Plan

Text: The United States federal government should substantially increase its economic
engagement towards the government of Mexico in the area of renewable energy.

Warming
Advantage One warming
Global warming is real and human induced top climate scientists agree
Anderegg et al 10 PhD Candidate @ Stanford in Biology
(William, Expert credibility in climate change, National Academy of Sciences, p. 1210712109)//BB
Preliminary reviews of scientific literature and surveys of cli- mate scientists indicate
striking agreement with the primary conclusions of the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC): anthropogenic greenhouse gases have been responsible for most of the
unequivocal warming of the Earths average global temperature over the second half of the 20th
century (13). Nonetheless, substantial and growing public doubt remains about the
anthropogenic cause and scientific agreement about the role of anthropogenic greenhouse
gases in climate change (4, 5). A vocal minority of researchers and other critics contest the
conclusions of the mainstream scientific assessment, frequently citing large numbers of scientists
whom they believe support their claims (68). This group, often termed climate change
skeptics, contrarians, or deniers, has received large amounts of media attention and wields
significant influence in the societal debate about climate change impacts and policy (7, 914).
An extensive literature examines what constitutes expertise or credibility in technical and
policy-relevant scientific research (15). Though our aim is not to expand upon that
literature here, we wish to draw upon several important observations from this literature in
examining expert credibility in climate change. First, though the degree of contextual,
political, epistemological, and cultural in- fluences in determining who counts as an expert
and who is credible remains debated, many scholars acknowledge the need to identify credible
experts and account for expert opinion in tech- nical (e.g., science-based) decision-making
(1519). Furthermore, delineating expertise and the relative credibility of claims is critical,
especially in areas where it may be difficult for the majority of decision-makers and the lay public to
evaluate the full complexities of a technical issue (12, 15). Ultimately, however, societal
decisions regarding response to ACC must necessarily include input from many diverse and
nonexpert stakeholders. Because the timeline of decision-making is often more rapid than
scientific consensus, examining the landscape of expert opinion can greatly inform such decisionmaking (15, 19). Here, we examine a metric of climate-specific expertise and a metric of overall
sci- entific prominence as two dimensions of expert credibility in two groups of
researchers. We provide a broad assessment of the rel- ative credibility of researchers convinced
by the evidence (CE) of ACC and those unconvinced by the evidence (UE) of ACC. Our
consideration of UE researchers differs from previous work on climate change skeptics and
contrarians in that we primarily focus on researchers that have published extensively in the
climate field, although we consider all skeptics/contrarians that have signed pro- minent
statements concerning ACC (68). Such expert analysis can illuminate public and policy
discussions about ACC and the extent of consensus in the expert scientific community. We
compiled a database of 1,372 climate researchers based on authorship of scientific
assessment reports and membership on multisignatory statements about ACC (SI
Materials and Methods). We tallied the number of climate-relevant publications authored
or coauthored by each researcher (defined here as expertise) and counted the number of
citations for each of the researchers four highest-cited papers (defined here as
prominence) using Google Scholar. We then imposed an a priori criterion that a researcher
must have authored a minimum of 20 climate publications to be considered a climate
researcher, thus reducing the database to 908 researchers. Varying this minimum
publication cutoff did not ma- terially alter results (Materials and Methods). We ranked
researchers based on the total number of climate publications authored. Though our
compiled researcher list is not comprehensive nor designed to be representative of the
entire cli- mate science community, we have drawn researchers from the most high-profile
reports and public statements about ACC. Therefore, we have likely compiled the strongest

