11 Oceans Neg 2014

West Coast Publishing Ocean 2014 NEGATIVE Page 1
West Coast Publishing

Ocean 2014
Negative
Edited by Jim Hanson
Researchers
Alex Zendeh, Alyssa Lucas-Bolin, Ben Menzies, Eric Robinson,
Greta Stahl, Matt Stannard, William James Taylor
Thanks for using our Policy, LD, Public Forum, and Extemp Materials.
Please don’t share this material with anyone

outside of your school
including via print, email, dropbox, google drive, the web, etc.
We’re a small non-profit; please help us continue to provide our products.
Contact us at jim@wcdebate.com
www.wcdebate.com
We’re a small non-profit. Please don’t share this file with those who have not paid including via
dropbox, google drive, the web, printed copies, email, etc. Visit us at www.wcdebate.com
Resolved: The United States federal

government should substantially increase
its non-military exploration and/or
development of the Earth's oceans.
WEST COAST DEBATE

OCEAN 2014-2015
NEGATIVE
Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its non-military
exploration and/or development of the Earth's oceans.
Finding Arguments in this File

Use the table of contents on the next pages to find the evidence you need or the navigation bar on the left. We
have tried to make the table of contents as easy to use as possible. You’ll find scenario/impacts, affirmatives,
disadvantages, counterplans, and kritiks listed alphabetically in their categories.
Using the arguments in this File

We encourage you to be familiar with the evidence you use. Highlight (underline) the key lines you will use in the
evidence. Cut evidence from our files, incorporate your and others’ research and make new files. File the evidence
so that you can easily retrieve it when you need it in debate rounds. Practice reading the evidence out-loud;
Practice applying the arguments to your opponents’ positions; Practice defending your evidence in rebuttal
speeches.
Use West Coast Evidence as a Beginning

We hope you enjoy our evidence files and find them useful. In saying this, we want to make a strong statement
that we make when we coach and that we believe is vitally important to your success: DO NOT USE THIS EVIDENCE
AS A SUBSTITUTE FOR YOUR OWN RESEARCH. Instead, let it serve as a beginning. Let it inform you of important
arguments, of how to tag and organize your arguments, and to offer citations for further research. Don’t stagnate
in these files--build upon them by doing your own research for updates, new strategies, and arguments that
specifically apply to your opponents. In doing so, you’ll use our evidence to become a better debater.
Copying West Coast Evidence

Our policy gives you the freedom to use our evidence for educational purposes without violating our hard work.
 You may print and copy this evidence for those on your team.
 You may not electronically share nor distribute this evidence with anyone other than those on your team
unless you very substantially change each page of material that you share.
For unusual situations, you can e-mail us at jim@wcdebate.com and seek our consent.
Ordering West Coast Materials

1. Visit the West Coast Web Page at www.wcdebate.com
2. E-mail us at jim@wcdebate.com
3. Fax us at 877-781-5058
Copyright 2014. West Coast Publishing. All Rights Reserved.
Visit our web page!

www.wcdebate.com
Table of Contents
Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its non-military
exploration and/or development of the Earth's oceans. ......................................................... 2
WEST COAST DEBATE ................................................................................................................................ 3
Table of Contents ...................................................................................................................................... 4
Debating on the Negative .................................................................................................... 13
Ocean Topicality-Definitions ................................................................................................ 17
Non-Military ........................................................................................................................................................18
Exploration ..........................................................................................................................................................19
And/Or ................................................................................................................................................................20
Development ......................................................................................................................................................21
Oceans ................................................................................................................................................................22
Ocean Topicality Shells ........................................................................................................ 23

1NC R&D .............................................................................................................................................................24
1NC Its =/= NGOs ................................................................................................................................................25
1NC Oceans = All .................................................................................................................................................26
1NC Oceans International ...................................................................................................................................27
1NC Non-Military ................................................................................................................................................28
1NC USFG = Not International Treaties ..............................................................................................................29
1NC International Cooperation ...........................................................................................................................30
1NC Exploration Means New ..............................................................................................................................31
1NC Development Is Minerals ............................................................................................................................32
Biodiversity of Ocean Fine ................................................................................................... 33

General Biodiversity ................................................................................................................................ 34
Biodiversity High Now .........................................................................................................................................35
De-extinction solves impacts ..............................................................................................................................36
No Extinction.......................................................................................................................................................37
AT: Keystone Species ..........................................................................................................................................38
Ocean-Specific Impacts ........................................................................................................................... 39
Oceans Alt Cause – Climate Change ...................................................................................................................40
Oceans Alt Cause – Climate Change ...................................................................................................................41
New Regulations Solve Oceans ...........................................................................................................................42
AT: Ocean Ecosystems/Biodiversity ....................................................................................................................43
AT: Overfishing ....................................................................................................................................................44
AT: Coral Reefs ....................................................................................................................................................45
AT: Ocean Acidification .......................................................................................................................................46
US China No Conflict ............................................................................................................ 47

No Conflict - General ...........................................................................................................................................48
No Conflict – East China Sea ...............................................................................................................................49
No Conflict – South China Sea .............................................................................................................................50
No Conflict - Taiwan ............................................................................................................................................51
US Russia No Conflict ........................................................................................................... 52
No Conflict – Ukraine ..........................................................................................................................................53

No Conflict – Arctic .............................................................................................................................................54
No Conflict – Missile Defense .............................................................................................................................55
No Conflict – Syria ...............................................................................................................................................56
No Conflict – Syria ...............................................................................................................................................57
Aquaculture Neg ................................................................................................................. 58

1NC Urban Aquaculture CP .................................................................................................................................59
2NC Solvency/Net Benefit Extension ..................................................................................................................60
2NC Avoids the Antibiotic Turn ...........................................................................................................................61
Politics Links ............................................................................................................................................ 62
Case Debate/Turns.................................................................................................................................. 63
1NC Environment Turn .......................................................................................................................................64
Environment Turn-Extensions.............................................................................................................................65
1NC Disease Turn ................................................................................................................................................67
Extensions-Disease Turn .....................................................................................................................................68
A2 Food Instability Advantage ............................................................................................................................69
Solvency ..............................................................................................................................................................71
Antibiotic Resistance Turn ..................................................................................................................................72
Biodiversity Defense ...........................................................................................................................................73
Biodiversity Keystone Flawed Theory .................................................................................................................74
Marine Reserves Negative ................................................................................................... 75

Topicality: Reserves and Protection Are Not Development ...............................................................................76
Topicality: Reserves and Protection Are Not Development ...............................................................................77
Protected Areas Don’t Solve ...............................................................................................................................78
Protected Areas Don’t Solve ...............................................................................................................................79
Barriers to PA Solvency .......................................................................................................................................80
Protected Areas Don’t Solve Biodiversity ...........................................................................................................81
Protected Areas Don’t Increase Fish Stocks ........................................................................................................82
Shift Disadvantage ..............................................................................................................................................83
Shift Disadvantage ..............................................................................................................................................84
Negative: Anthropocentrism Links......................................................................................................................85
Incentives Counterplan Solvency ........................................................................................................................87
Status Quo Fishery Management Solves ............................................................................................................88
Status Quo Fishery Management Solves ............................................................................................................89
High Seas Closure Counterplan: Solvency ...........................................................................................................90
High Seas Closure Counterplan: Solvency ...........................................................................................................91
Politics Links ........................................................................................................................................................92
Politics Links ........................................................................................................................................................93
Economy Links ....................................................................................................................................................94
Economy Links ....................................................................................................................................................95
Ocean Renewables MHK Negative ....................................................................................... 96

Off-Case................................................................................................................................................... 97
A-Spec / I-Spec violations....................................................................................................................................98
Reg-Neg CP solvency (Regulatory-Negotiation) ..................................................................................................99
Reg-Neg CP solvency (Regulatory-Negotiation) ................................................................................................100
Studies CP solvency ...........................................................................................................................................101
Studies CP solvency ...........................................................................................................................................103
A2: Inherency ....................................................................................................................................... 104
Federal support for MHK is high now ...............................................................................................................105

