needs to track, but does not. According to Tonelson and Peter Kim in a Washington Times
article, in recent years most industries producing goods in the United States have been steadily losing their
home market the worlds biggest, most important and most competitive to products from overseas. In
other words, numerous U.S. industries are facing the kind of import tide that has pushed General Motors and
Ford dangerously close to receivership. Moreover, this weakness shows up in so-called smokestack and high-tech
industries alike. Unless this rising import penetration is reversed, the nations long-time global industrial
leadership and all the benefits it has generated will be irretrievably lost.
Page 59 of 121

Warming Answers
Page 60 of 121

Status Quo Solves Renewables

Studies prove renewables solve warming
Rigg, Huffington Post Writer, 11
[Kelly, Executive Director of the Global Call for Climate Action, 05/ 9/11, Huffington Post,IPCC Report: Renewable
Energy Key to Solving Climate Change, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kelly-rigg/ipcc-report-renewableene_b_859426.html, accessed: 7/12/13, ML]
A new IPCC report is hot off the press this time focused on the potential of renewable energy sources to solve the
climate crisis. Given the UN climate science panel's proclivity for producing scenarios guaranteed to make any
thinking person lose sleep at night, the good news take-home message was a welcome cause for celebration.
From a technological standpoint, renewables can more than meet our global energy demands. By 2050, nearly 80
percent of our energy needs can be met by renewables with existing technologies. So it's clear that whatever
challenges and difficulties lay ahead, they are entirely within our power to overcome, simply by adopting the right
policy incentives.
A myriad of facts about the amazing rise of renewable energy can be found in the press releases of Greenpeace, WWF
and the IPCC itself.
This labor of love (IPCC authors contribute on a voluntary, no-pay basis) will undoubtedly become a major source of
discussion in the coming days and weeks. Or months -- after all, the report is 900 pages long. Climate deniers will look
for conspiracies, and the nuclear and fossil fuel industries will seize on short-term costs and other obstacles to
downplay the revolutionary message that shines through the study's conclusions.
But as I've said before there is no getting around one central conclusion -- like it or not we are in the midst of an
energy paradigm shift.
This prevailing sense of change was clearly evident at the Creating Climate Wealth Summit last week in Washington
DC, which brought together investors and entrepreneurs in the new clean energy economy. It was held at a rather
unusual conference venue: the Washington Nationals baseball stadium.
Amidst the hotdog vendors at the top of the stands, there's a VIP area where some of the sessions took place and by
some bizarre ironic twist, I accidentally found myself in the Exxon Mobil skybox. It was an honest mistake, cross my
heart. I entered the room through a door marked with a 'W' mistaking the Washington Nationals logo for the Women's
Room.
Imagine my surprise to suddenly find myself in a posh entertainment suite, replete with a massive Exxon Mobil logo
on the wall and an antique Esso oil pump in the corner (the price showing a nostalgic 42 cents per gallon, with room
for only a single digit to the left of the decimal point in the total purchase)! It was the epitome of all things anticlimate, anti-renewables, and anti-progress.
Suppressing my instinctive tendencies toward direct action, I contented myself with taking photos, including this
framed company editorial hanging on the wall of the restroom:
I presume it was selected because of all the good ol' American baseball metaphors, but its message appeared to be
aimed directly at the 112th Congress:
Improving the energy box score means cutting out energy waste. But conservation alone is not enough. To fuel
the economy and provide new jobs we also need action to find and develop new supplies of energy within the
United States. That means cutting the red tape that's holding back offshore drilling for oil and gas, blocking wider use
of coal, and delaying construction of badly needed nuclear power plants.
It all seemed a bit ho-hum until I got to the last line: "Let your elected representatives know how you feel. Your pitch
can help make 1975 the Year of Energy Action."
1975! Back then, Mobil ran weekly paid op-eds on the editorial pages of major U.S. newspapers. This one serves as a
fascinating reminder of how just how stuck the major oil companies are in an energy paradigm that is so last century.
Written more than 35 years ago, it could just as easily have appeared last week. All these years later, and they're still
whining about pesky environmentalists holding them back.
What's even more interesting is that oil industry leaders know they are a dying breed. A recent survey of business
leaders in major oil and gas companies found that 90 percent of those who responded believed that "by 2025,
renewables will be the most substantial energy source."
Let's face it, the end of the fossil fuel era is in sight. Hats off to the IPCC for showing the way forward not just for
the climate crisis but for a wide range of other societal ills -- energy poverty, energy insecurity, and respiratory
Page 61 of 121

diseases to name just a few. May government policymakers have the wisdom to take the hand being offered to them,
allowing us to pull ourselves out of the dirty, dangerous energy hole we've dug for ourselves as fast as we possibly can.
Renewables solve warming Europe proves it can displace emissions.

Sovacool, Senior Research Fellow for the Network for New Energy Choices in New York and
Adjunct Assistant Professor at the Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University in
Blacksburg, VA and Cooper, Executive Director of the Network for New Energy Choices, 7
[Benjamin, and Christopher, , Network for New Energy Choices Report No. 01-07, June, 2007, Renewing America:
The Case for Federal Leadership on a National Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS),
http://www.newenergychoices.org/dev/uploads/RPS%20Report_Cooper_Sovacool_FINAL_HILL.pdf, accessed:
7/12/13, ML]
Carbon Dioxide (CO2) and Other Greenhouse Gases (GHG) In its most recent report released on April,
2007, theIntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)a forum made up of thousands of the worlds top
climate scientistsconcluded that continued emissions of greenhouse gases will contribute directly to global:
Changes in the distribution, availability, and precipitation of water, resulting in severe water shortages for millions of
people.
Destruction of ecosystems, especially the bleaching of coral reefs and widespread deaths of migratory species.
Complex, crop productivity and fishing impacts.
Damage from floods and severe storms, especially among coastal areas.
Deaths arising from changes in disease vectors and an increase in the number of heat waves, floods, and droughts.298
Policymakers should not underestimate the impacts of global warming for the United States. The Pew Center on
Global Climate Change estimates that, in the Southeast and southern Great Plains, the financial costs of climate change
could reach as high as $138 billion by 2100. Indeed, Pew researchers warn that waiting until the future to address
global climate change might bankrupt the U.S. economy.299
Yet carbon-intensive fuels continue to dominate electricity generation in the United States. By 2005, almost 90
percent of the countrys greenhouse gas emissions were energy-related, with the electric utility industry outpacing all
other sectors (including transportation) with 38 percent of national carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. Fossil-fueled
power plants in the U.S. emitted 2.25 billion metric tons of C02 in 2003, more than 10 times the amount of
C02 compared to the next-largest emitter, iron and steel production.301 Put simply, of all U.S. industries, electricity
generation isby substantial marginsthe single largest contributor of the pollutants responsible for global
warming. In 2004, almost every state in country was home to at least one power plant with significant C02 emissions.
Nuclear energy is not much of an improvement, despite recent claims by the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) that
nuclear power is the Clean Air Energy. Reprocessing and enriching uranium requires a substantial amount of
electricity, often generated from fossil fuel-fired power plants. Data collected from one uranium enrichment company
alone revealed that it takes a 100- megawatt power plant running for 550 hours to produce the amount of enriched
uranium needed to fuel a 1,000 megawatt reactor (of the most efficient design currently available) for one year.302
According to the Washington Post, two of the nations most polluting coal plants (in Ohio and Indiana) produce
electricity exclusively for the enrichment of uranium.303
Because uranium enrichment consumes so much electricity derived from fossil fuels, many nuclear power
plants contributeindirectly, but substantially, to global climate change and do virtually nothing to end U.S. dependence
on foreign oil. The International Atomic Energy Agency estimates that when direct and indirect carbon emissions are
included,coal plants are around 10 times more carbon intensive than solar and more than 40 times more carbon
intensive than wind. Natural gas fares little better, at three times as carbon intense as solar and 20 times as carbon
intensive as wind.304
The Common Purpose Institute estimates that renewable energy technologies could offset as much as 0.49 tons of
carbon dioxide emissions per every MWh of generation. According to data compiled by the Union of Concerned
Scientists, a 20 percent RPS would reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 434 million metric tons by 2020a
reduction of 15 percent below business as usual levels, or the equivalent to taking nearly 71 million automobiles
off the road.305
These estimates are not simply theoretical. Between 1991 and 1997 renewable energy technologies in the
Netherlands reduced that countrys annual emissions of CO2 by between 4.4 million and 6.7 million tons
Renewable technologies were so successful at displacing greenhouse gas emissions that Europe now views
renewable energy as the major tool of distribution utilities in meeting industry CO2 reduction targets.
Page 62 of 121

Page 63 of 121

Fracking Bad
Page 64 of 121

Fracking Bad Environment

Fracking conflicts with removing CO2 and exasperates warming
Fischetti, Science writer and editor @ Scientific America, 12
[Mark, 1/20/12, Scientific America, Fracking Would Emit Large Quantities of Greenhouse Gases,
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=fracking-would-emit-methane, accessed: 7/10/13, ML]
Add methane emissions to the growing list of environmental risks posed by fracking.
Opposition to the hydraulic fracturing of deep shales to release natural gas rose sharply last year over worries that the
large volumes of chemical-laden water used in the operations could contaminate drinking water. Then, in early
January, earthquakes in Ohio were blamed on the disposal of that water in deep underground structures.
Yesterday, two Cornell University professors said at a press conference that fracking releases large amounts of
natural gas, which consists mostly of methane, directly into the atmospheremuch more than previously thought.
Robert Howarth, an ecologist and evolutionary biologist, and Anthony Ingraffea, a civil and environmental engineer,
reported that fracked wells leak 40 to 60 percent more methane than conventional natural gas wells. When water
with its chemical load is forced down a well to break the shale, it flows back up and is stored in large ponds or tanks.
But volumes of methane also flow back up the well at the same time and are released into the atmosphere before they
can be captured for use. This giant belch of "fugitive methane" can be seen in infrared videos taken at well sites.
Molecule for molecule, methane traps 20 to 25 times more heat in the atmosphere than does carbon dioxide. The
effect dissipates faster, however: airborne methane remains in the atmosphere for about 12 years before being
scrubbed out by ongoing chemical reactions, whereas CO2 lasts 30 to 95 years. Nevertheless, recent data from the two
Cornell scientists and others indicate that within the next 20 years, methane will contribute 44 percent of the
greenhouse gas load produced by the U.S. Of that portion, 17 percent will come from all natural gas operations.
Currently, pipeline leaks are the main culprit, but fracking is a quickly growing contributor. Ingraffea pointed out
that although 25,000 high-volume shale-gas wells are already operating in the U.S., hundreds of thousands are
scheduled to go into operation within 20 years, and millions will be operating worldwide, significantly expanding
emissions and keeping atmospheric methane levels high despite the 12-year dissipation time.
Howarth said he is particularly concerned about fracking emissions because recent data indicates that the planet is
entering a period of rapid climate change. He noted that the average global temperature compared with the early
1900s is now expected to increase by 1.5 degrees Celsius within the next 15 to 35 years, which he called "a tipping
point" toward aggressive climate change. More and more fracking would speed the world to that transition or
undermine efforts to reduce emissions of CO2 and other greenhouse gases. The notion, Ingraffea said, that shale gas
is a desirable "bridge fuel" from oil to widespread renewable energy supplies several decades from now "makes no
sense" in terms of climate change.
Natural gas worse than other fossil fuels studies prove

McDermott, Masters degree from New York University's Center for Global Affairs, 11
[Mat, editor at tree hugger, Tree Hugger, Natural Gas From Fracking Emissions Can Double Those From Coal,
http://www.treehugger.com/fossil-fuels/natural-gas-from-fracking-emissions-can-double-those-from-coal.html,
Here's the second study of the year showing that the greenhouse gas emissions caused by burning natural gas
obtained by hydraulic fracturing are much higher than acknowledged. In fact, according to a soon to be published
study seen by The Hill, using fracked natural gas results in emissions up to double those of using coal.
"The [greenhouse gas] footprint for shale gas is greater than that for conventional gas or oil when viewed on any
time horizon, but particularly so over 20 years. Compared to coal, the footprint of shale gas is at least 20%
greater and perhaps more than twice as great on the 20-year horizon and is comparable when compared over 100
years," states the upcoming study from Howarth, who is a professor of ecology and environmental biology, and
other Cornell researchers.
Here's the pre-publication version of the study: Methane and the Greenhouse-Gas Footprint of Natural Gas from Shale
Formations
Page 65 of 121