and most credentialed re- searchers in CE and UE groups. Citation and publication analyses
must be treated with caution in inferring scientific credibility, but we suggest that our
methods and our expertise and prominence criteria provide conservative, robust, and
relevant indicators of relative credibility of CE and UE groups of climate researchers
(Materials and Methods). Results and Discussion The UE [unconvinced by evidence] group
comprises only 2% of the top 50 climate researchers as ranked by expertise (number of
climate publications), 3% of researchers of the top 100, and 2.5% of the top 200, excluding
researchers present in both groups (Materials and Methods). This result closely agrees with
expert surveys, indicating that 97% of self-identified actively publishing climate scientists agree
with the tenets of ACC (2). Furthermore, this finding complements direct polling of the
climate researcher community, which yields quali- tative and self-reported researcher
expertise (2). Our findings capture the added dimension of the distribution of researcher
expertise, quantify agreement among the highest expertise climate researchers, and provide
an independent assessment of level of scientific consensus concerning ACC. In addition to
the striking difference in number of expert researchers between CE and UE groups, the
distribution of expertise of the UE group is far below that of the CE group (Fig. 1). Mean
expertise of the UE group was around half (60 publications) that of the CE group (119 publications; MannWhitney U test: W = 57,020; P < 1014), as was median expertise (UE =
34 publications; CE = 84 publications). Furthermore, researchers with fewer than 20 climate
publications comprise 80% the UE group, as opposed to less than 10% of the CE group. This
indicates that the bulk of UE researchers on the most prominent multisignatory statements
about climate change have not published extensively in the peer-reviewed climate
literature. We examined a subsample of the 50 most-published (highest- expertise)
researchers from each group. Such subsampling facili- tates comparison of relative
expertise between groups (normalizing differences between absolute numbers). This
method reveals large differences in relative expertise between CE and UE groups (Fig. 2).
Though the top-published researchers in the CE group have an average of 408 climate
publications (median = 344), the top UE re- searchers average only 89 publications
(median = 68; Mann Whitney U test: W = 2,455; P < 1015). Thus, this suggests that not
all experts are equal, and top CE researchers have much stronger expertise in climate
science than those in the top UE group. Finally, our prominence criterion provides an
independent and approximate estimate of the relative scientific significance of CE and UE
publications. Citation analysis complements publication analysis because it can, in general
terms, capture the quality and impact of a researchers contributiona critical component
to overall scientific credibilityas opposed to measuring a research- ers involvement in a
field, or expertise (Materials and Methods). The citation analysis conducted here further
complements the publication analysis because it does not examine solely climate- relevant
publications and thus captures highly prominent re- searchers who may not be directly
involved with the climate field. We examined the top four most-cited papers for each CE
and UE researcher with 20 or more climate publications and found immense disparity in
scientific prominence between CE and UE communities (MannWhitney U test: W =
50,710; P < 106; Fig. 3). CE researchers top papers were cited an average of 172 times,
compared with 105 times for UE researchers. Because a single, highly cited paper does not
establish a highly credible reputation but might instead reflect the controversial nature of
that paper (often called the single-paper effect), we also considered the av- erage the
citation count of the second through fourth most-highly cited papers of each researcher.
Results were robust when only these papers were considered (CE mean: 133; UE mean: 84;
MannWhitney U test: W = 50,492; P < 106). Results were ro- bust when all 1,372
researchers, including those with fewer than 20 climate publications, were considered (CE
mean: 126; UE mean: 59; MannWhitney U test: W = 3.5 105; P < 1015). Number of
citations is an imperfect but useful benchmark for a groups scientific prominence
(Materials and Methods), and we show here that even considering all (e.g., climate and
nonclimate) publications, the UE researcher group has substantially lower prominence
than the CE group. We provide a large-scale quantitative assessment of the relative level of
agreement, expertise, and prominence in the climate re- searcher community. We show that the

expertise and prominence, two integral components of overall expert credibility, of climate
researchers convinced by the evidence of ACC vastly overshadows that of the climate change
skeptics and contrarians. This divide is even starker when considering the top researchers in each
group. Despite media tendencies to present both sides in ACC debates (9), which can contribute
to continued public misunderstanding re- garding ACC (7, 11, 12, 14), not all climate
researchers are equal in scientific credibility and expertise in the climate system. This extensive
analysis of the mainstream versus skeptical/contrarian researchers suggests a strong role for
considering expert credibi- lity in the relative weight of and attention to these groups of researchers in future discussions in media, policy, and public forums regarding anthropogenic
climate change.

Action now averts extinction

Morgan 9 professor at Hankuk University of Foreign Studies (Dennis Ray, World on Fire:
Two Scenarios of the Destruction of Human Civilization and the Possible Extinction of the
Human Race, 2009)//Beddow
As horrifying as the scenario of human extinction by sudden, fast-burning nuclear fire may
seem, the one consolation is that this future can be avoided within a relatively short period
of time if responsible world leaders change Cold War thinking to move away from
aggressive wars over natural resources and towards the eventual dismantlement of most if
not all nuclear weapons. On the other hand, another scenario of human extinction by fire is
one that may not so easily be reversed within a short period of time because it is not a fastburning fire; rather, a slow burning fire is gradually heating up the planet as industrial
civilization progresses and develops globally. This gradual process and course is longlasting; thus it cannot easily be changed, even if responsible world leaders change their
thinking about progress and industrial development based on the burning of fossil fuels.
The way that global warming will impact humanity in the future has often been depicted
through the analogy of the proverbial frog in a pot of water who does not realize that the
temperature of the water is gradually rising. Instead of trying to escape, the frog tries to
adjust to the gradual temperature change; finally, the heat of the water sneaks up on it until
it is debilitated. Though it finally realizes its predicament and attempts to escape, it is too
late; its feeble attempt is to no avail and the frog dies. Whether this fable can actually be
applied to frogs in heated water or not is irrelevant; it still serves as a comparable scenario
of how the slow burning fire of global warming may eventually lead to a runaway condition
and take humanity by surprise. Unfortunately, by the time the politicians finally all agree
with the scientific consensus that global warming is indeed human caused, its development
could be too advanced to arrest; the poor frog has become too weak and enfeebled to get
himself out of hot water. The Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change (IPCC) was
established in 1988 by the WorldMeteorological Organization (WMO) and the United
Nations Environmental Programme to assess on a comprehensive, objective, open and
transparent basis the scientific, technical and socio-economic information relevant to
understanding the scientific basis of risk of humaninduced climate change, its potential
impacts and options for adaptation and mitigation.[16]. Since then, it has given
assessments and reports every six or seven years. Thus far, it has given four assessments.13
With all prior assessments came attacks fromsome parts of the scientific community,
especially by industry scientists, to attempt to prove that the theory had no basis in
planetary history and present-day reality; nevertheless, as more and more research
continually provided concrete and empirical evidence to confirm the global warming
hypothesis, that it is indeed human-caused, mostly due to the burning of fossil fuels, the
scientific consensus grew stronger that human induced global warming is verifiable. As a
matter of fact, according to Bill McKibben [17], 12 years of impressive scientific research
strongly confirms the 1995 report that humans had grown so large in numbers and
especially in appetite for energy that they were now damaging the most basic of the earths
systemsthe balance between incoming and outgoing solar energy; . . . their findings
have essentially been complementary to the 1995 report a constant strengthening of the
simple basic truth that humans were burning too much fossil fuel. [17]. Indeed, 12 years