A2: Solvency ......................................................................................................................................... 106
MHK technologies fail .......................................................................................................................................107
Tidal/Wave Energy Bad ......................................................................................................................... 108
Tidal Energy – fails/not effective ......................................................................................................................109
Wave Energy - fails/not effective ......................................................................................................................110
Wave Energy - fails/not effective ......................................................................................................................112
Wave Energy – won’t displace fossil fuels ........................................................................................................113
A2: Biodiversity Advantage .................................................................................................................. 114
Marine renewables kill species .........................................................................................................................115
A2: artificial “reef effect” – General answers ..................................................................................................117
A2: Marine biodiversity – General impact answers .........................................................................................118
A2: Marine Biodiversity – Alternate causes (general) ......................................................................................120
A2: Climate Change Advantage ............................................................................................................ 122
Marine renewables cannot solve/bad ..............................................................................................................123
No solvency / Emissions are not key .................................................................................................................124
Climate change impact answers .......................................................................................................................125
Alternate Causes to warming/climate change ..................................................................................................127
Offshore Wind Negative .................................................................................................... 128

Off-Case................................................................................................................................................. 129
A/I-SPEC Violations ...........................................................................................................................................130
Politics Links – GOP Hates the Plan ...................................................................................................................131
Studies CP Solvency ..........................................................................................................................................132
A2: Inherency ....................................................................................................................................... 134
The federal government is increasing offshore wind now ...............................................................................135
A2: Advantage: Economy .................................................................................................................... 136
A2: Manufacturing ...........................................................................................................................................137
A2: U.S. Key to Global Economy .......................................................................................................................138
U.S. & Global Growth High Now .......................................................................................................................139
Impacts Answers ...............................................................................................................................................140
A2: Advantage: Hurricanes.................................................................................................................. 141
A2: Hurricanes Getting Worse .........................................................................................................................142
A2: Jacobsen / The Stanford Study ..................................................................................................................143
A2: Biodiversity / Ecosystems ..........................................................................................................................144
A2: Advantage: Climate ....................................................................................................................... 147
A2: IPCC Alarmism ............................................................................................................................................148
Reducing Emissions Will Not Solve ...................................................................................................................149
CO2 Emissions Good .........................................................................................................................................150
A2: Advantage: Ocean Biodiversity ..................................................................................................... 151
A2: Biodiversity – Avian Collisions ...................................................................................................................152
A2: Biodiversity – Noise Pollution ....................................................................................................................153
A2: Solvency ......................................................................................................................................... 154
General Solvency Answers ................................................................................................................................155
Technology Fails / Too Many Barriers ...............................................................................................................156

Technology Fails / Too Many Barriers ...............................................................................................................157
No Infrastructure ..............................................................................................................................................158
Too Costly .........................................................................................................................................................159
UNCLOS NEG ..................................................................................................................... 160

Case Answers ........................................................................................................................................ 161
1NC Arctic .........................................................................................................................................................162
1NC Arctic .........................................................................................................................................................163
2NC Arctic—Status Quo Solves .........................................................................................................................164
2NC Arctic—No War .........................................................................................................................................165
1NC China..........................................................................................................................................................166
1NC China..........................................................................................................................................................167
2NC China—Can’t Solve Chinese Interpretation ...............................................................................................168
2NC China—No War ..........................................................................................................................................169
2NC China—No Escalation ................................................................................................................................170
1NC Navy...........................................................................................................................................................171
2NC Navy—Naval Power Inevitable ..................................................................................................................172
2NC Navy—Navigational Access Inev ...............................................................................................................173
2NC Navy—AT Damaging Interpretations ........................................................................................................174
CPs ......................................................................................................................................................... 175
Statutory Enactment Counterplan ....................................................................................................................176
Statutory Enactment Counterplan ....................................................................................................................177
Arctic Submarines Counterplan ........................................................................................................................178
2NC Arctic Submarines CP—Solves Arctic Drilling ............................................................................................179
Disadvantages ....................................................................................................................................... 180
Politics DA .........................................................................................................................................................181
Economy DA ......................................................................................................................................................182
Economy DA – Litigation Link ............................................................................................................................183
Economy DA – Sovereignty Link........................................................................................................................184
Economy DA – Sovereignty Link........................................................................................................................185
Constitution Disadvantage ................................................................................................................................186
Topicality ............................................................................................................................................... 187
Topicality - 1NC Exploration/Development ......................................................................................................188
China DA ........................................................................................................................... 189

1NC – China Disad .............................................................................................................................................190
1NC – China Disad .............................................................................................................................................191
1NC – China Disad .............................................................................................................................................192
Uniqueness/Brink..............................................................................................................................................193
Links- Generic....................................................................................................................................................194
Link- Oceans Key ...............................................................................................................................................195
Link Boosters .....................................................................................................................................................196
Links- Fisheries ..................................................................................................................................................197
Links- Ocean Science .........................................................................................................................................198
Links- Sea Bed Mining .......................................................................................................................................199
Link- Soft Power ................................................................................................................................................200
Internal Link – Asian Institutions.......................................................................................................................201
Internal Link – Asian Institutions.......................................................................................................................202
Impact– Asian Instability ...................................................................................................................................203
Impact- Asian Institutions- Terror & Disease ....................................................................................................204
Impact- Asian Institutions- Economy ................................................................................................................205

Impact- Containment ........................................................................................................................................206
Impact- Chinese Soft Power ..............................................................................................................................207
China Alternative Energy DA .............................................................................................. 208

Explanation .......................................................................................................................................................209
1NC China Alternative Energy DA .....................................................................................................................210
1NC China Alternative Energy DA .....................................................................................................................211
Yes Chinese Ocean Energy ................................................................................................................................212
Yes Chinese Alternative Energy ........................................................................................................................213
Yes Chinese OTEC ..............................................................................................................................................216
Link – OTEC .......................................................................................................................................................217
Link – Offshore Wind ........................................................................................................................................218
Chinese Alternative Energy Good .....................................................................................................................219
Energy Key to China Econ .................................................................................................................................220
Chinese Growth Good – US Economy ...............................................................................................................221
Chinese Growth Good – War ............................................................................................................................222
Chinese Growth Good – Taiwan .......................................................................................................................225
Chinese Growth Good – Sino-Russian War .......................................................................................................226
Chinese Growth Good – Sino-Indian War .........................................................................................................227
AT: China is Resilient ........................................................................................................................................228
Chinese S&T Good – Warming ..........................................................................................................................229
Yes China Growth + Innovation ........................................................................................................................230
No China War ....................................................................................................................................................231
Fishing Industry DA............................................................................................................ 232

1NC Fishing Industry Shell 1/2 ..........................................................................................................................233
1NC Fishing Industry Shell 2/2 ..........................................................................................................................234
Uniqueness............................................................................................................................................ 235
Commercial Fisheries Are Rebounding .............................................................................................................236
Commercial Fisheries Are Rebounding .............................................................................................................237
Economic Growth Increasing Now ....................................................................................................................238
Economic Growth Increasing Now ....................................................................................................................239
Links ...................................................................................................................................................... 240
Links – Aquaculture ...........................................................................................................................................241
Links – Marine Reserves / Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) .............................................................................242
Links – Marine Spatial Planning (MSP) ..............................................................................................................243
Links – Offshore Wind .......................................................................................................................................244
Links – Offshore Wind .......................................................................................................................................245
Links - Regulations ............................................................................................................................................246
Links - Regulations ............................................................................................................................................247
Links – Tidal / Wave Energy ..............................................................................................................................248
Links – UNCLOS (Law of the Sea Treaty) ...........................................................................................................249
Links – UNCLOS (Law of the Sea Treaty) ...........................................................................................................250
Internal Link Extension.......................................................................................................................... 251
Displacement Hurts Fishers and Income ..........................................................................................................252
Displacement Hurts Fishers and Income ..........................................................................................................253
Impacts.................................................................................................................................................. 254
Fishing is Key to the Economy ...........................................................................................................................255
Economic Decline is Disastrous .........................................................................................................................256
Economic Growth Is Good ................................................................................................................................257
Ocean Climate Change DA ................................................................................................. 258