Read the original article for more detailed reasons why fracking emissions are so much higher than conventional
sources of natural gas--which otherwise compared to coal is a far cleaner-burning source of energy, even if a long way
from being carbon-neutral or renewable.
The other study from this year on this there: Back in January a lifecycle analysis of natural gas by the EPA showed that
in fracking operations methane emissions were up to 9,000 times higher than previously reported.
So what's the bigger picture, beyond concerns about water supply that continue to hound fracking?
Projections by the EIA show that natural gas obtained by fracking could account for 45% of the US natural gas
supply by 2035, an increase of 14% from 2009. In his most recent energy speech, President Obama touted natural gas
from shale (he deftly avoided the term 'fracking') as a great and important future source of energy.
In other words, the natural gas touted as a good way to power the US over the coming decades could be worse
than using coal and make it much more difficult to cut greenhouse gas emissions more broadly. Especially when you
realize how much of the US energy mix goes to transportation: Converting truck fleets to natural gas and
electrifying cars may not be the environmental winner it's conventionally thought to be. Not that continuing to run
them on oil is any better though.
Fracking leads to major air pollution

Banerjee, LA Times reporter, 12
[Neela, 3/20/12, LA Times, Study: 'Fracking' may increase air pollution health risks,
http://articles.latimes.com/2012/mar/20/local/la-me-gs-fracking-increases-air-pollution-health-risks-to-residents20120320, accessed: 7/10/13, ML]
Air pollution caused by hydraulic fracturing, a controversial oil and gas drilling method, may contribute to acute
and chronic health problems for those living near natural gas drilling sites, according to a new study from the
Colorado School of Public Health.
The study, based on three years of monitoring at Colorado sites, found a number of potentially toxic petroleum
hydrocarbons in the air near the wells including benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene and xylene. The Environmental
Protection Agency has identified benzene as a known carcinogen.
Soon to be published in an upcoming edition of Science of the Total Environment, the report said that those living
within a half-mile of a natural gas drilling site faced greater health risks than those who live farther away.
Colorado allows companies to drill for natural gas within 150 feet of homes.
Hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, involves injecting great volumes of water and sand laced with chemicals into
shale formations to break apart the rock and unlock reservoirs of oil and gas. Its advocates say it carries minimal
environmental risks and the chance of great economic rewards for companies and communities. Its critics have largely
focused so far on frackings possible contamination of underground and surface water.
But when a well is fracked, its almost as if a small factory is rapidly erected at the drilling site, as machinery and
tanks of chemicals and water are brought in. Studies have shown that air pollution at many of these sites is greater
than in surrounding areas. Adhering to EPA standards, the researchers for this study used air toxics data collected in
Garfield County from January 2008 to November 2010. A small rural community in Colorado, Garfield is poised to
undergo a sharp increase in drilling activity.
Fracking is worse than coal

Leahy, International Environmental Journalist, 12
[Stephen, 1/20/12, Fracking for Shale Gas: The Bridge to Global Warming Disaster,
http://stephenleahy.net/2012/01/23/fracking-for-shale-gas-neither-clean-nor-green-making-global-warming-worse/,
It is true that natural gas is cleaner in that it releases about 40 to 45 percent less carbon dioxide than coal does to
produce the same amount of energy.
However, gas from fracking has a higher carbon footprint because more energy is needed to get the gas and
because methane leaks out.
Methane has 25 times the warming impact of carbon dioxide.
Page 66 of 121

Switching from coal to gas as an energy source could result in increased global warming, not less, according to the
study Coal to Gas: The Influence of Methane Leakage, released in September by the U.S. National Center for
Atmospheric Research (NCAR).
This is mainly due to the methane leakage problem, which is common but unregulated.
Natural gas is mainly methane, so even if leaks are limited to one to two percent, it would only be slightly better
than continuing to burn coal.
Relying more on natural gas would reduce emissions of carbon dioxide, but it would do little to help solve the
climate problem, said study author Tom Wigley, a researcher at NCAR, in a press release.
Increased fracking accelerates warming and locks in reliance on fossil fuels

Henry, StateImpact Reporter 12
[Terrence Henry, B.A. in International Relations from Brigham Young University,11-13-12, State Impact, How a
Domestic Drilling Boom Could Lead to a Global Climate Bust, http://stateimpact.npr.org/texas/2012/11/13/how-adomestic-drilling-boom-could-lead-to-a-climate-bust/, accessed, 7-10-13 AMS]
This week the International Energy Agency (IEA) released their annual World Energy Outlook, and its getting
a lot of attention for its predictions that the U.S. will soon outpace Saudi Arabia as a producer of oil.
Thats projected to happen by 2020, according to the report, thanks to a hydraulic fracturing-led boom in domestic
drilling. Reserves of oil and gas in the U.S. and Canada once considered impossible to reach are now just a frack job
away. But theres a downside to this boom that hasnt garnered much attention in the coverage of the report: climate
change could be exacerbated as a result.
The world is still failing to put the global energy system onto a more sustainable path, the report says. The IEA
says that factoring in emissions from new energy development will lead to a long-term average global
temperature increase of 3.6 degrees Celsius. Thats largely due to the fact that increased drilling will meet new
demand in China, India and the Middle East. As natural gas replaces coal in the U.S., that coal is being shipped to
Europe, where gas is expensive. The fossil fuel industry enjoyed $523 billion in subsidies last year, the report says,
more than six times the amount offered to renewables. The deck appears stacked in favor of continued reliance
on fossil fuels.
Page 67 of 121

Fracking Bad Earthquakes

Fracking increases the amount of earthquakes studies prove
Drajem, Bloomberg, Staff writer 12
[Mark Drajem, 4-12-12, Bloomberg, "Fracking Tied To Unusual Rise In Earthquakes In U.S.",
www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-04-12/earthquake-outbreak-in-central-u-s-tied-to-drilling-wastewater.html, accessed,
7-10-13 AMS]
A spate of earthquakes across the middle of the U.S. is almost certainly man-made, and may be caused by
wastewater from oil or gas drilling injected into the ground, U.S. government scientists said in a study.
Researchers from the U.S. Geological Survey said that for the three decades until 2000, seismic events in the
nations midsection averaged 21 a year. They jumped to 50 in 2009, 87 in 2010 and 134 in 2011.
Those statistics, included in the abstract of a research paper to be discussed at the Seismological Society of America
conference next week in San Diego, will add pressure on an energy industry already confronting more regulation of the
process of hydraulic fracturing.
Our scientists cite a series of examples for which an uptick in seismic activity is observed in areas where the
disposal of wastewater through deep-well injection increased significantly, David Hayes, the deputy secretary of
the U.S. Department of Interior, said in a blog post yesterday, describing research by scientists at the U.S. Geological
Survey.
Fairly Small Quakes
The earthquakes were fairly small, and rarely caused damage, Hayes said.
He said not all wastewater disposal wells induce earthquakes, and there is no way of knowing if a disposal well
will cause a temblor.
Last month, Ohio officials concluded that earthquakes there last year probably were caused by wastewater
from hydraulic fracturing for natural gas injected into a disposal well.
In hydraulic fracturing -- or fracking -- water, sand and chemicals are injected into deep shale formations to
break apart underground rock and free natural gas trapped deep underground. Much of that water comes back
up to the surface and must then be disposed of.
Theres a difference between disposal injection wells and hydraulically fractured wells, Daniel Whitten, a
spokesman for the Americas Natural Gas Alliance, which represents companies such as Chesapeake Energy Corp.
(CHK) and Cabot Oil & Gas Corp. (COG), said in an e-mail. There are over 140,000 disposal wells in America, with
only a handful potentially linked to seismic activity.
Fracking increases seismic activity six fold

Efstathiou, Bloomberg, 12
[Jim Efstathiou Jr., 4-20-12, Bloomberg, "Fracking-Linked Earthquakes Spurring State Regulations",
www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-04-20/fracking-linked-earthquakes-spurring-state-regulations.html, accessed, 7-1013 AMS]
With scientific evidence emerging that wastewater from oil and gas drilling is the possible cause of earthquakes,
states are adding new requirements for disposal wells.
Researchers think an increase in wastewater injected into the ground by drilling operators may be the cause of
a sixfold increase in the number of earthquakes that have shaken the central part of the U.S. from 2000 to 2011,
according to a U.S. Geological Survey study. The demand for underground disposal wells has increased with the
proliferation of shale-gas drilling, a technique that produces millions of gallons of wastewater a well.
Links between disposal wells and earthquakes in Arkansas, Ohio and other states has raised public concern,
according to Scott Anderson, senior policy adviser for the Environmental Defense Fund in Austin, Texas. The U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, which sets standards for wells under the Safe Drinking Water Act, said it is working
with states to develop guidelines to manage seismic risk.
Basically, people need to be told not to locate their disposal wells in active seismic areas, Anderson said in an
interview. But the total percentage of wells that would be impacted by those restrictions almost certainly would be
small.
Page 68 of 121

U.S. Geological Survey researchers found that, for three decades prior to 2000, seismic events in the nations
midsection averaged 21 a year. They jumped to 50 in 2009, 87 in 2010 and 134 in 2011, according to the study,
which was presented April 18 at the annual meeting of the Seismological Society of America.
Recent studies prove fracking causes earthquakes

Madrak, staff writer for the Huffington Post and managing editor of Crooks and Liars, 12
[Suzie, 11-9-12, Crooks and Liars, Looks Like Fracking Can Cause Earth Quakes After All,
http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/oops-looks-fracking-can-cause-earthqu, accessed 7-10-13]
So the drilling industry insisted there was no link at all between fracking and earthquakes, but finally had to admit that
injecting fracking wastewater can trigger earthquakes. Now it looks like the actual fracking can trigger
earthquakes, after all. Maybe we should put the onus on businesses to prove the safety of what they're doing first? Nah,
that would be un-American!
Drawing on scientific research and reports by government agencies, Smart News and SmithsoniansSurprising
Science blog have written that, as the National Research Council puts it, there is no evidence to suggest that hydraulic
fracturing itself is the cause of the increased rate of earthquake. The known link between fracking and
earthquakes has been to do with the waste disposal process, not the fracking itself: Inappropriate disposal of
waste water used during the fracking process has triggered induced earthquakes.
A recent report by the British Columbia Oil & Gas Commission, however, finds that fracking actually can cause
earthquakes.
Earthquake monitoring equipment in northern British Columbia, Canada, says the report, recorded 216 small
earthquakes clustered in a small area around an ongoing fracking project in the northern end of the province.
Of those earthquakes, 19 of them were rated between 2 and 3 on the Richter magnitude scale. Only one of them was
strong enough to be felt at the surface. By comparison, in the past week alone, Southern California experienced 333
earthquakes, with 29 of those having magnitudes from 2.0 to 3.9.
Focusing in on a subset of the earthquakes, the report says,
Eighteen [local] magnitude 1.9 to 3.0 events were selected from dense array microseismic plots. These events
were selected because they were located adjacent to hydraulic fracturing stages and could be connected to a
single stage fluid injection with some confidence. Evidence strongly suggests that all events were triggered by
fluid injection at adjacent stages.
They found that eight of those earthquakes happened while the fracking was ongoing and that all eighteen happened
within 24 hours of the fracking injections. The fracking-induced earthquakes happened when the fluid injection
caused pre-existing faults within the Earth to slip. The strength of the earthquakes got bigger or smaller the closer
or further the fracking was from the fault.
This isnt the first time a link has been seen between fracking and earthquakes, but the pool of observations remains
extremely limitedthe report cites other known instances in England and inOklahoma.
U.S. geological survey concludes that fracking causes earthquakes