later, the 2007 report not only confirms global warming, with a stronger scientific
consensus that the slow burn is very likely human caused, but it also finds that the
amount of carbon in the atmosphere is now increasing at a faster rate even than before
and the temperature increases would be considerably higher than they have been so far
were it not for the blanket of soot and other pollution that is temporarily helping to cool the
planet. [17]. Furthermore, almost everything frozen on earth is melting. Heavy rainfalls
are becoming more common since the air is warmer and therefore holds more water than
cold air, and cold days, cold nights and frost have become less frequent, while hot days, hot
nights, and heat waves have become more frequent. [17]. Unless drastic action is taken
soon, the average global temperature is predicted to rise about 5 degrees this century, but it
could rise as much as 8 degrees. As has already been evidenced in recent years, the rise in
global temperature is melting the Arctic sheets. This runaway polar melting will inflict
great damage upon coastal areas, which could be much greater than what has been
previously forecasted. However, what is missing in the IPCC report, as dire as it may seem,
is sufficient emphasis on the less likely but still plausible worst case scenarios, which could
prove to have the most devastating, catastrophic consequences for the long-term future of
human civilization. In other words, the IPCC report places too much emphasis on a linear
progression that does not take sufficient account of the dynamics of systems theory, which
leads to a fundamentally different premise regarding the relationship between industrial
civilization and nature.

Warming is an existential risk quickening reductions is key to avoiding extinction

Mazo 10 PhD in Paleoclimatology from UCLA
(Jeffrey Mazo, Managing Editor, Survival and Research Fellow for Environmental Security and
Science Policy at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London, 3-2010, Climate
Conflict: How global warming threatens security and what to do about it, pg. 122)//BB
The best estimates for global warming to the end of the century range from 2.5-4.~C above
pre-industrial levels, depending on the scenario. Even in the best-case scenario, the low
end of the likely range is 1.goC, and in the worst 'business as usual' projections, which
actual emissions have been matching, the range of likely warming runs from 3.1--7.1C.
Even keeping emissions at constant 2000 levels (which have already been exceeded), global
temperature would still be expected to reach 1.2C (O'9""1.5C)above pre-industrial levels
by the end of the century." Without early and severe reductions in emissions, the effects of
climate change in the second half of the twenty-first century are likely to be catastrophic for the
stability and security of countries in the developing world - not to mention the associated
human tragedy. Climate change could even undermine the strength and stability of emerging
and advanced economies, beyond the knock-on effects on security of widespread state failure and
collapse in developing countries.' And although they have been condemned as melodramatic
and alarmist, many informed observers believe that unmitigated climate change beyond the
end of the century could pose an existential threat to civilisation." What is certain is that there
is no precedent in human experience for such rapid change or such climatic conditions, and even
in the best case adaptation to these extremes would mean profound social, cultural and political
changes.

Technical assistance for renewables significantly reduces greenhouse gases

COCEF 12 - La Comisin de Cooperacin Ecolgica Fronteriza
(Energy Efficiency, Renewable Energy and Transportation: Project Opportunities in the U.S.
Mexico Border Region, http://www.cocef.org/Eng/VLibrary/Publications/SpecialReports/BECC
%20WP%20%20Nov%202011%20index.pdf)//BB
This white paper describes the current deficit in the U.S.-Mexico border region in terms of
renewable energy, energy efficiency, and transportation projects focused on the reduction
of greenhouse gases (GHG). In the presentation, the argument is made that the primary
reason this project deficit exists is due to: 1. limited resources for project development, 2.
lack of capacity building, at the most fundamental level, in the public and publicprivate

sectors, and 3. lack of technical assistance program to address this deficit Specifically
targeting a technical assistance program for renewable energy, energy efficiency, and
transportation projects to achieve GHG reductions would be invaluable in promoting an
environment for effective climate action in border communities. A proposed technical
assistance program could help public sector entities build the bases on which they can
develop both mitigation and adaptation greenhouse gas projects. Mitigation projects are
the priority of the program since they are intended to directly reduce greenhouse gas
emissions. Adaptation projects are important as well, and it is recommended they be
developed as capacity building initiatives to assist municipalities better manage the
current realities of climate change. Ultimately, these project types do need technical
assistance funds , and the funds will need a highly

capacitated and experienced program

manager .