1NC Shell-UQ.....................................................................................................................................................259
1NC Shell- Development Link ............................................................................................................................260
1NC Shell- Exploration Link ...............................................................................................................................261
1NC Shell- Impact ..............................................................................................................................................262
***UQ Ext.*** ..................................................................................................................................................263
UQ- Tipping Point ..............................................................................................................................................264
UQ- Tipping Point ..............................................................................................................................................265
UQ- Tipping Point ..............................................................................................................................................266
UQ- Structural ...................................................................................................................................................267
UQ- International Efforts Now ..........................................................................................................................268
UQ- International Efforts Now ..........................................................................................................................269
UQ- Whale Populations on Brink ......................................................................................................................270
***Link Ext.*** .................................................................................................................................................271
Exploration- Sonar ............................................................................................................................................272
Exploration- Sonar Kills Species ........................................................................................................................273
Exploration- Oil (Offshore Drilling) ...................................................................................................................274
Exploration- Natural Gas ...................................................................................................................................275
Exploration/ Production (Oil/Gas)- Noise Pollution ..........................................................................................276
Ships- Gotta Build More ....................................................................................................................................277
Ships- Burn Dirty Fuel........................................................................................................................................278
Development- General......................................................................................................................................279
Development- Oil (Offshore Drilling) ................................................................................................................280
Development- Oil (Offshore Drilling) ................................................................................................................281
Geothermal .......................................................................................................................................................282
Tourism .............................................................................................................................................................283
***Impact Ext.*** ............................................................................................................................................284
Whales- Environment- Species/ Climate Change..............................................................................................285
Whales- Environment- Laundry List ..................................................................................................................286
Whales- Economy .............................................................................................................................................287
Overfishing/ Fish loss- A/T “Species Resilient” .................................................................................................288
Overfishing/ Species Loss- “Tipping Point” .......................................................................................................289
Overfishing/ Shark Loss—Coral Reef ................................................................................................................290
Coral Reef- Laundry List ....................................................................................................................................291
Noise Pollution- Sonar ......................................................................................................................................292
Noise Pollution- Sonar ......................................................................................................................................293
Oil Production Kills Environment ......................................................................................................................294
Oil Production= Runaway Climate Change .......................................................................................................296
Ocean Acidification= Species Loss ....................................................................................................................298
Ocean Acidification= Species Loss ....................................................................................................................299
Sea Level Rise ....................................................................................................................................................300
Sea Level Rise ....................................................................................................................................................301
Oceans Prevent Human Extinction/ Turns Economy ........................................................................................302
Oceans Prevent Human Extinction/ Turns Economy ........................................................................................303
Oceans Prevent Human Extinction ...................................................................................................................304

Disad O/W Exploration .....................................................................................................................................308
Climate Change= Human Extinction .................................................................................................................309
Climate Change= Real/ Human Caused/ Extinction ..........................................................................................310
***Random Section*** ....................................................................................................................................311
A/T “Protected Zones Check Impact” ...............................................................................................................312
Offshore Drilling- Spills Inevitable.....................................................................................................................313
EU CP ................................................................................................................................ 314
EU CP – 1NC Shell ..............................................................................................................................................315
Solvency – Ocean Energy Development ...........................................................................................................316
Solvency – Indian Ocean ...................................................................................................................................317
Solvency – Pacific ..............................................................................................................................................318
Solvency – Deep Sea Fishing .............................................................................................................................319
Solvency – Maritime Security ...........................................................................................................................320
Solvency – Maritime Research ..........................................................................................................................321
Solvency – Marine Biotech................................................................................................................................322
Solvency – Marine Sensors ...............................................................................................................................323
Solvency – Biodiversity .....................................................................................................................................324
Solvency – Fines ................................................................................................................................................325
Solvency – Seabed Mapping .............................................................................................................................326
Solvency – Satellite Programs ...........................................................................................................................327
Solvency – Arctic Climate ..................................................................................................................................328
Solvency – Arctic Council/Exploration ..............................................................................................................329
2NC AT Perm .....................................................................................................................................................330
2NC AT Perm .....................................................................................................................................................331
2NC AT No Funding ...........................................................................................................................................332
2NC AT “All Show, No Action”...........................................................................................................................333
Geoengineering CP ............................................................................................................ 334

Geoengineering Explanation ................................................................................................................. 335
1NC Iron Fertilization CP ...................................................................................................................................336
Iron Fertilization Works ....................................................................................................................................337
AT: International Disagreement .......................................................................................................................338
AT: Iron Fertiliztaion Bad..................................................................................................................................339
Geoengineering Solves – Inevitable ..................................................................................................................340
Geoengineering Solves – Inevitable ..................................................................................................................341
Geoengineering Solves – Cheap........................................................................................................................342
AT: Acid Rain ....................................................................................................................................................343
AT: Monsoons ..................................................................................................................................................344
Seabasing CP ..................................................................................................................... 345

Seabasing Explanation .......................................................................................................................... 346
1NC Seabasing CP .............................................................................................................................................347
Seabasing Good – Hegemony ...........................................................................................................................348
Seabasing Outweighs Softpower ......................................................................................................................349
AT: No Capability ..............................................................................................................................................350
AT: No Capability ..............................................................................................................................................351
AT: Links to Politics ..........................................................................................................................................352
Eco Security Kritik ................................................................................................................................. 353
1NC Eco Security K ............................................................................................................................................354
1NC Eco Security K ............................................................................................................................................355

Link – Ocean Resources ....................................................................................................................................356
Link – Biodiversity .............................................................................................................................................357
Link – Eco Managerialism..................................................................................................................................358
Link – Environment ...........................................................................................................................................359
Link – Ocean Diseases .......................................................................................................................................361
Link – Climate Change .......................................................................................................................................362
Link – Energy Security .......................................................................................................................................364
Link – State Reform ...........................................................................................................................................365
Link – Law..........................................................................................................................................................366
Impact – Security Bad .......................................................................................................................................367
Impact – Turns Environment.............................................................................................................................369
Impact – Violence .............................................................................................................................................370
Impact – War ....................................................................................................................................................371
AT: Security Inevitable ......................................................................................................................................372
AT: Heg/Realism Key to Peace .........................................................................................................................373
Yes Global Violence ...........................................................................................................................................374
Alternative – Rejection .....................................................................................................................................375
Framework ........................................................................................................................................................376
Framework ........................................................................................................................................................377
Framework ........................................................................................................................................................378
AT: Perm...........................................................................................................................................................379
AT: Perm...........................................................................................................................................................380
AT: Perm...........................................................................................................................................................381
Predictions Fail ..................................................................................................................................................382
Eco Security Kritik .............................................................................................................. 383

1NC Eco Security K ............................................................................................................................................384
1NC Eco Security K ............................................................................................................................................385
Link – Ocean Resources ....................................................................................................................................386
Link – Biodiversity .............................................................................................................................................387
Link – Eco Managerialism..................................................................................................................................388
Link – Ocean Diseases .......................................................................................................................................391
Link – Energy Security .......................................................................................................................................394
Link – State Reform ...........................................................................................................................................395
Link – Law..........................................................................................................................................................396
Impact – Turns Environment.............................................................................................................................399
Impact – Violence .............................................................................................................................................400
Impact – War ....................................................................................................................................................401
AT: Security Inevitable ......................................................................................................................................402
AT: Heg/Realism Key to Peace .........................................................................................................................403
Yes Global Violence ...........................................................................................................................................404
Alternative – Rejection .....................................................................................................................................405
Framework ........................................................................................................................................................406
Framework ........................................................................................................................................................407
Framework ........................................................................................................................................................408
AT: Perm...........................................................................................................................................................409
AT: Perm...........................................................................................................................................................410
AT: Perm...........................................................................................................................................................411
Predictions Fail ..................................................................................................................................................412
Ocean Management Kritik ................................................................................................. 413