Drajem, Bloomberg news, 12
[Mark, 4-12-12, Bloomberg News, Fracking Tied to Unusual Rise in Earthquakes in the U.S.,
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-04-12/earthquake-outbreak-in-central-u-s-tied-to-drilling-wastewater.html,
accessed 7-10-13, HG]
A spate of earthquakes across the middle of the U.S. is almost certainly man-made, and may be caused by
wastewater from oil or gas drilling injected into the ground, U.S. government scientists said in a study.
Researchers from the U.S. Geological Survey said that for the three decades until 2000, seismic events in the
nations midsection averaged 21 a year. They jumped to 50 in 2009, 87 in 2010 and 134 in 2011.
Those statistics, included in the abstract of a research paper to be discussed at the Seismological Society of America
conference next week in San Diego, will add pressure on an energy industry already confronting more regulation of the
process of hydraulic fracturing.
Our scientists cite a series of examples for which an uptick in seismic activity is observed in areas where the
disposal of wastewater through deep-well injection increased significantly, David Hayes, the deputy secretary of
Page 69 of 121

the U.S. Department of Interior, said in a blog post yesterday, describing research by scientists at the U.S. Geological
Survey.
Page 70 of 121

Oil Spills Answers
Page 71 of 121

Link Answers
Page 72 of 121

No Solvency Environmental Regulations

The US is a poor model for environmental regulationsenforcement is hampered by limited
data, staff, and compliance
Trimble, GAO director of natural resources and environment, 12
(David C., September 2012, US Government Accountability Office, Unconventional Oil and Gas Development: Key
Environmental and Public Health Requirements, http://www.gao.gov/assets/650/647782.pdf, p. 77-79, Accessed
7/10/13, JC)
Federal and state agencies reported facing several challenges in regulating oil and gas development from
unconventional reservoirs. Specifically, EPA officials reported that their ability to conduct inspection and
enforcement activities and limited legal authorities are challenges. In addition, BLM and state officials reported
that hiring and retaining staff and educating the public are challenges.
Officials at EPA reported that conducting inspection and enforcement activities for oil and gas development
from unconventional reservoirs is challenging due to limited information, as well as the dispersed nature of
the industry and the rapid pace of development. More specifically, according to EPA headquarters officials,
enforcement efforts can be hindered by a lack of information in a number of areas. For example, in cases of
alleged groundwater contamination, EPA would need to link changes in groundwater quality to oil and gas
activities before taking enforcement actions. However, EPA officials said that often no baseline data exist on
the quality of the groundwater prior to oil and gas development.100
In addition, EPA officials said that they do not always have information on the types of activities taking place or
equipment being used at oil and gas well sites, making it difficult to know where to conduct inspections related
to SDWA, CWA, and CAA. For example, regarding SDWA, EPA headquarters officials said that, though EPAs
guidance document on this topic is not yet finalized, EPA requires operators conducting hydraulic fracturing
operations with diesel fuel to apply for a Class II UIC permit. These officials also said that linking groundwater
contamination to a specific activity may be difficult even in cases where baseline data are available because of the
variability and complexity of geological formations. 101 100As discussed earlier in this report, three of the six states
we reviewedColorado, Ohio, and Pennsylvaniahave requirements that encourage or require operators to conduct
baseline water testing in certain cases. However, it is difficult for EPA to assess operators compliance because the
agency does not know which operators are using diesel. Similarly, with respect to CWA, EPA officials said it is
difficult to assess operators compliance with the SPCC program, which establishes spill prevention and
response planning requirements in accordance with CWA, because EPA does not know the universe of
operators with tanks subject to the SPCC rule. In addition, related to CAA, EPA headquarters officials said that it
would be difficult for EPA to find oil and gas wells that are subject to but noncompliant with NESHAPs
because EPA does not have information on the universe of oil and gas well sites with the equipment that are
significant to air emissions. Also, according to EPA Region 8 officials, these requirements are self-implementing,
and EPA would only receive notice from a facility that identifies itself as subject to the rules.
Several EPA officials also mentioned that the dispersed nature of the industry and the rapid pace of
development make conducting inspections and enforcement activities difficult. For example, officials in EPA
Region 5 said that it is a challenge to locate the large number of new well sites across Ohio and to get inspectors out
to these sites because EPA generally does not receive information about new wells or their location.102
Page 73 of 121

Turn Habitat Fragmentation

Pipelines cause habitat fragmentationcreates disturbance zones and prevent species survival
Notice Nature 6
(Notice Nature, Wildlife, Habitats & Development, http://www.noticenature.ie/files/Construction_v12.pdf, Accessed
7/10/13, JC)
Note: Date based on most recent citation
Habitat fragmentation is a process whereby large tracts of the natural landscape are gradually developed and
subdivided until only patches of original habitat remain. The patches are often too small and too far apart to
support the survival and reproductive needs of many wildlife species during various stages of their life-cycle or in
different times of the year.
Linear projects are generally responsible for fragmentation of habitats i.e. road, railway or pipeline projects. This
results in both habitat loss and the fragmentation of the remaining parts.
When a species habitat is separated by such distances that make movement from one area to another impossible,
the impacts on the health of the population are significant and reduce a species ability to reproduce. In addition,
fragmentation of habitats results in fewer species, even if the total amount of habitat is the same as it was originally.
There is also the likelihood that animals will try to cross between two areas of habitat, which can result in animal
deaths if roads and railway lines are involved. Furthermore, smaller patches of habitat and the wildlife that
depend on them are more vulnerable to the effects of natural disturbances i.e. fire, flooding etc.
Disturbance
The impact of development/human activity on biodiversity extends beyond the actual area of development into
what is referred to as a disturbance zone i.e. the entire area where habitat value has been meaningfully reduced.
The encroachment of development/human activity into a natural area creates changes in environmental conditions
as well as changes in animal behaviour and well-being as a result of being in close proximity to the border between
habitat areas. in addition, the encroachment of human activity reduces the amount of interior habitat area
relative to edge or border area. While borders between two different habitats are often an essential part of the
ecology of an area, when habitat becomes so small that it is all edge and no interior, it loses its ability to
support those species that require an isolated interior for some portion of their life (e.g. some nesting birds).
Page 74 of 121

Turn More Spills

Hydrocarbons development causes biodiversity lossaccidental spills, poor response, and
disruptive pipelines
Wells, Dalhousie University International Ocean Institute manager, 10
(Peter G. Wells, Bay of Fundy Ecosystem Partnership member, Gulf of Maine Council on the Marine Environment,
June 2010, Emerging Issues Circa 2010: State of the Gulf of Maine Report, http://www.gulfofmaine.org/state-ofthe-gulf/docs/emerging-issues.pdf, p. 9, Accessed 7/10/13, JC)
The oil and gas issue, a major concern the Gulf in the 1980s, will recur soon due to renewed interest by the oil
sector in further developing regional resources. The Georges Bank moratorium has been reconsidered in Canada,
with an extension to 2015 now decided. Ecological risks associated with oil and gas exploration and
development in the offshore are well understood environmentally and economically due to extensive research
and reviews since the 1970s, and considerable experience in the offshore worldwide. Along with operational
discharges, spills, blowouts at the well head and pipeline breaks are all possibilities (GESAMP 2007), and
risks increase for off-shelf, deep-water operations, as shown by the BP Deepwater Horizon blowout in the Gulf
of Mexico, April 2010. In the upper Bay of Fundy, gas reserves sit under coastal lands, but no attempt has yet been
made to further explore them. Finally, this issue also concerns operational and accidental oil spills of varying
size, a continuous risk given the numbers of tankers and other ships transporting crude oil and refined
products to and from Saint John, Portland and Boston. The ecological risks are well understood, emergency response
organizations are in place, but there is great reliance on technology to reduce risks and manage accidents. The
ecological risks are real, especially at the entrance of the Bay of Fundy during the summer months when whales
such as the northern right whale, finbacks and humpbacks, and other marine mammals, frequent the area, and in the
southern Gulf in areas of high biodiversity (Stellwagen Bank and Georges Bank). Also, seabirds and shorebirds
frequent the Gulf region in huge numbers, seasonally or year-round, and they are highly vulnerable and sensitive to
oil spill events.
Another emerging issue is the impacts of oil and gas pipelines in the Gulf if they are developed to bring oil and
gas resources from the Scotian Shelf and Georges Bank. Pipelines are only partially buried on the bottom,
leading to potential interference with the movement of benthic species (e.g., lobsters and fishing gear). Pipelines
were considered an emerging issue in an ocean zoning forum in 2002 (Courtney and Wiggin 2003)
Page 75 of 121

Turn Oil Extraction

Energy development threatens biodiversitytransportation, storage, and development cause
species extinction
Berwyn, Summit County Citizens Voice writer, 12
(Bob, 1/26/12, Summit County Citizens Voice, Report: Energy development threatens biodiversity,
http://summitcountyvoice.com/2012/01/26/report-energy-development-threatens-biodiversity/, Accessed 7/10/13, JC)
SUMMIT COUNTY Along with the significant pollution including greenhouse gases associated with use of
fossil fuels, the push to extract more oil and gas is also a driver in the great wave of species extinctions currently
sweeping the planet.
From tiny river mollusks in the Appalachians to the mighty polar bear, aggressive development of fossil fuel
resources is endangering dozens of species. In the West,greater sage-grouse is under pressure, as habitat is
increasingly fragmented by well pads, compressor stations, access roads, power lines and pipelines.
To draw attention to the threats, the Endangered Species Coalition last week released a report on wildlife endangered
by energy development, highlighting 10 species that are particularly at risk.
Americas outsized reliance on dirty and dangerous fuels is making it much harder to protect our most
vulnerable wildlife, said Mark Salvo, Wildlife Program Director atWildEarth Guardians and head of the Sagebrush
Sea Campaign. We should not sacrifice our irreplaceable natural heritage in order to make the fossil fuels
industry even wealthier.
The report shows how wildlife suffers displacement, loss of habitat and the threat of extinction from the
development, storage and transportation of fossil fuels. Coalition members nominated candidates for inclusion in
the report, and submissions were then reviewed, judged, and voted on by a panel of scientists. The report identifies the
home range, conservation status, remaining population and specific threat facing each of the ten finalists.
Page 76 of 121

Relations Answers
Page 77 of 121

Uniqueness Answers
Page 78 of 121

Uniqueness- Mexico Growing

Status quo solves Mexican economylarge amount of US investment, low debt, and growing
middle class
Thomson, Financial Times Mexico correspondent, 6/27/13
(Adam, Aztec tiger begins to sharpen its claws, http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/0c8398e4-c79c-11e2-9c5200144feab7de.html#axzz2Ys2UaCSn, Accessed 7/12/13, JC)
Fast-forward to today and Mexico is one of the brightest prospects in Latin America. No longer in the shadow
of Brazil, where growth has slowed dramatically, the regions second-largest country suddenly appears strong and
confident. The economy is likely to expand at more than 3 per cent this year after growing 3.9 per cent in 2012.
International investors have rekindled their love for Mexico. Between the start of this year and May 8, the country
received a net US$5.6bn in fixed-income and equity flows, three times the amount that went to Brazil. Before Junes
generalised emerging markets sell-off, this new-found favour helped push Mexican sovereign borrowing costs to
record lows, and the stock market to record highs.
Mexico is in a completely different place from where it was a few years ago, says Gabriel Casillas, chief economist
at Banorte, the countrys largest domestically owned bank. We are very optimistic.
So what happened to turn such an gloomy future into the seemingly bright one that Mexico faces today? One reason is
the countrys reputation for prudent macroeconomic management.
The result is a total government debt of equivalent to about 36 per cent of gross domestic product, which is enviably
low by almost any standards.
At the same time, inflation, at over 4 per cent, is above the central banks target ceiling, but is also under control,
with core inflation at less than 3 per cent. The prudent and responsible handling of fiscal policy has allowed us to
eradicate the large and persistent imbalances in the public finances that the country suffered in the past, Agustn
Carstens, central bank governor, said recently.
The new administration headed by centrist President Enrique Pea Nieto has this year balanced the budget after a
fiscal deficit following the deep recession in 2009.
All of this has helped to expand the middle classes, and the consequent though insufficient improvement in
the numbers of formal-sector workers, bank accounts and even changes in consumer patterns.
Page 79 of 121