Mexico is key:
First production they have ENORMOUS renewable energy potential
Wood 10 PhD in Political Studies @ Queens, Professor @ ITAM in Mexico City
(Duncan, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars,
http://www.statealliancepartnership.org/resources_files/USMexico_Cooperation_Renewable_E
nergies.pdf)//BB
The North American context The North American economic region is experiencing an
impact from all of the issues mentioned above. Climate change, population growth,
tightening energy markets and the need for sustainable development pose a series of
challenges for policy makers at both the national and regional levels. A number of studies ,
some dating from the early years of the 2000s, have called for the creation of North
American renewable energy markets, with adequate integration of electricity transmission
systems, funding programs and intergovernmental cooperation 3. The demand for
integration of RE markets is urgent. As nations, states and municipalities struggle to meet
carbon emissions targets, they are looking to their neighbors to satisfy demand for RE and
to benefit from synergies across sectors. Unfortunately, we are still a long way away from
such integration. There is still a lack of knowledge about the full extent of renewable energy
resources across the region and differences in regulatory regimes, both within and between
countries remains an obstacle. A comprehensive study and database of renewable energy
resources is a vital component for developing RE in the region that was attempted in 2003
by the North American Commission on Environmental Cooperation (CEC)'1, but which
sadly came to nothing. However, it is encouraging that significant progress has been made
in recent years on both the technological and the regulatory fronts, and there is significant
interest from the private sector in exploiting renewable energy across borders in the
region. The industry in Mexico Mexico enjoys one of the world's most privileged positions
in terms of its potential to generate renewable energy. Possessing tropical, temperate and
arid climates, very long coastlines, areas of high wind velocity and stability, geothermal
activity, and high levels of solar irradiation, Mexico is naturally extremely well endowed .
However there has been very little development of the renewable sector in Mexico until
very recently (with the exception of hydro-electric and geothermal electricity generation).
This lack of development can be explained by; The dominance of energy thinking by issues
related to oil and, to a lesser extent, gas The absence of any consideration of energy
security issues due to the abundance of hydrocarbons A lack of awareness on the part of
the executive branch and legislators of the potential for renewable energy generation A
low level of environmental consciousness on the part of government, society and the
private sector The absence of economic and financial incentives for public or private sector
development of renewable resources

Second technology transfer Mexico will spread the green tech globally
ENS 12 Environmental News Service
(U.S., Canada, Mexico Vow Continental Energy Grid,
http://www.reepedia.com/archives/4568)//BB
The leaders of the United States, Mexico, and Canada today pledged to develop
continental energy, including electricity generation and interconnection across national
borders and welcomed increasing North American energy trade. Meeting in Washington,
U.S. President Barack Obama, Canadas President Stephen Harper and Mexicos President
Felipe Calderon committed their governments to enhance their collective energy security,
to facilitate seamless energy flows on the interconnected grid and to promote trade and
investment in clean energy technologies. They will cooperate in expanding cooperation to
create clean energy jobs and combat climate change, the leaders said in a joint statement.
Enhanced electricity interconnection in the Americas would advance the goals of the
Energy and Climate Partnership of the Americas to reduce energy poverty and increase the
use of renewable sources of energy, the three leaders said. They recognized Mexicos
leadership in supporting inter-connections in Central America and reaffirmed their
support to bring affordable, reliable, and increasingly renewable power to businesses and
homes in Central America and the Caribbean while opening wider markets for clean energy
and green technology. During a joint news conference this afternoon, President Obama
said, Between us, we represent nearly half-a-billion citizens, from Nunavut in the
Canadian north to Chiapas in southern Mexico. In between, the diversity of our peoples
and cultures is extraordinary. But wherever they live, they wake up every day with similar
hopes to provide for their families, to be safe in their communities, to give their children
a better life. And in each of our countries, the daily lives of our citizens are shaped
profoundly by what happens in the other two. And thats why were here. Energy
cooperation reduces the cost of doing business and enhances economic competitiveness in
North America, the three leaders said. We recognize the growing regional and federal
cooperation in the area of continental energy, including electricity generation and
interconnection and welcome increasing North American energy trade.

Third international cooperation Mexican leadership leads to GLOBAL climate

agreements
ONeill 13 PhD in Government @ Harvard, senior fellow for Latin America Studies at the
Council on Foreign Relations, a nonpartisan foreign-policy think tank and membership
organization
(Shannon, Mexico Makes It: A Transformed Society, Economy, and Government, Foreign
Affairs, 92.2)//BB
If Mexico addresses these challenges, it will emerge as a powerful player on the
international stage. A democratic and safe Mexico would attract billions of dollars in
foreign investment and propel the country into the world's top economic ranks. Robust
growth would both reduce northbound emigration and increase southbound trade,
benefiting U.S. employers and employees alike. Already influential in the G-20 and other
multilateral organizations, Mexico could become even more of a power broker in global
institutions and help construct new international financial, trade, and climatechange
accords .