1NC Shell ...........................................................................................................................................................414
Links ...................................................................................................................................................... 418
Links – General Topic ........................................................................................................................................419
Links – Alternative / Renewable Energy ...........................................................................................................421
Links – Aquaculture (Marine) / Mariculture .....................................................................................................422
Links – “Biodiversity” / “Sustainability” Rhetoric..............................................................................................423
Links – Ecological Crisis/Security .......................................................................................................................425
Links – Fisheries Management ..........................................................................................................................428
Links – Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) / Marine Reserves .............................................................................431
Impacts.................................................................................................................................................. 433
Impacts – Biopolitics .........................................................................................................................................434
Impacts – Epistemology / Knowledge Production ............................................................................................436
Impacts – Rhetoric ............................................................................................................................................437
Impacts – Serial Policy Failure ...........................................................................................................................438
Impacts – Standing Reserve ..............................................................................................................................439
Impacts – Technological Enframing ..................................................................................................................442
Alternative Extensions .......................................................................................................................... 444
“Do Nothing” Alternative Extension .................................................................................................................445
Permutation Answers ........................................................................................................................... 447
Permutations Answers ......................................................................................................................................448
Debating on the Negative

Ben Menzies, Whitman College
Being negative on the oceans topic will require significant adaptation to the specifics of the affirmative.
Of course, this is the case on any topic, but because of the potentially drastic variability of topical
affirmatives, few generic negative arguments offer strategic paths to victory. The vast majority of
winning negative strategies will rely either on mitigating the affirmative case through an agent
counterplan or case defense and winning a small risk of a disadvantage or on simply going for a critique
of the affirmative. We will discuss how to implement several potential strategies in this section, but you
should regard all of these strategies as guidelines for further research depending on the affirmatives you
expect to debate.
Topicality
With such a massive topic, topicality seems like a natural choice for negatives to have ready.
Unfortunately, the wording of the oceans topic virtually guarantees no non-arbitrary limits to topical
affirmatives, with almost no limiting language contained in the resolution. Since few of the terms in the
resolution are even well-established in the relevant literature, negative teams will have a hard time
winning a definitive link to any topicality interpretation, making topicality an unusually difficult
proposition on this resolution. In general, then, negative teams will be best served by forwarding
substantive strategies to answer the affirmative. On the other hand, in the rare instance in which the
negative has a clear topicality objection, negatives should be guaranteed the high ground due to the
sheer size of the topic – no pushing of boundaries necessary.
Domestic actor counterplan, federal government disadvantage

In this strategy, the negative team forwards a counterplan advocating a different domestic actor
performs the mandates of the affirmative plan, with a net benefit articulating a disadvantage to the
federal government as a whole acting. This strategy is best deployed against affirmatives that
successfully isolate reasons why US actors are key but perhaps does not have a large impact upon the
international sphere, obviating the usefulness of perception disadvantages.
Potential counterplans in this setting include the 50 States counterplan, a specific federal agent
such as NOAA or the EPA, the military, or a different branch of government (specifically the courts or the
executive branch). Any of these actors can potentially implement US-specific action like the affirmative
plan while capturing the net benefit of being less controversial than the federal government. In most
cases, the decision of which counterplan to read should be based on specific solvency evidence and
which counterplan links less to the relevant disadvantage. For instance, in cases in which the affirmative
weakens federal regulations, a federal actor such as the courts or a federal agency would be superior,
while for a plan that provides economic incentives for a particular action, the states will likely be
sufficient to solve.
Disadvantages that function as net benefits in this strategy are likely to be based on the federal
government’s greater perception as a lightning rod of controversy. For instance, agenda politics
disadvantages will focus on the controversy of the plan derailing key elements of the federal lawmaking
agenda, a disadvantage that can be averted by implementing a similar policy through less perceptible
means (such as a federal agency).
International actor counterplan, domestic disadvantage

In this strategy, the negative team tests the necessity of US action by advocating that another
country or international organization performs the mandates of the plan while presenting a
disadvantage to US action. This strategy could be deployed against affirmatives that have large effects
on international geopolitics, such as by operating in international waters or conforming to international
treaties. Additionally, this strategy could be deployed against affirmatives that do actions that are not
US-specific, such as developing particular energy resources (technologies or oil drilling) that solve
problems affecting international actors (climate change or the global economy) and thus can be resolved
as easily through international actors.
Individual countries are likely to be most effective as counterplan agents for this strategy, as
most international organizations either have significant solvency problems or include the United States,
making the counterplan arguably uncompetitive. Therefore, which country to use as actor is mostly a
question of what the affirmative does. Drilling for oil may be best accomplished by a country like Canada
whereas scientific development could be best performed by wealthy, environmentally-conscious
countries in Europe that have well-established technological development records. One key to keep in
mind is that many affirmative advantages will have embedded reasons why a particular international
actor is bad; for instance, an advantage about drilling for oil in order to resolve US access to fossil fuels is
also a reason a China counterplan would probably not solve the advantage.
Disadvantages to US action are broad, although most are likely to have significant weaknesses,
making counterplan solvency important. After all, if the counterplan solves all of the affirmative,
winning any risk of the disadvantage becomes sufficient to win the debate. Any disadvantage from the
previous strategy related to federal policymaking would be acceptable, such as a US agenda politics
disadvantage or an elections disadvantage. In addition, affirmatives that are likely to trigger
international backlash would be acceptable net benefits, such as affirmatives that countries like China
could perceive as threatening their spheres of influence.
Status quo, major disadvantage

Most affirmative teams will have significant incentive to read non-controversial affirmatives that
make minimal changes to the status quo so as to avoid most disadvantage links. However, it is likely that
at least some affirmatives will be major changes to the status quo. In this case, it may be more strategic
to simply attack the case, defend the status quo, and win a large link to a sizeable disadvantage.
A good example might be a global warming disadvantage to an affirmative that drastically
increases oil production globally. If the negative can win that oil production will radically diminish in the
status quo, thus eliminating a major source of global CO2 emissions, the affirmative must merely win
that the benefits of the affirmative are insignificant. Generally, success in this strategy will depend on
the affirmative claiming a major effect on the status quo. In this case, the affirmative could be arguing
that a major increase in global oil supply is necessary to preserve the global economy, thus granting the
affirmative the necessary inroads to win an internal link to the warming disadvantage. Such an
advantage would likely outweigh any generic negative disadvantage, such as the politics disadvantage,
that relies on a counterplan to work. Negative teams should take advantage of affirmative boldness with
their own large disadvantages in the rare instances that they may link.
Critique
The critique offers a means to defeat a broad range of affirmatives without necessarily
responding to the specifics of the policy in question. On a broad topic like the oceans topic in which
direct answers to specific affirmatives may be difficult to produce and few disadvantages offer credible
links or impacts to outweigh the affirmative, critiques are a way of generating a large “disadvantage” to
the affirmative due to the existence of a problematic ontology or epistemology.
Ecological criticisms are likely to link to virtually any topical affirmative. As any affirmative will
require conceiving of the ocean as a tool to be operationalized by humans or the United States or as a
space to be conquered or colonized through exploration, critiques based on the work of Martin
Heidegger arguing against ontologies, or states of being, based on dominating nature will be persuasive.
These critiques can gain rhetorical currency by noting language used by the affirmative intended to
“improve” the environment through management, a line of thought critiqued effectively by Timothy
Luke. Furthermore, work by ecofeminists emphasizes the ways in which masculine patriarchal notions of
control over the environment, which itself is represented as feminized, reinforce patriarchy broadly in
ways that lead to daily patriarchal injustices and global planetary destruction.
Potential negative arguments

China influence disadvantage
China reacts aggressively to increased US presence in international waters, especially near China.
Biodiversity disadvantage
Increased human development of the ocean has cascading negative effects on ocean ecosystems. For
instance, oil drilling could destroy crucial marine habitats.
Tradeoff disadvantage
Increasing funding for ocean development or research necessarily trades off with other government-
funded environmental protection programs, which could potentially spur worse crises. Even if there is
no link to government budgets specifically, the market signals sent by government policy likely could
cause capital flight away from established important industries.
Economy disadvantage
Increasing protected areas or environmental protection generally could interfere with economic activity
in the ocean by making business prohibitively expensive through an explosion of “red tape,” cascading
throughout the economy.
United Nations counterplan