Link Answers
Page 80 of 121

Turn Engagement Destabilizes Mexico

US presence destabilizes Mexicoextreme anti-Americanism in politics and public
Bonn, president of nonpartisan Patriot Union of America, 8
(Xelan, 5/15/8, Patriot Union of America, Mexico Destabilizing: Is War With USA Imminent?
http://www.needtoknowsite.com/Mexico_Destabilizing.pdf, pg. 1, Accessed 7/12/13, JC)
Exasperating political climates, the violence, bloodshed, and hatred for Americans South of the border, coupled
with rising injustices and racism against and by US citizens, compounded by an incompetent federal
government North of the border, are propagating the fires of civil discontent on both sides and about to stripaway the last veneers of civility.
Toss into the ugly political salad the mix of illegal immigration, free trade, high treason, disdain for the
Constitution by US leaders, anti-rule-of-law anarchists groups and members of Congress (i.e. pro-open
borders, pro-illegal immigration groups), and increasing economic pressures and uncertainties on both
sides of the border, the climate is now ripe for growing a civil war.
Corrupted Mexican officials are driving an ever-increasing political wedge against Americans,
demanding non-existent rights for millions of their invading hordes in direct violation of the Treaty of
Guadalupe--giving the US the unilateral legal right to militarily invade Mexico and seize its oil fields
and other natural assets. However, at the highest level of government, both countries remain safe from
such political unthinkables--but then the choice as to whether the US goes to war with Mexico is not in
either government's hands.
Page 81 of 121

Alt Cause Drug Trafficking

Drug trafficking hurts relations aff cant solve
Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, 9
[January 2009, Woodrow Wilson Center Mexico Institute, The United States and Mexico: Towards a
Strategic Partnership, http://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/The%20U.S.%20and%20Mexico.
%20Towards%20a%20Strategic%20Partnership.pdf, pg. 3, accessed 7-10-13, MSG]
Today is a time of great opportunity in our relationship with Mexico, but also a time of severe challenges.
While the two governments have taken important steps to limit the risk that terrorists will use the shared
border as a launching pad for attacks, drug tracking organizations have developed a lucrative and deadly
cross-border trade that creates signicant vulnerabilities for both countries. Mexican drug tra cking
organizations have become increasingly violent in recent years, with over ve thousand deaths tied to
narcotics tracking in 2008 alone, and they have gradually penetrated the institutional framework of the
Mexican state, especially local law enforcement authorities. These organizations are fueled by persistent
demand in the United States: over twenty million Americans use illegal drugs each month and roughly 15
to 25 billion dollars in prots from U.S. drug sales are pumped back into to the Mexican economy each year
in cash and weapons. The violence and corruption wrought by drug tracking organizations are felt
particularly strongly in border communities, but the eects of the trade run deep throughout cities and
towns in both countries. Policymakers in the two countries have a shared interest in working together to
develop a comprehensive and bilateral approach that limits the reach of organized crime.
Page 82 of 121

Internal Link Answer
Page 83 of 121

No Stability Internal Link Empirically

Mexican economic history proves that political stability and economic growth have no
correlation
Hanna, Harvard Business School associate editor, 6
(Julia, 7/19/6, Harvard Business School, Political Turmoil and Mexicos Economy,
http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/5458.html, Accessed 7/12/13, JC)
In research examining Mexico's economic history, HBS assistant professor Noel Maurer considers these questions
and opens the door to other queries involving issues of economics and governance that reach well beyond the United
States and its neighbor to the south.
Mexico makes a good laboratory for studying these issues, notes Maurerand the country's recent volatile presidential
election just puts another twist in the story. Between 1910 and 1929, the country struggled through a revolution, a
counterrevolution, a counter-counterrevolution, two military coups, three coup attempts, and two presidential
assassinations. Even so, the Mexican economy registered growth during this tumultuous period.
"You'd think the economy would come to a crashing halt," Maurer says. "Except that when you look around the world,
it turns out there are a number of countries, including Mexico, that have experienced political instability without
having their economies fall apart. On average, such countries don't do nearly as well as liberal democracies; but
there's still a mystery in that they're not doing as badly as the economists and political scientists would have
predicted."
Page 84 of 121

Impact Answers
Page 85 of 121

Alt Cause Laundry List

US engagement fails to resolve Mexican instabilityalt causes are military imbalance, social
problems, and the drug trade
Friedman, Stratfor chair, 12
(George, founder, chief intelligence officer, financial overseer, and CEO of the private intelligence corporation
Stratfor, Ph.D. in government at Cornell University, and former political science professor at Dickinson College;
8/21/12, Stratfor Global Intelligence, Geopolitical Weekly: The State of the World, Mexico's Strategy,
http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/mexicos-strategy, Accessed 7/12/13, JC)
The defeat in Texas and during the Mexican-American War cost Mexico its northern territories. It created a
permanent political issue between the two countries, one that Mexico could not effectively remedy. The defeat in the
wars continued to destabilize Mexico. Although the northern territories were not central to Mexico's national
interest, their loss created a crisis of confidence in successive regimes that further irritated the core social
problem of massive inequality. For the past century and a half, Mexico has lived with an ongoing inferiority
complex toward and resentment of the United States.
The war created another reality between the two countries: a borderland that was a unique entity, part of both
countries and part of neither country. The borderland's geography had defeated the Mexican army. It now became a
frontier that neither side could control. During the ongoing unrest surrounding the Mexican Revolution, it became a
refuge for figures such as Pancho Villa, pursued by U.S. Gen. John J. Pershing after Villa raided American towns. It
would not be fair to call it a no-man's-land. It was an every-man's-land, with its own rules, frequently violent, never
suppressed.
The drug trade has replaced the cattle rustling of the 19th century, but the essential principle remains the same.
Cocaine, marijuana and a number of other drugs are being shipped to the United States. All are imported or
produced in Mexico at a low cost and then re-exported or exported into the United States. The price in the United
States, where the products are illegal and in great demand, is substantially higher than in Mexico. That means that the
price differential between drugs in Mexico and drugs in the United States creates an attractive market. This typically
happens when one country prohibits a widely desired product readily available in a neighboring country.
This creates a substantial inflow of wealth into Mexico, though the precise size of this inflow is difficult to gauge. The
precise amount of cross-border trade is uncertain, but one number frequently used is $40 billion a year. This would
mean narcotic sales represent an 11.4 percent addition to total exports. But this underestimates the importance of
narcotics, because profit margins would tend to be much higher on drugs than on industrial products. Assuming that
the profit margin on legal exports is 10 percent (a very high estimate), legal exports would generate about $35 billion a
year in profits. Assuming the margin on drugs is 80 percent, then the profit on them is $32 billion a year, almost
matching profits on legal exports.
These numbers are all guesses, of course. The amount of money returned to Mexico as opposed to kept in U.S. or other
banks is unknown. The precise amount of the trade is uncertain and profit margins are difficult to calculate. What can
be known is that the trade is likely an off-the-books stimulant to the Mexican economy, generated by the price
differential created by drug prohibition.
The advantage to Mexico also creates a strategic problem for Mexico. Given the money at stake and that the legal
system is unable to suppress or regulate the trade, the borderland has again become -- perhaps now more than
ever -- a region of ongoing warfare between groups competing to control the movement of narcotics into the
United States. To a great extent, the Mexicans have lost control of this borderland.
From the Mexican point of view, this is a manageable situation. The borderland is distinct from the Mexican heartland.
So long as the violence does not overwhelm the heartland, it is tolerable. The inflow of money does not offend the
Mexican government. More precisely, the Mexican government has limited resources to suppress the trade and
violence, and there are financial benefits to its existence. The Mexican strategy is to try to block the spread of
lawlessness into Mexico proper but to accept the lawlessness in a region that historically has been lawless.
The American position is to demand that the Mexicans deploy forces to suppress the trade. But neither side has
sufficient force to control the border, and the demand is more one of gestures than significant actions or threats. The
Mexicans have already weakened their military by trying to come to grips with the problem, but they are not
going to break their military by trying to control a region that broke them in the past. The United States is not
going to provide a force sufficient to control the border, since the cost would be staggering. Each will thus live
Page 86 of 121

with the violence. The Mexicans argue the problem is that the United States can't suppress demand and is unwilling to
destroy incentives by lowering prices through legalization. The Americans say the Mexicans must root out the
corruption among Mexican officials and law enforcement. Both have interesting arguments, but neither argument has
anything to do with reality. Controlling that terrain is impossible with reasonable effort, and no one is prepared to make
an unreasonable effort.
Another aspect is the movement of migrants. For Mexicans, the movement of migrants has been part of their social
policy: It shifts the poor out of Mexico and generates remittances. For the United States, this has provided a consistent
source of low-cost labor. The borderland has been the uncontrollable venue through which the migrants pass. The
Mexicans don't want to stop it, and neither, in the end, do the Americans.
Dueling rhetoric between the United States and Mexico hides the underlying facts. Mexico is now one of the largest
economies in the world and a major economic partner with the United States. The inequality in the relationship
comes from military inequality. The U.S. military dominates North America, and the Mexicans are in no
position to challenge this. The borderland poses problems and some benefits for each, but neither is in a position
to control the region regardless of rhetoric.
Mexico still has to deal with its core issue, which is maintaining its internal social stability. It is, however,
beginning to develop foreign policy issues beyond the United States. In particular, it is developing an interest in
managing Central America, possibly in collaboration with Colombia. Its purpose, ironically, is the control of illegal
immigrants and drug smuggling. These are not trivial moves. Were it not for the United States, Mexico would be a
great regional power. Given the United States, it must manage that relationship before any other.
Given Mexico's dramatic economic growth and given time, this equation will change. Over time, we expect there
will be two significant powers in North America. But in the short run, the traditional strategic problems of
Mexico remain: how to deal with the United States, how to contain the northern borderland and how to
maintain national unity in the face of potential social unrest.
Page 87 of 121

No Impact LA Stable
Latin America has prospered without Mexican leadershippolitical and economic stability
Petras, Bartle Professor Emeritus at Binghamton University, 11
(James, adjunct professor at Saint Mary's University, 10/2/11, Global Research, Latin America: Growth, Stability and
Inequalities: Lessons for the US and EU, http://www.globalresearch.ca/latin-america-growth-stability-andinequalities-lessons-for-the-us-and-eu/26887, Accessed 7/12/13, JC)
Except for the Latin countries still under US dominance, especially Mexico and most of Central America, the rest
of Latin America has not only avoided the crises afflicting the North but have been growing at a healthy rate,
three times that of the US over the decade. The new millennium, especially between 2003-2011 (except for a brief
interlude in 2009) has been a period of high growth, general prosperity, booming exports, rising imports, greater
inter-regional co-operation, and large scale poverty reduction.
Brazil alone has reduced the number of poor by 30 million. Regular elections, relatively honest and competitive, result
in stable legitimate transfers of political power. Except for US backed coups in Honduras and intervention in Haiti
and Venezuela , violent seizures of power have disappeared, over the past decade. Regional institution building
has prospered with the advent of UNASUR and a Latin American regional bank.
Because of fiscal controls and banking regulations, both results of the lessons learned from the crisis of the lost
decades (1980-2000), Latin America was only slightly affected by the US-EU financial crash of 2008-2011. Latin
American trade has doubled, especially with Asia, aided by China s double digit growth. Demand for agro-mineral
commodities has tripled. The key to this new export powered growth is Latin America s growing economic
independence. This has led to the diversification of its markets, taking advantage of new opportunities and
reducing their dependence on the US . Latin Americas emphasis on economic growth, new markets and
investments, has led it to avoid entanglements in the proliferating and costly colonial wars which engage the US
and EU.
While the US and EU print more money and increase indebtedness to cover trade deficits, Latin America has
quadrupled its foreign reserves. These cushion any downturns and avoid any dependence on the IMF, architect of the
lost decades of the 1980s and 1990s.
Within Latin America , the issue of poverty reduction has been tackled with varying degrees of effectiveness. With
Venezuela under President Chavez leading the way the general direction has been toward increasing social payments,
by increments in most cases, but with greater efforts in others. Except for Mexico , nothing resembling the social cuts
of the US-EU has taken place in Latin America . The most striking structural advances have occurred in Venezuela and
to a lesser degree in Argentina . They have significantly increased the minimum wage and pensions and increased
welfare payments to the most vulnerable (single mothers, the disabled, those in extreme poverty).
With the exception of Colombia (the US s principle military ally in the region) which is still the murder capital of
the world for human rights advocates, trade unionists and peasant activists, human rights violations have declined.
While the US-EU have vastly increased their human rights violations geometrically via multiple colonial wars in
Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Pakistan, Somalia, Yemen and clandestine death squad operations, Latin Americas
overseas human rights violations are largely limited to its occupation forces in Haiti at the behest of the US and EU.
Nevertheless repression of popular movements, especially indigenous peoples and peasant movements and students
has increased in Bolivia , Chile , Brazil and elsewhere as the high growth policies on community rights and social
expenditures.
Because of Latin America s current political stability and dynamic growth, institutional and corporate
investment is pouring into the region. In contrast the US and EU are suffering from disinvestment and declining
rates of private investment. In other words, the development of Latin America is the other side of the coin of the USEU underdevelopment.
Page 88 of 121