Relations
US-Mexico climate cooperation prevents Latin skirmishes from escalating to war
Barry 13 senior policy analyst at the Center for International Policy, where he directs the
TransBorder project, he specializes in immigration policy, homeland security, border security and
the outsourcing of national security, has authored or co-authored more than twenty books on
Mexico, Central America, the Caribbean, food aid, the United Nations, free trade and U.S. foreign
policy
(Tom, Changing Perspectives on US-Mexico Relations, http://truth-out.org/news/item/16221changing-perspectives-on-us-mexico-relations)//BB
Its unfortunate that the two presidents chose to hold their May 2-3 summit in Mexico City.
Both nations and Presidents Barack Obama and Enrique Pea Nieto would have been
better served by a meeting at the borderwhere the grim reality of neighborly relations
would not be masked by the pomp and circumstance of the grand presidential residence of
Los Pinos. A meeting at the customs building in Ciudad Jurezthe site of the first
Mexico-U.S. presidential meeting in 1909 between Porfirio Daz and William Taftwould
have likely resulted in a more memorable and productive summit of the current heads of
state, Enrique Pea Nieto and Barack Obama. As it is, this meeting will likely be soon
forgottenlost in protocol, predictable rhetoric about interdependence, and the photogenic
smiles of the two presidents. A century ago the Rio Grande/Ro Bravo clearly marked the
divide between El Paso and Jurez, the border twins that were jointly known as El Paso del
Nortethe pass to the north. Today, however, its unlikely that the presidential delegations
and the accompanying media would now passes for a riverreally just an alarmingly
greenish trickle of pesticides, fertilizer runoff, and human waste. Instead of news photos
from the bilateral meeting depicting two smiling presidents, we would be witnessing
images of the stark divide between the two neighbors: the formidable border security
infrastructure, the smog rising from the long lines of vehicles waiting to cross, the beggars
and street vendors taking advantage of the stalled south-north traffic, the ravages of the
drug wars, the miles of low-slung factories calledmaquiladoras, the sprawling colonias of
Mexicos expanding, but still largely poor, middle class (those families earning at least
$7,500 annually), and still-poorer squatter settlements that spread out into the
Chihuahuan Desert. The lead items of the Los Pinos meeting are ones that have long
dominated U.S.-Mexico presidential meetings: immigration, border control, economic
integration, and drug-related security. The presidents will achieve some camaraderie
chatting about the domestic political obstacles that complicate their plans for national and
international progress. In the pleasant, climate-controlled setting of Los Pinos, its unlikely
that Pea Nieto and Obama will address in any depth, if at all, what will soon become the
top agenda item of most binational and multilateral meetings: the scourge of climate
change. Climate Change If Obama and Pea Nieto were to talk about common concerns
while on the border instead of in sitting rooms of the White House and Los Pinos, they
would see a common future in the river that divides the two nations. Climate change aggravated drought has reduced the Ro Bravo to a viscous, milky green trickle.
Groundwater reserves in the greater borderlands are being quickly depleted, and farmers,
ranchers, and city planners on both sides of the border are battling over rapidly
diminishing supplies in the first skirmishes of the water wars that will surely soon
overshadow the drug wars as the main threat to regional stability . A common
commitment by Obama and Pea Nieto for each government to do its part to mitigate and
mutually adjust to climate changewhich doesnt respect border lines or border security
fortificationswould be a sign that binational relations can move beyond being merely
economic partners and fighting on the same side of the drug war. The sad plight of the
once glorious Ro Bravo should not further divide the two nations, but bring the

communities to the north and those to the south together as neighbors and part of the
larger North American community with shared interests and responsibilities.

Latin American wars go global

Rochin 94 Professor of Political Science
(James, Professor of Political Science at Okanagan University College, Discovering the Americas:
the evolution of Canadian foreign policy towards Latin America, pp. 130-131)//BB
While there were economic motivations for Canadian policy in Central America, security
considerations were perhaps more important. Canada possessed an interest in promoting
stability in the face of a potential decline of U.S. hegemony in the Americas. Perceptions of
declining U.S. influence in the region which had some credibility in 1979-1984 due to the
wildly inequitable divisions of wealth in some U.S. client states in Latin America, in
addition to political repression, under-development, mounting external debt, antiAmerican sentiment produced by decades of subjugation to U.S. strategic and economic
interests, and so on were linked to the prospect of explosive events occurring in the hemisphere.
Hence, the Central American imbroglio was viewed as a fuse which could ignite a cataclysmic
process throughout the region. Analysts at the time worried that in a worst-case scenario, instability
created by a regional war, beginning in Central America and spreading elsewhere in Latin
America, might preoccupy Washington to the extent that the United States would be unable to
perform adequately its important hegemonic role in the international arena a concern
expressed by the director of research for Canadas Standing Committee Report on Central
America. It was feared that such a predicament could generate increased global instability and
perhaps even a hegemonic war . This is one of the motivations which led Canada to become
involved in efforts at regional conflict resolution, such as Contadora, as will be discussed in
the next chapter.