The United Nations implements a policy for its member countries to do similar activities to the plan,
avoiding disadvantages to US-centric action.
China counterplan
China implements a policy similar to the plan mandates, avoiding disadvantages to US infringement on
Chinese interests.
Canada counterplan
Canada implements a policy similar to the plan mandates, avoiding disadvantages to US action while
retaining most benefits to US action by having an ally implement the policy (such as access to oil).
Enforcement counterplan
Rather than developing new policies, the US could simply enforce existing regulations in more effective
manner, such as prohibitions against illegal fishing and poaching, cutting off the problem at its source
without further legislation.
Ecofeminism critique
The environment is constructed by patriarchal discourses as a feminized space in need of masculinist
“exploration” and “development,” fulfilling masculine fantasies of control and domination.
Heidegger critique
Instrumentalization of the natural environment engages in technological and calculative thinking,
making ontological reflection impossible and endorsing an emphasis on destructive piecemeal
“solutions” that merely replicate policy errors.
Imperialism critique
Representation of the US as responsible for “solving” the problems of the ocean as a whole implies that
the US owns the global ocean. This reinscribes US dominance, particularly over coastal and island
communities that are overwhelmingly victims of colonialism.
Conclusion
Unlike recent topics, negative teams must become accustomed to the idea of having multiple
“go-to” strategies highly dependent on the affirmative in question. Few good generic negative
strategies exist, and the strategies outlined above are highly dependent on the context of the debate.
Beginning by outlining answers to the affirmatives published by West Coast publishing will likely prepare
you for most genres of relevant debates on the oceans topic.
Ocean Topicality-Definitions
Resolution
Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its non-
military exploration and/or development of the Earth’s oceans.
Non-Military
Non-military excludes technologies that spillover to military use
R. Kenton Musgrave, Senior Judge in the United States Court of International Trade, 1-7-2003,
UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION v. UNITED STATES, lexis nexis
To obtain duty-free treatment, Note 3(c)(iv) states "that the imported article has been imported for use in civil aircraft, [and] that it
will be so used . . . ." (Emphasis added.) United Technologies hinges its statutory argument that the phrase "for use in civil aircraft" means that
the imported parts need not be actually installed on civil aircraft upon two premises. First, it asserts that the language of Note 3(c)(iv), that
"'civil aircraft' means
all aircraft other than aircraft purchased for use by the Department of Defense or the
United States Coast Guard," dictates that "for use in civil aircraft" merely means non-military aircraft and parts.
Second, it contends that the absence of any language explicitly mandating "installation" on an aircraft demonstrates that none is required. We
agree with Customs' interpretation that Note 3(c)(iv) requires that covered parts be used in actual flight. However, because it relies on one
subsequent Headquarters Ruling, and discusses it only in a conclusory manner, we think it is of minimal persuasive value. See Mead, 533 U.S. at
235 (stating that HN11Go to this Headnote in the case.Customs' classification ruling's power to persuade is [**12] dependent upon "the merit
of its writer's thoroughness, logic, and expertness, its fit with prior interpretations, and any other sources of weight"). As with the Agreement,
the adjective "civil" defines "civil aircraft" as non-military, but it does not affect the term "for use in civil aircraft." We need not reconstrue the
meaning of "for use in civil aircraft" because Note 3(c)(iv) is entitled "Articles Eligible for Duty-Free Treatment Pursuant to the Agreement on
Trade in Civil Aircraft," and we see no conflict between Note 3(c)(iv) and the Agreement. Thus HN12Go to this Headnote in the case.we
conclude that Note
3(c)(iv) does not accord duty-free treatment to experimental civil aircraft parts which are
not intended for installation on civil aircraft. The absence of separate "installation on an aircraft" language is irrelevant. The
phrase "that it will be so used," like "incorporation therein" from the Agreement, requires installation; United Technologies
cannot aver that the parts will be so used.
Non-military means not involving armed forces

Oxford Dictionary of American English, no date, “nonmilitary,” Oxford Dictionaries,
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/nonmilitary
Not belonging to, characteristic of, or involving the armed forces; civilian:
“the widespread destruction of nonmilitary targets”
“Military” includes the entire staff of the Department of Defense

Black’s Law Dictionary, 1990, 5th Edition, p 92 “Military”
Pertaining to war or to the army; concerned with war. Also the whole of military forces, staff, etc. under
the Department of Defense.
Exploration
Exploration means discovery – broad definitions are specifically key to education
about oceans
NOAA, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2003, quoting NOAA 2000, Exploration of
the Seas: Voyage Into the Unknown, Committee on Exploration of the Seas, National Research Council,
http://explore.noaa.gov/sites/OER/Documents/national-research-council-voyage.pdf
As defined by the President’s Panel on Ocean Exploration (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2000), exploration is
discovery through disciplined, diverse observations and the recording of findings. Ocean exploration has
included rigorous, systematic observation and documentation of the biological, chemical, physical, geological, and
archaeological aspects of the ocean in the three dimensions of space and in time. This definition of exploration is much broader than the
definition one would find, for example, within the context for the extractive industries, where exploration is a search for
hydrocarbon or mineral deposits. More general approaches allow researchers to develop and ask questions that
are not rooted in specific hypotheses and that often lead to unexpected answers — a difficult task to
promote within the current approaches to research funding.
Exploration is limited to searching for resources

Black’s Law Dictionary 1990, 5th Edition, “Exploration,” p 579
The examination and investigation of land supposed to contain valuable minerals, by drilling, boring,
sinking shafts, driving tunnels, and other means, for the purpose of discovering the presence of ore and
its extent.
Exploration is limited to searching for natural resources

Oxford English Dictionary, no date given, accessed May 4, 2014, “Exploration,”
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/exploration
1The action of searching an area for natural resources. ‘onshore oil and gas exploration’
Especially true in the context of ocean policy

Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, PL 106-580 43 U.S.C. 1301 Sec. 2, 2000,
http://www.epw.senate.gov/ocsla.pdf Accessed May 4, 2014
The term “exploration” means the process of searching for minerals, including (1) geophysical surveys
where magnetic, gravity, seismic, or other systems are used to detect or imply the presence of such
minerals, and (2) any drilling, whether on or off known geological structures, including the drilling of a
well in which a discovery of oil or natural gas in paying quantities is made and the drilling of any
additional delineation well after such discovery which is needed to delineate any reservoir and to enable
the lessee to determine whether to proceed with development and production.
And/Or
And/or means either or both – means affirmative plans must pertain to exploration or
development or both
Black’s Law Dictionary, 1990, 5th Edition, “And/Or,” p 86
“And/or” means either or both of. Poucher v. State, 287 Ala. 731, 240 So.2d 695, 695.
Development
Development means activities carrying a resource through to full scale utilization
UNESCO, United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization, 1-31-1964, “A Definition of
Natural Resources,” Conference on the Organization of Research and Training in Africa in Relation to the
Study, Conservation and Utilization of Natural Resources,
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0014/001436/143605eb.pdf
6. Stages in developing a resource. Once a natural resource of real significance to the country is recognized or discovered, whether it be a
mineral deposit, a rich soil suitable for development in cultivation, or an area of wild life and fine scenery appropriate as a national park,
there should be an unbroken sequence of scientific and technical study and operations right through to
full scale utilization. This generally includes many intermediate stages, such as small scale experiments to check
that the resource is theoretically capable of development, pilot projects to test the practicability of methods, with a special eye also
to conservation as well as to exploitation. At a later stage it is likely that economic studies will be necessary into, for instance, the
establishment of markets and the organization and costs of production. Each problem needs to be gone into as
deeply as it is necessary to solve it, but with the minimum wastage of effort, money and time.
Development means converting minerals into useable resources