Solvency Answers
Page 89 of 121

Investment Fails
Page 90 of 121

Investment FailsNo Attraction

Foreign investment cant solve Mexican economynon-tradable sectors are key but dont
attract investors
Maurer, Harvard Business School associate professor, 6
(Noel, associate professor at the Harvard Business School in the Business, Government and the International Economy
(BGIE) unit, Ph.D. from Stanford University, former assistant professor in the Department of Economics at ITAM
(university in Mexico City); Was NAFTA Necessary? Trade Policy and Relative Economic Failure since 1982,
http://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Publication%20Files/06-043.pdf, pg. 1-2, Accessed 7/12/13, JC)
Did Mexicos strategy work? There have been some positive outcomes. Since NAFTA was ratified in 1994, the
Mexican economy has grown, Mexican wages have risen, and inequality appears to have declined slightly. On the
other hand, productivity gains have not spread outside the manufacturing sector, real wages are still well below
the level of 1982, and Mexicos relative position vis--vis Europe and the United States has yet to regain its 1994
level, let alone its 1982 peak. NAFTA did succeed in dramatically increasing the level of foreign investment.
These gains, however, were mostly exhausted by 2001.
NAFTA failed to produce dramatic growth in Mexico because, quite simply, it had little effect on most of the
domestic economy. Foreign direct investment (FDI), for all its merits, is not a substitute for domestic investment.
FDI tends to cluster in the production of tradable goods (e.g., automobiles, electronics), but tends not to occur in
the production of non-tradables (e.g., services, with the partial exceptions of banking and large-scale retailing). Most
people in Mexico (as in the U.S.) produce non-tradables. Moreover, the production of traded goods requires
inputs from the non-traded sector. Imagine, for example, an automobile manufacturer financed with FDI. Its
output (automobiles) is tradable, and it consumes many tradable goods (tires, windshields, brake linings, cylinder
heads). It also consumes a wide variety of non-tradables (building materials, machinery repairs and maintenance,
electricity, accounting and legal services). The workers in this firm also consume a wide variety of non-tradables
(haircuts, restaurant meals, public transportation, electricity, housing), and they must price their labor in
accordance with the prices they face from the non-tradable sector. Thus, much of the costs of the firm are
determined by the productivity of the non-tradables sector. If productivity growth in the non-tradables sector
is slow, then firms in the tradables sector will face higher prices than they would otherwise. These higher prices
will, in turn, influence the prices that firms in the tradables sector must charge for their output. In short, the
long-run performance of the economy hinges upon the performance of a myriad of economic sectors which do
not attract much (if any) FDI.
Page 91 of 121

THA Fails
Page 92 of 121

Causes Disputes
Transboundry Hydrocarbon agreement leads to fights over resources and puts US companies
at a disadvantage
Simmons, Institute for Energy Research Director of Regulatory and State Affairs, 13
[Daniel, Institute for Energy Research, Master Resource, U.S.-Mexico Transboundary Hydrocarbons Agreement: A
Rare Victory for Oil and Gas in the Obama Era - http://www.masterresource.org/2013/04/u-s-mexico-transboundaryhydrocarbons-agreement/#sthash.Rc7iwAZu.dpuf, accessed: 7/10/13, ML]
In an otherwise good agreement, one potential problem is a conflict between Article 20 of the agreement and the
Security and Exchange Comissions Rule 13q-1 regarding Resource Extraction Payments.
Article 20 states:
To the extent consistent with their national laws, the Parties shall maintain confidential, and obligate their Licensees
to maintain confidential, all Confidential Data and other information obtained from the other Party or its Licensees in
accordance with this Agreement.
Together with Rule 13q-1, requiring resource extraction issuers to disclose payments made to foreign
governments, Article 20 can create an impossible situation for American companies operating on transboundary
hydrocarbon resources.
For example, Mexican confidentiality requirements may forbid the disclosure of the very information that Rule
13q-1 requires American companies to disclose. This would lead to a situation where companies regulated by
the SEC have, at very least, uncertainty about compliance with both Mexican and American disclosure laws .
This uncertainty and potential disclosure conflict would place foreign state-owned oil companies, who are not
regulated by the SEC, at a competitive advantage to the companies which operate in the United States are
regulated by the SEC.
Because much of the transboundary area is deepwater, it would require multi-billion dollar investments to
produce the hydrocarbon resources. Any legal uncertainty brought about by disclosure law could easily dissuade
American companies from undertaking what is already an expensive decision, in turn reducing opportunities for
new jobs for Americans.
Rule 13q-1 also creates a different type of competitive disadvantage for American companies operating in the
Gulf of Mexico Transboundary area. The rule would allow foreign state-owned oil companies with a competitive
advantage to consider business-sensitive information about American companies operations.
If Mexico were to allow foreign-owned companies to extract oil along the deepwater transboundary area, there could
very well be competition between U.S. private companies and foreign-state owned companies. Even though the
deepwater technology was developed in the U.S. deepwater, the U.S. companies would be at a disadvantage. This is
like playing poker but being required to show your cards to your fellow card-players.
Article 20 creates disputes over disclosure and means US companies are at a disadvantage
Simmons, Institute for Energy Research Director of Regulatory and State Affairs, 13
[Daniel, Institute for Energy Research, IER, U.S.-Mexico Transboundary Hydrocarbons Agreement: A Rare Victory
for Oil and Gas in the Obama Era - http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/2013/04/25/simmons-north-america-isenergy-rich/, accessed: 7/10/13, ML]
While the Transboundary Hydrocarbon Agreement is a good agreement that will aid both the United States and
Mexico, one potential problem is a conflict between Article 20 of the agreement and the Security and Exchange
Commissions Rule 13q-1 regarding disclosure of Resource Extraction Payments.
Possible conflict between Rule 13q-1 and Article 20 of the Transboundary Hydrocarbon Agreement, at very least,
create some uncertainty about compliance with both Mexican and American disclosure laws. This uncertainty
and potential disclosure conflict would place foreign state-owned oil companies, who are not regulated by the SEC,
at a competitive advantage to the companies which operate in the United States are regulated by the SEC.
Page 93 of 121

Also, much of the transboundary area in the Gulf is in deepwater, it would require multi-billion dollar
investments to produce the hydrocarbon resources. Any addition uncertainty makes these large investment
decisions harder and helps to impede additional exploration and production.
Page 94 of 121

Page 95 of 121

***Disadvantages***
Page 96 of 121

Fishing DA
Page 97 of 121

Uniqueness
Page 98 of 121

Uniqueness Public Awareness

The fishing industry is recovering- coalitions and increased public awareness of safety
Jahn, Manufacturing.net associate director of food manufacturing, 3/21/13
[Lindsey, March 21st 2013, Gulf Seafood Update: An Industry Regains Its Sea Legs,
http://www.manufacturing.net/articles/2013/03/gulf-seafood-update-an-industry-regains-its-sea-legs, Accessed
7/12/13, CB]
From April 2010 to June 2011, more than 8,000 seafood samples including species such as shrimp, oysters,
crabs, tuna and swordfish were collected and subjected to rigorous sensory and chemical tests by trained
experts. Samples were required to pass both forms of testing before an area was reopened to commercial fishing.
NOAA says that only 0.16 percent of seafood samples failed the sensory testing, most likely because the sampling
began after oil had been dispersed from the region. All chemical test results were below the established level of
concern. After all waters were reopened, periodic seafood samples continued to be tested to ensure ongoing safety.
All Gulf seafood has been long-declared safe for consumption by NOAA and the FDA, but consumers continue
to be skeptical. Immediately following the spill, 70 percent of consumers said they were concerned about the
safety of Gulf seafood, according to the Gulf Coast Seafood Coalition.
Nearly three years later, that number is down to 30 percent, but Nelson says the industry still has a long way to
go. The industry will fully recover, but it will take many more years of consumer education, marketing and
public relations. [I] expect that this period will last for at least another five years, he says.
Rising From The Depths
In an effort to rebuild the Gulf seafood industry, The Gulf & South Atlantic Fisheries Foundation, Inc. used a
grant to form the Gulf Coast Seafood Coalition. The Coalition comprises five member states Texas, Louisiana,
Mississippi, Alabama and Florida which have joined to support all parts of the Gulf seafood distribution chain, from
fishermen to retailers.
Nelson says the collaboration among the Gulf States has helped the Coalition meet one of its main objectives: to
create greater demand for Gulf seafood. [The states] have been able to share information and ideas for cooperative
marketing, and coordinate the message going to consumers and purchasers of Gulf seafood products.
The Coalition manages numerous outreach projects in order to increase consumer awareness of Gulf seafood.
One project that was particularly successful was the Coalitions partnership with Midwestern supermarket chain HyVee. The grocer held a week-long Gulf shrimp promotion in August 2012, during which the Coalition reported a 63
percent increase in Gulf shrimp sales.
Page 99 of 121

Uniqueness Funding
Fishing industry in the Gulf is beginning to recover massive funding proves
King, staff writer for the USA Today, Florida Times, and the Shreve Report Times, 6/6/13
[Ledyard, 6-6-13, Shreve Report Times, Three Years after Oil Spill, Gulf Coast Recovery Accelerating,
http://www.shreveporttimes.com/article/20130607/NEWS01/130606038/Three-years-after-spill-Gulf-Coast-recoveryaccelerating, accessed 7-12-13, HG]
WASHINGTON Three years after the BP oil spill ravaged the Gulf Coast in the nation's worst environmental
disaster, federal officials and coastal communities say the pace of government-sponsored recovery efforts is
slowly starting to pick up. Billions in civil fines paid by BP remain undistributed as lawyers wrangle in court. States
are still drawing up priority lists of projects for funding. And a total damage assessment of the spill that spewed nearly
5 million barrels of oil into the Gulf over 84 days is at least two years away.But key elements of the RESTORE Act,
which directs as much as $21 billion in BP fine money to the five Gulf Coast states, are beginning to take shape,
according to witnesses at a hearing Thursday before the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee.
Under a plea agreement reached earlier this year, the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation received more than
$2.5 billion in oil spill money to pay for environmental mitigation projects over the next several years. Half of the
money will be spent in Louisiana, which suffered the most damage. Alabama, Florida and Mississippi, would get 14
percent of the funds, while Texas would get 8 percent.More recently, the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill Natural
Resource Damage Assessment Trustees, one of three groups overseeing distribution of funds, announced it
would spend up to $600 million of the $1 billion BP has agreed to provide for restoration efforts.
U.S. fishing industry beginning to recover BP funding

Portello, PR Web, 4/19/13
[Beth, 4-19-13, PR Web, 3 Years after the BP Oil Spill Is the Gulf Still Recovering,
http://www.prweb.com/releases/2013/4/prweb10653164.htm, accessed 7-12-13, HG]
Three years later, the Gulfs ecosystems and residents are still suffering, but the billions of dollars in BP fines,
intended to come to the region through the RESTORE Act, present an opportunity to build a stronger and more
resilient Gulf for future generations, says GRNs Aaron Viles. The Gulf Restoration Network is working
collaboratively to seize that opportunity. BP must be held fully accountable for the maximum fines allowed
under the law, and, once these billions of dollars start flowing to the Gulf, the vast majority of these funds
should go towards restoring the long-term health of the Gulfs natural resources.
GRN recently released the Gulf Future Guidance for Sustainable Restoration, to direct the significant RESTORE Act
dollars to projects that restore the ecosystem and the coastal communities and economy that depend on the Gulf.
Supported by 50 groups representing a diverse coalition of conservation, community, and faith-based organizations
from throughout the Gulf, the document lays out shared priorities and guidance for the members of the Gulf Coast
Ecosystem Restoration Council and the Gulf states.
The Gulf Future Guidance focuses on four major areas: restoring the Gulf ecosystem, the economic benefits
of ecosystem restoration for local communities; public participation and transparency; and creating safe,
healthy and just communities. Details can be found at: http://gulffuture.org.
Page 100 of 121