Solvency
A comprehensive bilateral agreement on renewable energy is key spurs cooperation
and investment necessary to catalyze growth in the cross-border renewable energy
industries
Wood 12, Duncan Wood, [Director of the Mexico Institute at the Woodrow Wilson International
Center for Scholars, professor and the director of the International Relations Program at the Instituto
Tecnolgico Autnomo de Mxico (ITAM), researcher at the Centro de Derecho Econmico Internacional
(CDEI) at ITAM., member of the Mexican National Research System (level 2), a member of the editorial
board of Foreign Affairs Latinoamerica and has been an editorial advisor to Reforma newspaper, technical
secretary of the Red Mexicana de Energia, Senior Associate with the Simon Chair and the Americas
Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies]
http://wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/wood_energy.pdf The need for integration of North

American renewable energy markets is real and immediate. Although the

region has extensive renewable energy resources, their geographic
distribution, and their nature (intermittent and of variable strength), mean
that it makes sense to integrate both supply and distribution across
national borders. This has long been the case with energy; electricity grids have seen extensive
integration across the US northern border, and pipelines have brought Canadian natural gas and oil to the
United States for a long time. As US demand for renewable energy increases,
satisfying that demand will require importing energy from its neighbors, and
Mexico offers a reliable and relatively low cost supply from its wind energy farms in the north.

US financing and expertise is key

Wood 10 PhD in Political Studies @ Queens, Professor @ ITAM in Mexico City
(Duncan, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars,
http://www.statealliancepartnership.org/resources_files/USMexico_Cooperation_Renewable_E
nergies.pdf)//
Over the last 15 years, contributions by United States government agencies to the development of renewable energy
resources in Mexico have left a significant impact. Most obviously in the wind and solar sectors, Mexico has benefitted
from technical assistance, resource identification and regulatory guidance. The work of USAID, DOE, Sandia
Laboratories and the National Renewable Energy Laboratories has helped to promote awareness of renewable energies
and has built up human capital in Mexico. All of this, however, should be seen only as a prelude to what is coming in the
near future. With rising demand for renewable energy in the United States and a limited capacity to
generate it from national sources, Mexicos geographical proximity and its free trade relationship

with the US make it an ideal source for green electricity and biofuels. If it can build up its
renewable energy capacity, Mexico stands to benefit enormously from this opportunity in the
form of employment, investment and the sustainable development of underdeveloped regions.
Based on the evidence presented in this report, to help this capacity develop further, the United States
should concentrate its efforts on a number of key issues in the renewable energy sector.
Financing: to create bilateral mechanisms, through both the NADBank and new institutional
mechanisms o assist in the development of renewable energy projects throughout Mexico. Special
treatment should be given to projects that are aimed at the export of RE to the US o seed capital
will be particularly important in the biofuels sector as it is currently comparatively stagnated due
to lack of funds.

Plan promotes joint energy co-operation on both sides of the border

Diana Rodriguez, 4/24/12, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, "Enhancing the U.S.-Mexico Economic
Partnership," http://www.uschamber.com/sites/default/files/reports/1204EnhancingtheUSMexicoEconomicPartnership.pdfhttp://www.uschamber.com/sites/default/files/reports/1204EnhancingtheUSMexicoEconomicPartnership.pdf
In early 2009, President Caldern and President Obama announced plans to strengthen and deepen bilateral
cooperation by establishing the U.S.-Mexico Bilateral Framework on Clean Energy and Climate Change.

The framework seeks to

build upon cooperation along the border by facilitating the ability of

neighboring border states to work together to strengthen energy trade. A key issue for renewable
energy power development is access to electricity grid infrastructure . A specific priority under the U.S.Mexico Bilateral Framework is to promote the development of a regional renewable energy market between California
and Baja California and to help facilitate the construction of new power lines in a sustainable manner.
Recommendations: REGULATORY REFORMS Jointly prioritize further energy reform to ease
investment restrictions and allow additional two-way foreign investment that will lead to
increased efficiency and production. Benefit: At a time when global demand is also projected to rise, reform
facilitates production increases in order to meet growing domestic demand at more affordable prices to consumers.
Benefit: Reduces dependence on oil from the Middle East. Technological Innovation and INFRASTRUCTURE
DEVELOPMENT Technological innovation and infrastructure development will modernize outdated technology and
aging infrastructure. Benefit: Increased production and refining capacity will reduce costs, eliminate the need to
subsidize gas prices, and in turn increase government revenues. Benefit: Modern technologies and infrastructure will
curb emissions and reduce overall environmental impact. NONCONVENTIONAL FUELS The United States and

Mexico should further strengthen their energy relationship via co-generation projects in nonconventional fuels (synthetic oil, shale oil, coal bed methane, shale gas, etc.) and progressively transition out
of conventional oil. Benefit: Diversifies the energy mix of both the United States and Mexico to militate against
unexpected energy supply shocks caused by either natural disasters or geopolitical developments. GREEN ENERGY:
RENEWABLE FUELS The United States and Mexico should further strengthen their energy
relationship via co-generation projects in renewable fuels (solar, wind, biomass, and bio-fuels) and
promote sustainable energy development. Both governments should work with industry toward
regulatory coherence and use international standards that meet the WTOs definition. Benefit:
Reduces the carbon footprint of energy generation and mitigates climate change. Energy reform would guarantee the
supply of cost-effective energy sources for homes and businesses. With reduced energy costs, citizens would have more
disposable income and businesses would have additional operating capital to modernize their operations and/or invest
further in their sector.