The term “development” means those activities which take place following discovery of minerals in
paying quantities, including geophysical activity, drilling, platform construction, and operation of all
onshore support facilities, and which are for the purpose of ultimately producing the minerals
discovered.
Development requires international cooperation in the context of ocean policy

NOAA, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, no date, “NOAA Fisheries, International
Development,”
http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/ia/international_development/international_development.html
NOAA Fisheries has the authority to engage in international cooperation and development activities
with other countries in order to implement the Magnuson-Stevens Act. Our international development
work builds strategic partnerships with other nations , particularly with developing countries, to
promote sustainable and responsible management of fisheries and other relevant marine resources at
the national, regional, and global levels.
Oceans
Oceans can’t be under the jurisdiction of a single country
Black’s Law Dictionary, 1990, 5th Edition, p 1080
The main or open sea; the high sea; that portion of the sea which does not lie within the body of any
country and is not subject to the territorial jurisdiction or control of any country, but is open, free, and
common to the use of all nations. U.S. v. Rodgers, 150 U.S. 249, 14 S.Ct. 109, 37 L.Ed 1071. Body of salt
water that covers over 70% of earth’s surface.
There is only one ocean – the plan must affect the entire ocean
NOAA, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, revised 1-23-2014, “There is only one global
ocean,” http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/howmanyoceans.html
While there is only one global ocean , the vast body of water that covers 71 percent of the Earth is
geographically divided into distinct named regions. The boundaries between these regions have evolved
over time for a variety of historical, cultural, geographical, and scientific reasons.
Seas are distinct – not oceans

National Ocean Service, 3-25-2014, “What's the difference between an ocean and a sea?” NOAA,
http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/oceanorsea.html
Many people use the terms "ocean" and "sea" interchangeably when speaking about the ocean, but
there is a difference between the two terms when speaking of geography (the study of the Earth's
surface). Seas are smaller than oceans and are usually located where the land and ocean meet. Typically,
seas are partially enclosed by land.
Ocean Topicality Shells
1NC R&D
A. Interpretation: Development means activities carrying a resource through to full
scale utilization
UNESCO, United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization, 1-31-1964, “A Definition of
Natural Resources,” Conference on the Organization of Research and Training in Africa in Relation to the
Study, Conservation and Utilization of Natural Resources,
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0014/001436/143605eb.pdf
6. Stages in developing a resource. Once a natural resource of real significance to the country is recognized or discovered, whether it be a
mineral deposit, a rich soil suitable for development in cultivation, or an area of wild life and fine scenery appropriate as a national park,
there should be an unbroken sequence of scientific and technical study and operations right through to
full scale utilization. This generally includes many intermediate stages, such as small scale experiments to check
that the resource is theoretically capable of development, pilot projects to test the practicability of methods, with a special eye also
to conservation as well as to exploitation. At a later stage it is likely that economic studies will be necessary into, for instance, the
establishment of markets and the organization and costs of production. Each problem needs to be gone into as
deeply as it is necessary to solve it, but with the minimum wastage of effort, money and time.
B. Violation: the plan funds preliminary small-scale research
C. Standards
1. Limits explosion – allowing the affirmative to advocate any hypothetical technology
permits an infinite regression to science fiction technologies that the negative can
never be adequately prepared to debate
2. Ground – the topic calls for development – research into technologies that cannot
be utilized currently should be negative counterplan ground
D. Voter: Topicality is a voting issue – it is an a priori prima facie burden that the
affirmative team has failed to establish
1NC Its =/= NGOs

A. Interpretation: “its” refers to the United States federal government and requires
the federal government to effect a direct increase in the provision of exploration or
development
American Heritage Dictionary, 2014, 5th Edition, “its,”
http://www.ahdictionary.com/word/search.html?q=its
The possessive form of it.
B. Violation: The affirmative increases the exploration and/or development provided

by non-governmental organizations, not the United States federal government
C. Standards
1. Grammatical Precision: the meaning of the resolution can only be determined by
assessing the direct relationship between the words contained therein. It’s specifically
key to build awareness of the details of policies.
2. Ground: it is impossible for the negative to be prepared to debate about every
possible organization concerned with exploring and/or developing the ocean. Only the
federal government provides a sufficient locus for negation by being engaged in high
profile controversies and the subject of expert analysis
1NC Oceans = All

A. Interpretation – There is only one ocean – the plan must affect the entire ocean
NOAA, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, revised 1-23-2014, “There is only one global
ocean,” http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/howmanyoceans.html
While there is only one global ocean , the vast body of water that covers 71 percent of the Earth is
geographically divided into distinct named regions. The boundaries between these regions have evolved
over time for a variety of historical, cultural, geographical, and scientific reasons.
B. Violation – the affirmative only affects a part of the global ocean
C. Standards
1. Ground: the affirmative can always isolate a tiny part of the ocean in order to spike
out of all negative disadvantage links. Only creating policies that can affect all parts of
the ocean preserve negative preparation.
2. Precision: divisions between different regions of the ocean are unpredictable and
arbitrary. Only focus on the ocean as a singular mass is consistent with scientific
accuracy.
1NC Oceans International

A. Interpretation: Oceans can’t be under the jurisdiction of a single country
Black’s Law Dictionary, 1990, 5th Edition, p 1080
The main or open sea; the high sea; that portion of the sea which does not lie within the body of any
country and is not subject to the territorial jurisdiction or control of any country, but is open, free, and
common to the use of all nations. U.S. v. Rodgers, 150 U.S. 249, 14 S.Ct. 109, 37 L.Ed 1071. Body of salt
water that covers over 70% of earth’s surface.
B. Violation: the affirmative exclusively applies to waters under the jurisdiction of a

single country – the United States
C. Standards
1. Topic cohesion: compelling the affirmative to affect internationally-shared waters is
necessary in order to keep the topic’s focus international. Domestic education is
inevitable.
2. Most real world: all literature surrounding the ocean presumes the global sharing of
it. Arguments about backlash to United States encroachment on the ocean are key to
negative ground.
1NC Non-Military
A. Interpretation – Non-military excludes policies that spillover to military use
R. Kenton Musgrave, Senior Judge in the United States Court of International Trade, 1-7-2003,
UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION v. UNITED STATES, lexis nexis
To obtain duty-free treatment, Note 3(c)(iv) states "that the imported article has been imported for use in civil aircraft, [and] that it
will be so used . . . ." (Emphasis added.) United Technologies hinges its statutory argument that the phrase "for use in civil aircraft" means that
the imported parts need not be actually installed on civil aircraft upon two premises. First, it asserts that the language of Note 3(c)(iv), that
"'civil aircraft' means
all aircraft other than aircraft purchased for use by the Department of Defense or the
United States Coast Guard," dictates that "for use in civil aircraft" merely means non-military aircraft and parts.
Second, it contends that the absence of any language explicitly mandating "installation" on an aircraft demonstrates that none is required. We
agree with Customs' interpretation that Note 3(c)(iv) requires that covered parts be used in actual flight. However, because it relies on one
subsequent Headquarters Ruling, and discusses it only in a conclusory manner, we think it is of minimal persuasive value. See Mead, 533 U.S. at
235 (stating that HN11Go to this Headnote in the case.Customs' classification ruling's power to persuade is [**12] dependent upon "the merit
of its writer's thoroughness, logic, and expertness, its fit with prior interpretations, and any other sources of weight"). As with the Agreement,
the adjective "civil" defines "civil aircraft" as non-military, but it does not affect the term "for use in civil aircraft." We need not reconstrue the
meaning of "for use in civil aircraft" because Note 3(c)(iv) is entitled "Articles Eligible for Duty-Free Treatment Pursuant to the Agreement on
Trade in Civil Aircraft," and we see no conflict between Note 3(c)(iv) and the Agreement. Thus HN12Go to this Headnote in the case.we
conclude that Note
3(c)(iv) does not accord duty-free treatment to experimental civil aircraft parts which are
not intended for installation on civil aircraft. The absence of separate "installation on an aircraft" language is irrelevant. The
phrase "that it will be so used," like "incorporation therein" from the Agreement, requires installation; United Technologies
cannot aver that the parts will be so used.
And, “Military” includes the entire staff of the Department of Defense