Uniqueness Horizon Gone

Horizon oil spill rebounded unusually quickly, even according to the worst reports
ScienceDaily 12
[April 17th 2012, BP Oil Spill, Two Years Later: Natural Recovery Far Greater Than Expected,
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/04/120417152648.htm, Accessed 7/12/13, CB]
But despite the size of the spill, "the natural recovery is far greater than what anybody hoped when it happened,"
said James Morris, a professor of biology at the University of South Carolina. "The fears of most people -- that
there would be a catastrophic collapse of the ecosystem in the Gulf -- never materialized."
Morris is the director of USC's Belle W. Baruch Institute for Marine and Coastal Sciences, which has a field laboratory
on the South Carolina coast in what is widely recognized as the most pristine estuary in the United States -- North
Inlet. A wetland essentially untouched by development, it serves as an invaluable resource for understanding the effects
of climate change. More than 40 years of daily data -- temperature, sea level, salinity changes, and the like -- augment
the hundreds of research papers based on studies in the area that have been published since the institute was created in
1969.
For the past year and a half, Morris has served on a National Research Council committee tasked by Congress to assess
the effects of the spill on the Gulf's ecosystem. He's been impressed with the recovery of the area's ecology.
"The fisheries have come back like gangbusters," he said. "One of the interesting findings was that after the oil
spill, bait fish populations collapsed, and predator populations boomed. The reason was that there was no
fishing pressure on the top predators because people stopped fishing after the spill. So the predator fish
populations rebounded, and they grazed down their prey."
"The marshes that I saw actually looked very good," he added. "And I was taken to the worst by officials who
wanted to impress us that the damage was really significant, and that you could still find oil in the marshes. And
you can still find oil in the marshes, but the greatest damage to the place where they took us was from the
trampling by the reporters, scientists, and agency people tromping around out there looking for damage."
Page 101 of 121

Links
Page 102 of 121

Drilling Bad
The Plan takes away from the strategy of maintaining current production to expanding the
destructive transport of oil
Hebert, Huffington Post, 9
[H. Josef Hebert, AP writer, February 11th 2009, Activists Call Offshore Drilling "Flirting With Disaster,
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/12/activists-call-offshore-d_n_166283.html, Accessed 7/12/13, CB]
The hearing came a day after Interior Secretary Ken Salazar ordered a review of offshore oil and gas development,
scrapping a sweeping blueprint for expanded offshore drilling proposed in the Bush administration's final days.
While not ruling out expansion of some offshore drilling, Salazar promised to pursue a new direction in energy
development, with greater emphasis on using coastal waters to generate energy from wind, the sun and waves.
At a House hearing, Philippe Cousteau, grandson of legendary ocean explorer Jacques Cousteau, urged Congress to
reinstate the offshore drilling bans that until last fall had been in effect for 25 years in Atlantic and Pacific coastal
waters.
"It's absolutely critical for the health of the oceans," said Cousteau, a board member of the advocacy group Ocean
Conservancy. "Oil spills still occur."
Actor Ted Danson, a founder and board member of Oceana, an ocean advocacy group, said offshore drilling is
"flirting with disaster" because of potential oil spills not only at drilling rigs, but in transporting the oil
produced.
Danson said the country should be moving away from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources such as offshore
wind and energy from tidal waves because of the threats of climate change, which he said is another threat to ocean
health.
Tourism and fishing industry spokesmen from North Carolina, Florida and California said they are worried
offshore drilling would impact billions of dollars a year fishing and tourism industries.
"We cannot afford any kind of spill. ... We can't take the risk," D.T. Minich, executive director of the St.
Petersburg/Clearwater, Fla. visitor's bureau, told the House panel.
W.F. "Zeek" Grader Jr., executive director of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Association, said he's not so
worried about spills, but that exploratory seismic activities and drilling rigs would "kill fish... scare fish and make it
impossible for fishing operations to be held."
Expanding Drilling operations leads to spills and airgun testing that wrecks migratory
patternseach kill the fishing industry and government regulations cant solve
Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, 13
[Chris Carnevale, Writer and reporter, April 20th 2013, Why We Should Not Drill Offshore the South Atlantic,
http://blog.cleanenergy.org/2013/04/20/why-we-should-not-drill-offshore-the-south-atlantic/, Accessed 7/12/13, CB]
Today, April 20, marks the 3rd anniversary of the tragic Deepwater Horizon Gulf oil disaster. In spite of how
apparent it seemed three years ago that offshore drilling is a bad idea whose time has gone, today we are facing the
threat of even more drilling off our beautiful coasts. As weve reported before, the federal government is
considering opening the Atlantic coast to offshore oil and gas exploration for the first time in 30 years. Yet the lessons
learned from the Deepwater Horizon blowout have not been fully incorporated into industry practice or
government regulation. On this three year anniversary, we want to emphasize the reasons why it is a bad idea to drill
off the Southeast Atlantic coast.
Oil and gas exploration is bad for our region.
The current proposal by the federal government to open the Atlantic to offshore oil and gas exploration includes
the use of seismic airgun testing. This type of testing involves creating large blasts of noise that help show where
petroleum deposits are. The noises are so loud, though, that they can damage hearing and navigation of marine
mammals like whales and dolphins as well as other marine creatures. According to the federal government,
allowing this testing would result in the death or injury of up to 138,500 marine mammals by 2020 and disrupt
Page 103 of 121

migratory and mating habits of many creatures including sea turtles. European studies have shown declines in
catch rates for commercially important fish due to seismic airgun testing.
Exploration is just the beginning. The end goal is drilling. And the economics of drilling in the South Atlantic
just dont make sense.
Contrary to what some politicians would have us believe, jeopardizing our coast with offshore drilling would not
bring down gasoline prices. Studies under George W. Bushs administration have shown that if we opened all
feasible offshore U.S. areas to drilling, the gas price MIGHT decline by no more than 3 cents per gallon by 2030.
Since the U.S. supplies only 11 percent of the worlds oil supply, we dont get to set the price. Its the international
market that does that. As for natural gas, the U.S. is awash in cheap onshore gas due to recent technological
improvements. Furthermore, more than 70 percent of the currently leased area for offshore drilling is sitting idle and
unused. So why would we want to harm our marine and coastal environment exploring for oil and gas that the market
doesnt call for, that wont decrease fuel prices, and for which there are plenty of other places to go?
Page 104 of 121

AT Rigs Increase Biodiversity

Just because fish congregate around abandoned rigs doesnt mean oil platforms are healthy
Terkel, Huffington Post Politics Managing Editor, 8
[Amanda, September 18th 2008, ThinkProgress, The Fish Oil Salesman: McCain Pushes Offshore Drilling Because
Fish Love To Be Around Oil Rigs, http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2008/09/18/29384/mccain-fish-oil/, Accessed
7/12/13, CB]
Yesterday in his town hall meeting with Gov. Sarah Palin (R-AK), Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) advocated offshore
oil drilling by pushing three myths: 1) Hurricanes wont damage oil rigs, 2) Fish love oil rigs, and 3) Cuba is
allowing China to drill near the U.S. coast:
McCAIN: An oil rig off of the Louisiana coast. It survived hurricanes. It is safe, it is sound, and to somehow
And by the way, on that oil rig and Im sure youve probably heard this story you look down, and theres fish
everywhere! Theres fish everywhere! Yeah, the fish love to be around those rigs. So not only can it be helpful for
energy, it can be helpful for some pretty good meals as well. [...]
As far as China and Cuba are concerned, we continue to hear that there is negotiations or conversations or Im not
exactly sure what the state of play is, but its not a healthy thing, obviously.
Watch it:
A look at these three myths:
MYTH #1: Hurricanes wont damage oil rigs. The U.S. Minerals Management Service estimates that Hurricanes
Katrina and Rita destroyed 113 offshore oil platforms and caused 124 offshore spills for a total of 743,700 gallons. In
fact, damage to offshore producers accounted for 77 percent of the oil industrys storm costs. In the wake of Hurricane
Ike, there are at least three offshore oil rigs missing and presumed to be total losses.
MYTH #2: Fish love oil rigs. McCain is pushing an oil industry talking point. While marine biologists have seen
fish congregating around oil rigs, it doesnt mean they are good for wildlife. Thats like taking a picture of
birds on a telephone wire and saying its essential habitat, said the Environmental Defense Centers Linda
Krop. Without the platforms, fish would likely return to natural reefs.
MYTH #3: Cuba is allowing China to drill near the U.S. coast. The Congressional Research Service has unequivocally
concluded that Cuba has not permitted China to drill near the U.S. coastline in the Gulf of Mexico. Even Vice
President Cheney has admitted this talking point is false.
McCains second claim is especially silly. Not too long ago, conservatives were also trying to argue that the United
States should start drilling in Alaskas Arctic National Wildlife Reserve because oil pipelines would become a
meeting ground and coffee klatch for caribou. (HT: AMERICAblog)
Page 105 of 121

Internal Links
Page 106 of 121

Causes Global Price Spikes

Fish trade is globalizedless production from one region has to be exported by another,
leading to less supply, higher prices, and more food leaving developing countries
Pauly and Swartz, University of British Columbia Fisheries Center Professor and PhD
Candidate, 8
[Wilf Swartz, PhD Candidate at the University of British Columbia, and Daniel Pauly, Professor at the University of
British Columbia Fisheries Center, June 23rd 2008, Whos Eating All the Fish? The Food Security Rationale for
Culling Cetaceans,
http://www.pewtrusts.org/uploadedFiles/wwwpewtrustsorg/Reports/Protecting_ocean_life/daniel_pauly_paper_iwc_20
08_pdf_doc.pdf, pg. 14-15, Accessed 6/30/13, CB]
International trade in fish products, like other kinds of trade, is sometimes assumed to benefit all who are involved.
However, with the large amounts of fish entering into international markets, there are concerns that the
exported fish species will no longer be available for domestic consumption, thus compromising the food
security of the exporting countries, particularly in LIFDCs.
Fish is one of the most widely traded commodities in the world with nearly 40 percent of world fish
production entering the international marketsignificantly more than for other food staples such as wheat (20
percent) and rice (5 percent) (FAO 2006). The trends toward globalization of business, banking, and
telecommunications, as well as the policies of trade liberalization and expansion of global fishing fleets over
the past 50 years have greatly contributed to this increase in fish trade. The total volume and value of fish trade
have steadily increased from 8 million tonnes worth USD 8 billion in 1976 to 53 million tonnes worth USD 71.3
billion in 2004 (volume in live weight equivalent, FAO 2006).
The fish trade flows can be summarized as follow (FAO 2006):
Developing countries accounted for 57 percent and 48 percent of exports in quantity and value respectively.
LIFDCs accounted for 20 percent of the total export value in 2004;
A total of 97 countries, mostly in Latin America, the Caribbean, Africa and developing Asia and Oceania,
were net exporters of fish and fisheries products. Europe, Japan and North America were characterized by a fish
trade deficit;
9 of the top 40 fish-exporting countries were LIFDCs; and
85 percent of the value of developed country exports was destined for other developed countries; meanwhile,
only 15 percent of the value of fishery exports of developing countries was for other developing countries.
It is evident from these statistics that there is a net flow of fish in the international market from developing to
developed nations. Whether or not this should be viewed as problematic remains a matter of debate. But it is our
contention that the volume and growth of this trade poses a much greater risk to food security than the small amounts
of fish taken by whales. And, unlike the specious argument promoted by the whales-eat-our-fish advocates, there is
scientific and economic data to validate our claim.
A vast amount of fish enters international marketing channels- the void left by decreased
production in the Gulf would have to be filled
Valdimarsson, FAO Director of Fish Products, 5
[Grimur, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2005, Challenges for the global seafood industry,
ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/011/a1293e/a1293e01.pdf, p. 18, Accessed 7/12/13, CB]
In 2003, total world trade of fish and fish products increased to US$63.3 billion (export value), representing a 14
percent increase relative to 2000 and a 43 percent increase since 1993. In terms of quantity, exports were reported to
be 48.6 million tonnes (live weight equivalent), having grown by 16 percent since 1993, but showing a slight decline
compared with 2000 levels.
A large share of fish production enters international marketing channels, with about 37 percent (live weight
equivalent) exported as various food and feed products. Developed countries exported more than 21 million
Page 107 of 121