Renewables solve quickly outside expertise is key

Carus 13 - UK journalist, regularly reporting on clean energy policy and finance from
California for a global audience
(Felicity, Mexico offers tantalising prospect of a dawning major market, http://www.pvtech.org/editors_blog/mexico_offers_tantalising_prospect_of_a_dawning_major_market)//BB
Solar investors in the US and further afield would really love to get their hands on Mexico's
solar market: great resource on cheap desert land located squarely in the southern sun-belt.
Some experts estimate that it would only take PV panels spread over just 25km2 of land in
Chihuahua or the Sonoran desert to supply Mexicos electricity demand . National
legislation to reduce carbon emissions 30% by 2020 and constrained natural gas supplies
are pushing companies to renewable choices like never before. There is only one utility
company to deal with, the state-owned Comisin Federal de Electricidad (CFE). And its
nearest neighbour is a guzzler of imported electricity and already linked through the
Western Electricity Coordinating Council. Electricity trade between the United States and
Mexico started in 1905, when privately owned utilities located in remote towns on both
sides of the border helped "balance" electricity demand with a couple of low voltage lines,
according to the US Energy Information Agency. Since 2006, Mexico has been a very
small net exporter of electricity to the US. But electricity imports will likely boom after the Department of Energy granted a permit to a
subsidiary of Sempra International for a 230-kilovolt (kV) transmission line that will carry electricity from a Mexican wind farm to the California market. Meanwhile, Baja California
is the location for Latin America's largest solar installation to date, a 30MW project to be completed by the end of this year. When US president Barack Obama met Mexican president
Enrique Pea Nieto earlier this month, renewable energy was firmly on the agenda (along with gun control, economic cooperation and illegal drugs). Unlike the US, however, Mexico
even has an energy policy. The freshly minted National Energy Strategy 2013-2027 agreed only in April estimates that 6GW of solar energy could be developed by 2020. Some say
that estimate is way too conservative and forecast that PV will boom under these conditions, perhaps even 150-fold, while shorter term solar growth could go from today's estimated
50MW-70MW capacity to 250MW by 2015. Oh, and did I mention its growing population of 114 million inhabitants and an annual GDP growth rate last year of 4%? As if that weren't

the grid has been overbuilt by 50% to accommodate anticipated growth as the
country recoups its losses from the global recession. John Skibinski is executive director at
Global Renewables Group, which is based in Las Vegas with a subsidiary in Mexico called
Socios Energeticos de Mexico Verde. During a webinar ahead of the Mexican International
Renewable Energy Congress in Mexico City next week, Skibinski said: "Within two and a
half years at most, Mexico will explode in solar energy because its infrastructure is ready
for it. Its economic climate is now accelerating, its government climate is favourable
good enough news,

towards solar and wind there is so much desert land available at low cost. We should see
250MW by 2015 of deployed solar farms in Mexico easily." He said that energy-intensive
industry was facing a price on carbon that could force more interest in renewables. "What
we found from one steel mill was that for every 3MW of natural gas [electricity] production,
they need 1MW of solar to [reduce their] emissions footprint, said Skibinski. Even at the
corporate level, not just national level, corporations are saying, hey if I'm going to keep my
production on full, I've got to do something about [greenhouse gas] (GHG) reductions. So a
lot of people are going to be turning to solar to keep their production going as well as ramp
up. "Mexico is the 11th largest economy in the world, and it's also the 11th largest carbon
polluter in the world. It's the second largest polluter in Latin America, so it's highly focused
on what it should do with solar and wind." Skibinski, who has clearly sweated it out in the
field, cautioned half-hearted solar developers hopeful of striking Mexican gold. "You've got
to bring your own support when you come to this country, there is nobody here that knows
solar, there is nobody here that knows wind, he said. It's new to the country and it
requires training , development as well as pilot installations. We've done that for the
utilities, the banks and the government we've shown with pilot installations how we can
reduce GHG emissions. They are highly interested in new technology they don't want
solar panels that are 15 years old, 100W panels not going to cut it and they are already
looking at 115W." Skibinski has already seen some developers get burned by the Mexican
sun. "I have seen 50 independent power producers apply for power plant generation two
of them got approved," he said. "The other 48 were on the wrong place on the grid. You've got to do your homework when you want to put in an installation into
Mexico. A utility will deny your application if it doesn't fit their needs, they are very good at what they do in terms of their grid." Brian Schmidly, the chief executive of Rio Grande
Solar, said he was more cautious about the speed of deployment in Mexico, where his company has development partners. "You're going to see growth in the PV industry," he said. "I
just think it's going to be slow this year and pick up a little bit of steam in 2014, but you could potentially see 250MW by 2015." Schmidly said that government subsidies for
electricity and bespoke deals between commercial and industrial consumers and their electricity provider were major barriers to the development of solar in Mexico. Retail rates for
electricity varied between 10c per kwh and 15c per kwh, way too wide a variation for investor appetite. "Most consumers negotiate rates with CFE - subsidised electricity rates makes
solar difficult to compete," he said. Recent reversals in price declines for PV panels could also compound the problem and slow PV plant development in Mexico, he said. "Panel
prices [have] moved north for first time in three to four years," he said. "[Panels] usually represent about 40% of a PV plant's cost. So if that's a trend that we're going to continue to
see as a result of the Japanese and Asian markets turning round a little bit faster than everyone was expecting, then you could see some of the cost advantages for Mexico coming down
and that's a trend that we need to watch." Ernesto Hanhausen, managing director of Emerging Energy & Environment's CleanTech Fund, said that the push for PV installations might
come more from "emergency needs for power than regulation and willingness of the government". He compared Mexico's grid system to North Korea in that its electricity system is
so centralised. But the Mexican government had been creative in its approach to stimulating private sector investments such as "banking power" where CFE will take excess electricity
and store it, reimbursing the generator up to 85% of retail value. But Hanhausen warned that constrained natural gas supplies were both a boon and a challenge for renewables. "In