Black’s Law Dictionary, 1990, 5th Edition, p 92 “Military”
Pertaining to war or to the army; concerned with war. Also the whole of military forces, staff, etc. under
the Department of Defense.
B. Violation – the affirmative increases ocean activities using military means
C. Standards
1. Topic cohesion – the topic wording specifically prohibits military applications of
topical activity. Allowing affirmatives to claim advantages or solvency based on
military action opens the floodgates to an entirely different topic.
2. Predictable limits – the negative can only predict civilian policies based on the
resolution. Military oceans policy is an entirely different body of literature. Allowing
the affirmative to access that precludes negative preparation and steals negative
counterplan ground.
1NC USFG = Not International Treaties

A. The United States federal government is the government in Washington D.C.
Encarta Online Encyclopedia 2K http://encarta.msn.com
“The federal government of the United States is centered in Washington DC”
B. Violation: the affirmative advocates action by governments other than the national
government of the United States. [x] treaty requires other governments to act.
C. Standards
1. Ground: destroys all negative preparation – nearly every country on Earth has
ocean policies that can be modified and each of those can exist in any organization.
Makes it impossible for negative teams to adequately prepare for non-US ocean
policies. Also, those countries should be negative counterplan ground.
2. Illogical: No American policymaker can make other countries’ policies – forces

illogical advocacies. Policy debate should model the most accurate form of real world
policymaking.
3. At best, they are extra-topical – they advocate non-topical action in addition to

topical action. This is just non-topicality in disguise – it justifies infinite regression to
non-topical affirmatives that include a negligible topical component.
1NC International Cooperation

A. Interpretation: Development requires international cooperation in the context of
ocean policy
NOAA, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, no date, “NOAA Fisheries, International
Development,”
http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/ia/international_development/international_development.html
NOAA Fisheries has the authority to engage in international cooperation and development activities
with other countries in order to implement the Magnuson-Stevens Act. Our international development
work builds strategic partnerships with other nations , particularly with developing countries, to
promote sustainable and responsible management of fisheries and other relevant marine resources at
the national, regional, and global levels.
B. Violation: the affirmative only increases development within the United States
C. Standards
1. Topical education: this topic offers a unique window into international cooperation.
The affirmative averts all of that education in order to focus on the same tired U.S.-
centered policy disputes on yet another topic.
2. Ground: all controversy related to oceans policy is inherently written in the context
of international cooperation. The affirmative artificially skews out of that debate in
order to avoid all negative arguments related to the actions of other countries. That
makes it impossible for us to negate
1NC Exploration Means New

A. Exploration means discovery – this is specifically key to education about oceans
NOAA, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2003, quoting NOAA 2000, Exploration of
the Seas: Voyage Into the Unknown, Committee on Exploration of the Seas, National Research Council,
http://explore.noaa.gov/sites/OER/Documents/national-research-council-voyage.pdf
As defined by the President’s Panel on Ocean Exploration (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2000), exploration is
discovery through disciplined, diverse observations and the recording of findings. Ocean exploration has
included rigorous, systematic observation and documentation of the biological, chemical, physical, geological, and
archaeological aspects of the ocean in the three dimensions of space and in time. This definition of exploration is much broader than the
definition one would find, for example, within the context for the extractive industries, where exploration is a search for
hydrocarbon or mineral deposits. More general approaches allow researchers to develop and ask questions that
are not rooted in specific hypotheses and that often lead to unexpected answers — a difficult task to
promote within the current approaches to research funding.
B. Violation – the affirmative only increases activity in already-known regions

C. Standards
1. Education – the entire literature base surrounding exploration presumes a search
for new discoveries – they skirt all education about presently unknown parts of the
ocean
2. Ground – their interpretation guarantees them better solvency evidence than the
resolution should give access. Of course they have good evidence about the things the
plan might research – it only researches things that are already known – the point of
exploration is the possibility of the unknown!
1NC Development Is Minerals

A. Interpretation: Development means converting minerals into useable resources
The term “development” means those activities which take place following discovery of minerals in
paying quantities, including geophysical activity, drilling, platform construction, and operation of all
onshore support facilities, and which are for the purpose of ultimately producing the minerals
discovered.
B. Violation: the plan develops [x] – it doesn’t change minerals into a useable resource
C. Standards
1. Precision: only adhering to precise definitions of terms in the context of the
resolution ensures debates about salient policy issues in a narrow range of good
arguments.
2. Education: debate over oceans policy can only be relevant insofar as it is focused on
the resources that are part of the ocean – any other interpretation justifies an
unlimited topic with no negative ground.
Biodiversity of Ocean Fine
General Biodiversity
Biodiversity High Now

No major biodiversity decline – species loss offset by new species.
David Biello, Environment and Energy Editor at Scientific American, April 20, 2014, 60-second earth,
http://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode/biodiversity-survives-extinctions-for-now1/
(accessed 5/4/14)
We are living during what seem to be the opening stages of the sixth mass extinction in our planet's 4.5 billion year history. Species of birds,
fish, mammals and plants are disappearing at speeds rarely experienced, thanks in large part to human activities: pollution,
climate change, habitat destruction and other damage. But extinction apparently does not mean less biodiversity—at
least not yet. A new look at ecosystems from the poles to the tropics shows that losses in the number of
species in any given place do not yet translate to large changes in the overall number of different
species there. The study is in the journal Science. [Maria Dornelas et al, Assemblage Time Series Reveal Biodiversity Change but Not
Systematic Loss] The researchers analyzed 100 surveys that followed more than 35,000 different species over
various lengths of time. These long-term studies found that the number of different species in, say, a coral
reef remains relatively constant. Because the loss of a species, either locally or entirely, is often balanced by
the arrival of a new species. The meta-analysis showed that 40 percent of places had more species present, 40 percent had less and
20 percent were unchanged. In other words, the ecosystems of the current Anthropocene era are transformed,
but just as diverse—so far anyway. We are living in a world of novel ecosystems.
Predictions of species loss are highly speculative – don’t account for acclimation.
Craig Moritz, Research School of Biology and Centre for Biodiversity Analysis, The Australian National
University, and Rosa Agudo, The Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization
Ecosystem Sciences Division, August 2, 2013, Science,
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/341/6145/504.full (accessed 5/4/2014)
The actual predictions of effects on species persistence are often dire, however. For example, one prominent
analysis predicted that 15 to 37% of species would be endangered or extinct by 2050 (3). Another predicts more
than a 50% loss of climatic range by 2080 for some 57% of widespread species of plants and 34% of animals (4). Montane taxa are expected to
lose range area as they shift upward with warming. Again, predicted effects are catastrophic (43–45) and could be even worse for the highly
endemic biotas of tropical montane forests if the cloud base lifts (46). For the tropical lowlands, high levels of species attrition are predicted
because of narrower physiological tolerances (47) and a high velocity of change due to shallow temperature gradients (48). Reduction of
species ranges is expected to result in substantial loss of geographically structured genetic variation, perhaps including cryptic taxa (49, 50).
Yet, we must acknowledge the level of uncertainty of these predictions and the possibility that these
models are overestimating extinction risk. Future models should be improved by incorporating key
parameters such as finer-scale topographic heterogeneity (18), interaction of biotic (51, 52) and other
anthropogenic factors (7, 45, 53), species physiological constraints and plastic acclimation capacity (39), as
well as demographic processes [see for instance, the recent findings of Reed et al. (54) in a wild population in which density-
dependent compensation counteracts the reduced fledgling rates due to phenological mismatch provoked by climate change].
De-extinction solves impacts