tonnes of fish (in live weight equivalent) in 2003. Although a part of this trade may be re-exports, this amount
corresponds to nearly 70 percent of their production. Exports from developing countries (28 million tonnes)
were around one-quarter of their combined production. The share of developing countries in total fishery exports
was 49 percent by value and 56 percent by quantity (FAO 2005).
The net receipts of foreign exchange derived from fish in developing countries (i.e. the total value of their exports less
the total value of their imports) increased from US$13.2 billion in 1993 to US$18.3 billion in 2003. These figures
were significantly higher than those for other agricultural commodities such as rice, coffee and tea, even if
combined. Low-income food-deficit countries (LIFDCs) play an active part in the trade of fish and fish
products; in 2003, they accounted for more than 20 percent of the total value of fishery exports, with net export
revenues estimated at US$8.8 billion (FAO 2005).
In 2003, about 75% of the import value of fish was concentrated in three main areas: the European Union
(EU), Japan and the United States of America. In terms of quantity, developed countries imported over 31 million
tonnes (live weight equivalent), of which 70 percent was fish for human consumption, while developing countries
imported 19 million tonnes (live weight equivalent), of which 48 percent consisted of fish for food.
Developing countries are already overstretched in their attempts to export enough fish to
consumersa supply decrease would only make that worse
Macfarlane, International Coalition of Fisheries Associations Executive Secretary, 5
[Alastair, New Zealand Seafood Industry Council representative, 2005, international seafood trade: the rules and the
rorts, ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/011/a1293e/a1293e01.pdf, p. 28-29, Accessed 7/12/13, CB]
More than 40 percent of global fish production, whether from capture fisheries or from aquaculture, is traded
internationally. About 50 percent of the international export trade by value stems from developing countries.
Most developing country fisheries are therefore significantly export oriented. Most of that trade is directed to
developed country markets. Indeed, international markets are dominated by four import markets. More than 80
percent of global imports of fish and fish products is by Japan, the European Union (EU), the United States of
America and lately China. Of these countries, Japan, the EU and the United States of America have significant
net supply deficits from domestic sources. China is different, as much of the seafood that is imported there is being
further processed and then re-exported to the three main developed country markets. Within this global set of trading
relationships, the expectation of developed country consumers is that all the seafood they have access to will meet
first world standards of safety and quality.
The key message to be taken from this description of international seafood trade, is that while the
international import markets for seafood products are highly directed towards a small number of developed
countries, these markets are uncompromising in their expectations that the product will be safe to eat and will
meet expectations of quality. Therefore, regardless of domestic capacity and infrastructure in developing countries,
the seafood products that they export must meet developed importing country expectations or they will be excluded
from trade.
Developed country markets have only recently, within the last one to two generations, become heavily import
dependent. There is a lingering misconception among consumers that their markets can be self-sufficient. Imported
seafood products, especially where they are direct replacements for previously abundant domestic products, are often
vulnerable to a xenophobic back lash. This is especially the case when imported products are linked to instances of
food-borne illness.
Page 108 of 121

Biodiversity Impact
More Pressure to produce leads to unsafe fishing practices that destroy biodiversity
Kurien, Centre for Development Studies Fellow, 5
[John, 2005, Responsible fish trade and food security. ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/009/a0143e/a0143e00.pdf, p. 52,
Accessed 7/12/13, CB]
The long-term sustainability of international fish trade depends on the sustainability of the fishery resource.
This is a plain truth. The evidence from the case studies points unequivocally to the fishery sectors failure to
take cognizance of this. There appears to be an uncanny relationship between a fish species entering international
trade and its depletion. The opportunities for profitable trade drive the depletion.
There are reports of adverse impacts on the resource from all the countries. In capture fisheries, the single most
important factor responsible was the technology of harvesting in particular the use of bottom trawling. In
countries as widely separated as Brazil, Senegal, Kenya, Ghana and Thailand, trawling was used to achieve higher
rates of extraction of the species that entered trade. The inevitable consequence was sharply declining catch
rates, reduction in the specimen size of the species and a higher proportion of non-targeted fish in the catch.
Such trends jeopardize not just export production. Through larger ecosystem feedback, they impinge on production
for domestic consumption as well. The creeping negative indirect and direct impacts have a bearing on
national food security. That their magnitude has not been measured merely affords us the bliss that
accompanies ignorance.
In the Philippines, tuna stocks have diminished following the extensive use of fish-aggregating devices intended to
increase the ease with which they are harvested. In Nicaragua, Brazil, Sri Lanka, the Philippines and Thailand, the
rapid development of shrimp aquaculture has led to mangrove destruction. The use of poisons and dynamite to
stun high-value ornamental fish has destroyed coral reefs. In Chile, the use of fungicide in salmon aquaculture
is reported to affect the delicate marine environment and accumulate in the flesh of the salmon in cages and
nets. There was also evidence that the pelagic species being diverted for fishmeal are showing signs of stress due to
excessive fishing pressure in a milieu in which environmental factors affecting the stocks are also strong and still not
fully understood. In Namibia, there are reports of the species that inhabit deep ocean mounds, such as orange
roughy, being threatened by trawling.
Spurred by trade, the higher rates of resource extraction and rapid changes in harvesting technologies are the
most obvious factors accounting for resource depletion and loss of ecosystem integrity. Alteration of property
rights to the resource realms is an equally important reason. In Brazil, Nicaragua, Senegal, Ghana, Kenya, Sri Lanka
and Thailand, these rights have moved from a variety of forms of socially sanctioned, community arrangements to
unregulated state property regimes. The latter have degenerated, due to lack of adequate enforcement, into de facto
open access in which only possession rights prevail. The inevitable consequence of this is a race for fish. This
leads to more investment in crafts and gear, resulting in higher costs of fishing, often aided by financial support from
the state. This pursuit leads to overfishing economic and biological.
Page 109 of 121

Page 110 of 121

***Counterplans***
Page 111 of 121

Privatization CP
Page 112 of 121

Solvency Pemex
Private investment solves for Mexican energyPemex already contracts services
Althaus, Houston Chronicle's bureau chief in Mexico, 12
(Dudley, 7/14/12, Houston Chronicle, Will Texas oil companies get a shot at Mexico investments?
http://www.chron.com/business/article/Will-Texas-oil-companies-get-a-shot-at-Mexico-3707641.php, Accessed
7/10/13, JC)
Private investment, many insist, is the only answer.
"The potential for Mexican shale is enormous," said Tony Garza, the Bush administration's ambassador to
Mexico who previously served as a Texas petroleum regulator. "Simply warming over the service contract
approaches won't attract the kind of capital necessary to expand along the border ... let alone what is needed to
go offshore and ultra-deep where their big reserves are."
Clearly, Mexico's long-term energy hopes lie in the Gulf's deep waters. Houston-linked drillers and oil service
companies - Weatherford, Schlumberger, Noble and Halliburton among them - have earned billions over the years
providing contract services to Pemex.
That will continue as Pemex struggles to maintain or grow its 2.5 million barrel-a-day production by opening new
fields and re-drilling old ones. But the so-called easy oil and gas wells those companies helped produce are running
dry.
Texas companies like Houston's Kinder Morgan have been encouraged by Mexican officials to submit bids on
several thousand miles of new pipelines already planned, and more are in the works. Refineries need to be
burnished, built or bought.
"There will be lots of opportunities," said Wallace, a former senior U.S. diplomat overseeing commercial affairs in
Mexico City.
Page 113 of 121

Texas CP
Page 114 of 121

Solvency Petrochemicals
Texas solves the petrochemical industrynewly competitive industry due to technical
advances and shale boom
Thompson, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas business economist, 12
(Jesse, Fourth Quarter 2012, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, Booming Shale Gas Production Drives Texas
Petrochemical Surge, http://www.dallasfed.org/assets/documents/research/swe/2012/swe1204h.pdf, Accessed
7/12/13, JC)
A highly profitable petrochemical industry has reemerged in Texas from the boom in U.S. shale oil-and-gas
exploration, creating an internationally competitive sector that can produce a variety of products including
plastics at a lower cost.1 Advances in the exploration of shale, the source rock from which oil and gas have
seeped for millions of years, have brought to market new supplies of oil, natural gas and natural gas liquids
(NGLs) such as ethane, a key petrochemical feedstock or input. This modern-day gusher was made possible by
hydraulic fracturing (also known as fracking) and horizontal drilling in the United States.
These technologies have helped reduce the price of natural gas, which was once in line with oil, and led to the
production of lower-cost NGLs (Chart 1). Because U.S. petrochemical firms commonly use NGLs for feedstock,
their input costs have fallen and they have gained an export advantage over competitors in other parts of the world
that heavily rely on much pricier oil-based naphtha.
At the epicenter of the shale boom is Texas, a significant player in the U.S. petrochemical industry and home
to some of the nations most productive shale areas. The state is reaping economic gains from the
petrochemical resurgence that include increases in construction, jobs and exports.
Page 115 of 121

Solvency Hydrocarbons
Texas has a key opportunity to revitalize the Mexican hydrocarbons industryadvantages of
the economic boom could cross the border
Corchado, Dallas News Mexico Bureau, 12
(Alfredo, 11/19/12, Dallas news, Booming oil and gas development stops at Texas-Mexico border,
http://www.dallasnews.com/news/state/headlines/20121118-booming-oil-and-gas-development-stops-at-texas-mexicoborder.ece, Accessed 7/10/13, JC)
Alcala, executive administrative assistant for the Rio Grande Development Council, is talking about an oil and gas
boom that has ignited new energy in whats known as the Eagle Ford Shale, an area 400 miles long and 60 miles
wide, stretching from East Texas to the Texas-Mexico border region.
But hes equally intrigued by what could be just across the border in Mexico, where friends and relatives live and
too often struggle finding jobs.
You know, the oil doesnt stop at the border, he said. It just goes on and on into Mexico.
But the boom in oil and gas development does stop at the border, for the most part, a victim of the insecurity
generated by warring drug cartels and by a Mexican energy sector that has been stunted by bureaucracy and
lack of innovation, observers say.
Its a different story north of the border.
Since 2010, the South Texas region has created overnight boomtowns, a $25 billion economic windfall and
more than 48,000 jobs just last year. People are streaming in from across the United States and Mexico, Alcala said.
The Texas Railroad Commission says 4,293 drilling permits have been issued in the Eagle Ford Shale this year.
Mexicos chance
This region, which helps mark the Texas borderline with the Mexican states of Coahuila, Nuevo Len and
Tamaulipas, has historic double-digit unemployment and represents what experts say is an opportunity for the
incoming Mexican president, Enrique Pea Nieto, who takes office Dec. 1.
The shale is transforming the identity of the border area and moving the U.S. toward more energy
independence, said Tony Garza, a former U.S. ambassador to Mexico and Texas railroad commissioner. The
lesson for Mexico is, dont be left on the sidelines. When you fly above, its clear who is investing, exploring and
creating jobs and who is on the sidelines.
Texas supports Mexican hydrocarbon developmentgovernors statement proves

Lubbock-Avalanche Journal 4
(8/10/4, Texas governor calls on Mexico to further open energy markets, Lubbock-Avalanche Journal,
http://lubbockonline.com/stories/081004/upd_075-3309.shtml, Accessed 7/12/13, JC)
SANTA FE, N.M. (AP) Mexico should open its energy markets to greater U.S. investment, Texas Gov. Rick
Perry said Tuesday.
In a speech on the closing day of the Border Governors' Conference, Perry called for more cross-border economic
development.
"One of the best ways to expand opportunity in Mexico and the U.S. is for American energy companies to be
able to participate in the development of Mexico's vast oil, gas and electric markets," Perry said.
"We can create thousands of jobs for people on both sides of the border, create new wealth and opportunity, meet
the electrical demand that is predicted to double by 2020 in Mexico with the greater liberalization."
The governors of U.S. and Mexican states agreed Monday to improve security along their borders.
Page 116 of 121