natural gas
pipeline from the US could supply areas with greatest demand for electricity such as in the
north, but that progress was slow, whereas renewables could be deployed more quickly .
the north-west, there's big demand for natural gas and that's where the largest development of PV could be," he said. He added that construction of a

" In the [next] five years , the best way for Mexico to be able to cope with electrical demand
is to really exploit the possibility of developing renewable energy because that can come
into play much faster than the installation of potential gas pipelines, said Hanhausen.

Specifically the US is key

--aid is high now, but should be re-oriented towards renewables
Hartsoch 11 MA @ San Jose State, Senior Vice President of Marketing and Sales for
SolFocus
(Nancy, A Sunny Future for Border Relations?,
http://breakingenergy.com/2011/05/10/featured-a-sunny-future-for-border-relations/)//BB
Amidst the darkening cloud of violence that grips the US-Mexico border region, a
surprising ray of sunlight illuminates a prosperous, cleaner future. Quietly above the hustle
of Boulevard Tomas Fernandez in Ciudad Jurez, 25-year resident Daniel Chacn is
greeted each day by what he calls giant sun flowers, solar panels that flank his office at
the US-Mexico Border Environmental Cooperation Commission (BECC). The serene
landscape of solar panels turning with the sun-in a dance, as Daniel would say-runs in stark
contrast to the Ciudad Jurez that America perceives: a city besieged by crime. Headlines
from his hometown have reflected the strained relations between the U.S. and Mexico in
their efforts to thwart the violent trade of narcotics across the border. Daniel sees a new
and vital path in clean energy, and a path the US must facilitate . A brighter future of
bilateral trade and collaboration lies in the creation of environmentally sustainable
business opportunities that address the critical need for clean energy in the region. This
collaborative partnership to create sustainable economic opportunity and jobs exists on

both sides of the border. The sun doesnt recognize political boundaries. Together the
countries can use clean energy to alleviate the poverty and suffering in the border region
and at the same time produce clean, emissions-free energy to power one of Mexicos most
important industrial centers. The US-Mexico Border region has tremendous solar
resources. A constant flood of intense sunrays provide an annual average of 7-8 kilowatt
hours per square meter daily. Thats enough energy to power municipalities, airports,
colleges, and industrial complexes. With intelligent development efforts into renewable
energy, the region could be a showcase for sustainable economic development and trade.
BECC grasps that idea and is taking positive steps to promote it. Chartered to integrate
environmental solutions to preserve and enhance human health and the environment,
BECC has taken the next step in fulfilling this commitment by deploying advanced solar
energy technology. This is a refreshing development in the region and BECCs efforts
should be loudly applauded by its board of directors from both nations, which includes
representation from the US Department of State, US Treasury, the US EPA, and their
Mexican counterpart agencies. BECCs offices are showcasing advanced concentrator
photovoltaic (CPV) technology provided by California-based SolFocus. The two CPV arrays
installed at the facility harness the suns rays more effectively than traditional solar
equipment by concentrating the suns power 650 times onto tiny, highly efficient solar
cells. Daniel checks the meters on these systems daily, and finds them powering roughly
one-third of the office buildings needs. With the war on narcotics claiming so many lives,
coupled with the devastation of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill and its unknown effects on
the Gulf ecosystem, the people and businesses in the border region desperately need
positive, grass-roots efforts to inspire a sustainable economic future. Daniel has seen
firsthand the power that clean energy has to inspire his community. Local schools, officials,
family members, and curious residents visit the site to get a glimpse of the giant girasols
panels flanking the BECC offices. The opportunity is real and the time is now to change
border communities to places where individuals like Daniels three granddaughters can
have well-paying careers and a clean and healthy environment. Today US aid flows to
President Caldern in support of anti-narco trafficking enforcement. While important,
providing aid to support solar energy project development in the region would be a more
effective means to creating a peaceful, prosperous, cleaner future.