Solvency Technology
Texas is a key technology innovatorexpanding production and safety
Tillerson, University of Texas Distinguished Engineering Graduate, 11
(Rex W. Tillerson, Chairman and CEO of Exxon Mobil Corporation, 1/6/11, Exxon Mobil, Meeting energy challenges
with oil and gas technologies, http://www.exxonmobil.com/Corporate/news_speeches_20110106_rwt.aspx, Accessed
7/10/13, JC)
Few Americans realize that the U.S. energy industry is one of the most technologically advanced sectors of the
economy.
Energy technologies have not only helped expand supplies and increase safety, but they have also made America
more competitive. When the public and our policymakers think about technological innovation, they typically think of
Silicon Valley or MIT or some other research institute on the West Coast.
But because of our role in creating new energy technologies, it is worth noting that Texas is one of the most
important locations in the nation for developing new energy innovations innovations that have been exported
to the rest of our nation, and the world.
Page 117 of 121

Solvency Regulations
Texas is a good model for environmental regulationsensure safe oil and gas exploration
Permian Basin Petroleum Association 11
(Permian Basin Petroleum Association, Who Regulates Oil and Gas? http://pbpa.info/education-center/oil-and-gas101/who-regulates-oil-and-gas/, Accessed 7/10/13, JC)
There are comprehensive regulations governing Texas oil and gas exploration and production. State agencies
have been delegated authority to enforce federal programs and Texas laws establish additional requirements to
protect the environment and public health. Within local municipalities there are often additional regulations that
dictate site location, well design, well spacing, operational limitations, noise levels, water management, waste
handling and disposal, air emissions, surface water protection and storm water controls, groundwater
protection, site safety, and other measures to ensure public health and safety. Local ordinances may also address
permit fees and assurance of operators financial responsibility.
TheRailroad Commission of Texas (RRC) and the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) are the two
state agencies with most of the responsiblity for establishing standards and enforcing regulations for oil and gas
exploration and production. The RRC oversees all aspects of the drilling activity such as well spacing, well design,
groundwater protection during drilling and operational and public safety. TCEQs primary role during oil and gas
exploration and drilling relates to control of air emissions, required depth of each wells steel casing and cement,
and ensuring that off-site impacts, if any, are consistent with standards developed to protect public health and
safety.
Page 118 of 121

SolvencyEnergy Security
Texas is an industry leaderwill push the US toward energy independence
Forbes 3/19/13
(David Blackmon, The Texas Shale Oil & Gas Revolution - Leading the Way to Enhanced Energy Security,
http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidblackmon/2013/03/19/the-texas-shale-oil-gas-revolution-leading-the-way-toenhanced-energy-security/, Accessed 7/10/13, JC)
Texas is the energy capital of the world, and Houston is its home base.
There are more energy-related jobs in Houston than in any other city on earth. Upwards of 200,000 in the business
itself (E&P, Midstream, Refining) this does not include the thousands of oilfield service industry jobs at companies
like Halliburton, Baker Hughes and Schlumberger. All of the major oil and gas companies have thousands of
employees in the city, and many of the larger independent producers are headquartered here. When you factor in all the
indirect and induced jobs that the industry supports in all the hotels, cafes, gas stations and clothing stores around the
state, you quickly get numbers into the millions.
Some more statistics:
Texas today produces roughly 30% of US natural gas and roughly 30% of US oil production.
If Texas were a stand-alone country, it would today rank as the 14th largest oil producing nation and 3rd largest
natural gas producing nation on the face of the earth.
Where natural gas is concerned, only Russia and the other 49 states would rank ahead of Texas.
With the advent of the Eagle Ford Shale in 2008, shale natural gas production almost tripled in Texas between
2009 and 2012.
Shale oil production also ramped up very rapidly in those years, with the Eagle Ford Shale and various shale plays
in the Permian Basin, like the Wolfcamp/Wolfberry, coming on line.
As mentioned last week, several projections indicate that the Eagle Ford Shale is very likely to ultimately surpass the
East Texas Field as the largest oil field ever discovered in the lower 48 states.
Of course, we are now seeing speculation that the Cline Shale formation in West Texas may well contain more oil than
the Eagle Ford, so that distinction could be short-lived.
We explored the implications of all of this for Texas last week. For the nation, the implications of the shale
revolution are equally huge. The International Energy Agency last November issued a report that projects the U.S.
will surpass Saudi Arabia in total oil production by 2020. And that report was issued before anyone had a clue
about the potential of the Cline Shale.
Many people scoffed when first Citigroup and then the US Energy Information Administration issued reports last year
projecting that the US could become completely independent of imports from outside of North America by 2020.
Today, few informed people scoff at that prospect.
Last month, the US only imported 37% of its oil consumption. Thats down from 50% late last year and almost
70% just four years ago.
Page 119 of 121

SolvencyRelations
Texas paves the way for US-Mexico relationsjoint energy investment builds a long-term
partnership
Gonzalez, Latinos Ready To Vote political director, 3/8/13
(Alex, Latinos Ready to Vote!, Texas and Mexico Need To Partner for Natural resources,
http://latinosreadytovote.com/texas-and-mexico-need-to-partner-for-natural-resources/, Accessed 7/10/13, JC)
Moreover, a similar report argues:
that Americas own strategy for economic revival cannot be limited to the nations borders. And its future foreign policyits
projection of power and principlemust be grounded in the emerging economic order. The new U.S. international economic strategy should have should
strengthen its continental base by building on the North American Free Trade Agreement with Canada and Mexico.
So Texas alone cannot supply the required oil and natural gas to fuel the US economy or the independence from
the Middle East. Hence, the need for a partnership between the three nations of North American with Texas
leading the way.
The United States, Canada, and Mexico are are located in wealthy hydrocarbon resources zones: oil, natural
gas, and coal. The total North American hydrocarbon resource base is more than four times greater than all the resources in the Middle East. And the United
States alone is now the fastest-growing producer of oil and natural gas in the world. Furthermore, the recent growth in hydrocarbons production has already
generated hundreds of thousands of jobs and billions in local tax receipts by unlocking billions of barrels of oil and natural gas in the hydrocarbon-dense shales of
North Dakota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas, and several other states, as well as the vast resources of Canadas oil sands. An affirmative policy to expand extraction
and export capabilities for all hydrocarbons over the next two decades could yield as much as $7 trillion of value to the North American economy, with $5 trillion
of that accruing to the United States,
Similar recommendations on the need to work with Mexico and Canada have been issued by the Heritage Foundation on Natural resources. Heritage Foundation
argues that
Attempting to control the energy sector from Washington, the President should learn from hydraulic fracturing and trust private-sector investment and innovation
and consumer choice to drive American energy policy. An energy policy that allows the private sector to meet Americas energy needs will provide Americans with
the most secure fuel choices at the lowest prices. The energy marketplace will work if the President and the Administration will just allow it.
Texas will continue to lead on natural energy since Production from the Eagle Ford shale in Texas increased more than 60
percent in December when compared to last year. The Eagle Ford Shale is still in its early stages, with landmen continuing to hunt for mineral rights
across South Texas and no one really knowing how much oil is out there. And just two week ago a report by Texas Commission show that shale formations in
South and West Texas appear awash again in oil and gas.
Therefore Texas oil companies in Houston now are looking into how to keep Texas open for exploration and the
work with Mexico to untapped their oil reserves with more advance machinery to develop long-term
partnership.
Page 120 of 121

AT Perm
Perm failscourt decisions maintain that the federal government doesnt have authority over
key Texas oil regions in the Gulf of Mexico
Daniel, associate justice of the Texas Supreme Court, 87
(Price, Democratic U.S. Senator, 38th Governor of Texas, member of the National Security Council, Director of the
Office of Emergency Preparedness, and Assistant to the President for Federal-State Relations; Texas State Historical
Association, Handbook of Texas Online, "Tidelands Controversy,"
http://www.tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/mgt02, Accessed 7/10/13, JC) Note: Date based on most recent
citation
TIDELANDS CONTROVERSY. The tidelands controversy between the United States and Texas involved the
title to 2,440,650 acres of submerged land in the Gulf of Mexico between low tide and the state's Gulfward
boundary three leagues (10.35 miles) from shore. Texas, first acquiring this land by establishing and maintaining
itself as an independent nation, reserved this as well as all other unsold land when it entered the Union in 1845.
Ownership of the property by the state of Texas was recognized by officials of the United States for more than
100 years. After oil was discovered under state leases, applicants for cheaper federal leases and federal officials
began to assert national ownership in the same manner as they had done against California and other coastal states.
The contest was not confined to Texas. All states became concerned over their long-recognized titles to lands beneath
their navigable waters. It became a national issue, resulting in three Supreme Court decisions against the states, three
acts of Congress in favor of the states, two presidential vetoes against the states, and a major issue in a presidential
campaign, before the states finally won the victory. It was the most serious conflict of the century between the states
and the federal government. The federal claims were branded as an attempted "expropriation" and "steal" by
outraged officials of Texas and many of the other states. In 1949 a statewide public opinion poll reported that the
people of Texas considered it to be the most important public issue facing the state. Public indignation ran higher in
Texas than elsewhere because this land had been dedicated to and was a source of revenue for the public school fund
(see AVAILABLE SCHOOL FUND; PERMANENT SCHOOL FUND). Furthermore, Texas held title not only under
the general rule of law theretofore applicable to all states, but under the specific provisions of the Annexation
Agreement between the Republic of Texas and the United States. State officials, the Texas legislature, the
Democratic and Republican state conventions, the Texas congressional delegation, and many citizens groups
resolved to resist the federal claims and seek congressional action recognizing continued state ownership.
Page 121 of 121

Mexico Hydrocarbons Negative Wave 2 - Gonzaga 2013

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Mexico Hydrocarbons Negative Wave 2 - Gonzaga 2013

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Gonzaga Debate Institute 13 1

Brovero Lundeen Mexico Hydrocarbons Neg Supplement

Gonzaga Debate Institute 13 2

Gonzaga Debate Institute 13 3

Gonzaga Debate Institute 13 4

Gonzaga Debate Institute 13 5

THA Pass Now

Gonzaga Debate Institute 13 6

Will Pass Momentum

egulation and any responses to incidents along the maritime border.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 13 7

Gonzaga Debate Institute 13 8

Energy Security/Production Answers

Gonzaga Debate Institute 13 9

Gonzaga Debate Institute 13 10

Gonzaga Debate Institute 13 11

Gonzaga Debate Institute 13 12

Gonzaga Debate Institute 13 13

No Impact Asia War

Gonzaga Debate Institute 13 14

No Impact Resource Wars

Gonzaga Debate Institute 13 15

Gonzaga Debate Institute 13 16

Production Bad Warming

Gonzaga Debate Institute 13 17

Gonzaga Debate Institute 13 18

Natural Gas Answers

Gonzaga Debate Institute 13 19

Gonzaga Debate Institute 13 20

Alt Causes Weak Industry

Gonzaga Debate Institute 13 21

Gonzaga Debate Institute 13 22

Alt Cause Climate Change

Alt. cause to food insecurity climate change

Gonzaga Debate Institute 13 23

Alt Cause Industrial Farming Bad

Gonzaga Debate Institute 13 24

Alt Causes Trade Regulations

Gonzaga Debate Institute 13 25

Alt Causes Biofuels

Alt. cause Increased biofuel production causes global food insecurity

Gonzaga Debate Institute 13 26

Gonzaga Debate Institute 13 27

Alt Causes Water Shortages

Gonzaga Debate Institute 13 28

Non-Unique Petrochemical Industry Growing

Construction is currently underway for a $4.5 billion petrochemical project in Mexico

Gonzaga Debate Institute 13 29

Fertilizers Bad Fishing Dead Zones

Gonzaga Debate Institute 13 30

Impact Answer No Ag Wars

Gonzaga Debate Institute 13 31

Gonzaga Debate Institute 13 32

No Impact Too Difficult

Empirical examples prove that dispersal and spreading is highly unlikely

Gonzaga Debate Institute 13 33

Gonzaga Debate Institute 13 34

Gonzaga Debate Institute 13 35

Gonzaga Debate Institute 13 36

Gonzaga Debate Institute 13 37

Gonzaga Debate Institute 13 38

Gonzaga Debate Institute 13 39

Gonzaga Debate Institute 13 40

Gonzaga Debate Institute 13 41