De-extinction solves species loss impacts.
George Church, professor of genetics at Harvard Medical School and director of the National Institutes
of Health Center of Excellence in Genomic Science at Harvard, August 20, 2013, Scientific American,
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/george-church-de-extinction-is-a-good-idea/ (accessed
5/4/2014)
“De-extinction” is not a novel idea. Medical researchers have resurrected the full genomes of the human
endogenous retrovirus HERV-K and the 1918 influenza virus. Insight into these reanimated species could save millions of
lives. Several other extinct genes, including for mammoth hemoglobin, have been reconstructed and tested for
novel properties. Moving from these few genes to most of the 20,000 or so in a bird or mammalian
genome may not be necessary, and even if it is, it may not be hard to do. The costs for a variety of
relevant technologies are low—and dropping. Breeding animals and raising them until there are
sufficient numbers to release into the wild is an ambitious undertaking, but the expense should be
comparable to breeding livestock or preserving other endangered wildlife. These costs could be reduced
if we used genetic means to improve the species we revive—boosting their immunity and fertility and
their ability to draw nutrition from available food and to cope with environmental stress. Aside from
bringing back extinct species, reanimation could help living ones by restoring lost genetic diversity. The
Tasmanian devil (aka Sarcophilus harrisii) is so inbred at this point that most species members can exchange tumor cells without rejection. A
rare transmissible cancer spread via facial wounds is driving the species toward extinction. Reanimating ancestral, diverse Sarcophilus
histocompatibility genes, which govern tissue rejection, could save it. Similar
arguments could be made for amphibians,
cheetahs, corals and other groups. Ancient genes could make them more tolerant of chemicals, heat,
infection and drought. Reanimation is not a panacea for ecosystems at risk. Preventing ongoing extinction of elephants, rhinoceroses
and other threatened species is critically important. By all means, we must set priorities for allocating finite conservation resources. But it is a
mistake to look at this issue as a zero-sum game. Just
as a new vaccine can free up medical resources that would
otherwise be spent on sick patients, reanimation may be able to help conservationists by giving them
powerful new tools. That this is even a possibility is reason enough to explore it seriously.
Criticisms are wrong – de-extinction leads to habitat protection and thriving species.
Adam Welz, environmental blogger for the Guardian, June 7, 2013, The Guardian,
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/nature-up/2013/jun/07/deextinction-critics-scientific-
american (accessed 5/5/2014)
If scientists bring back long-extinct, charismatic species, does anyone seriously think that politicians
would stand in the way of allowing them to thrive? People are strongly drawn to miraculous stories of
resurrection (Jesus of Nazareth has more than a few fans) and de-extinction could, if framed and conducted correctly, bring
new awareness to extinction and habitat protection. Perhaps the strongest argument for resurrection
biology is that it allows wildlife conservationists to push forward against the onslaught of extinction, in
some sense to win back territory that has been lost, to engage in restoration, rejuvenation and
rewilding. How long can an army remain motivated if it's never allowed to advance, if it's only allowed to hold the line or, step by painful
step, retreat?
No Extinction
Species loss won’t cause human extinction.
Holly Doremus, Professor of Law, University of California at Davis, 2000, Washington and Lee Law
Review, http://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1311&context=wlulr
(accessed 5/5/2014)
Reluctant to concede such losses, tellers of the ecological horror story highlight how close a catastrophe might
be, and how little we know about what actions might trigger one. But the apocalyptic vision is less
credible today than it seemed in the 1970s. Although it is clear that the earth is experiencing a mass wave of
extinctions, the complete elimination of life on earth seems unlikely. Life is remarkably robust. Nor is
human extinction probable any time soon. Homo sapiens is adaptable to nearly any environment. Even
ifthe world of the future includes far fewer species, it likely will hold people.
Species loss doesn’t threaten human extinction.

Thomas Gale Moore, Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, 1998, Climate of Fear,
http://www.stanford.edu/~moore/Climate_of_Fear.pdf (accessed 5/5/14)
Nevertheless, the loss of a class of living beings does not typically threaten other species. Most animals and
plants can derive their nutrients or receive the other benefits provided by a particular species from
more than a single source. If it were true that the extinction of a single species would produce a cascade
of losses, then the massive extinctions of the past should have wiped out all life. Evolution forces various
life forms to adjust to change. A few may not make the adaptation but others will mutate to meet the
new conditions. Although a particular chain of DNA may be eliminated through the loss of a species, other animals or plants
adapting to the same environment often produce similar genetic solutions with like proteins. It is almost
impossible to imagine a single species that, if eliminated, would threaten us humans. Perhaps if the E. coli that
are necessary for digestion became extinct, we could no longer exist. But those bacteria live in a symbiotic relationship with man and, as long as
humans survive, so will they. Thus any animal that hosts a symbiotic species need not fear the loss of its partner. As long as the host remains, so
will parasites and symbiotic species.
AT: Keystone Species

No individual species is key and plan insufficient to solve.
Holly Doremus, Professor of Law, University of California at Davis, 2000, Washington and Lee Law
Review, http://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1311&context=wlulr
(accessed 5/5/2014)
Another response drops the horrific ending and returns to a more measured discourse of the many material benefits nature provides humanity.
Even these more plausible tales, though, suffer from an important limitation. They call for nature protection only at a high level of generality.
For example, human-induced increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide levels may cause rapid changes in global temperatures in the near future,
with drastic consequences for sea levels, weather patterns, and ecosystem services. Similarly, the
loss of large numbers of species
undoubtedly reduces the genetic library from which we might in the future draw useful resources. But it
is difficult to translate these insights into convincing arguments against any one of the small local
decisions that contribute to the problems of global warming or biodiversity loss." It is easy to argue that
the material impact of any individual decision to increase carbon emissions slightly or to destroy a small amount of
habitat will be small. It is difficult to identify the specific straw that will break the camel's back.
Furthermore, no unilateral action at the local or even national level can solve these global problems. Local
decisionmakers may feel paralyzed by the scope of the problems, or may conclude that any sacrifices they might make will go unrewarded if
others do not restrain their actions. In sum, at
the local level at which most decisions affecting nature are made, the
material discourse provides little reason to save nature. Short of the ultimate catastrophe, the material benefits of
destructive decisions frequently will exceed their identifiable material costs.
No specific species key – ecosystems adapt.

Mark Sagoff, researcher for the Institute of Philosophy and Public Policy at the University of Maryland,
June 1997, The Atlantic, https://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs/issues/97jun/consume.htm (accessed
5/5/14)
There is no credible argument, moreover, that all or even most of the species we are concerned to protect
are essential to the functioning of the ecological systems on which we depend. (If whales went extinct, for
example, the seas would not fill up with krill.) David Ehrenfeld, a biologist at Rutgers University, makes this point in
relation to the vast ecological changes we have already survived. "Even a mighty dominant like the
American chestnut," Ehrenfeld has written, "extending over half a continent, all but disappeared
without bringing the eastern deciduous forest down with it." Ehrenfeld points out that the species most likely to be
endangered are those the biosphere is least likely to miss. "Many of these species were never common or ecologically influential; by no
stretch of the imagination can we make them out to be vital cogs in the ecological machine."
Ocean-Specific Impacts
Oceans Alt Cause – Climate Change

No solvency - Climate change driving ocean destruction.
Angel Borja, PhD in Marine Biology and Head of Projects in Marine Research Division at AZTI-Tecnalia,
February 12, 2014, Frontiers, http://journal.frontiersin.org/Journal/10.3389/fmars.2014.00001/full
(accessed 5/4/14)
Sea waters are getting warmer, sea-level rise is accelerating and the oceans are becoming increasingly
acidic (Stocker et al., 2013). From a database of 1735 marine biological responses to global change,
Poloczanska et al. (2013) determined that 81–83% of all observations for distribution, phenology, community composition,
abundance, demography and calcification across taxa and ocean basins were consistent with the expected impacts
of climate change on marine life (Richardson et al., 2012). As there is an insufficient understanding of the
capacity for marine organisms to adapt to rapid climate change, Munday et al. (2013) emphasize that an evolutionary
perspective is crucial to understanding climate change impacts on our seas and to examine the approaches that may be useful for addressing
this challenge.
Even if you solve human causes, warming makes ocean ecosystem destruction
inevitable.
Jelle Bijma et al, Alfred-Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research, 2013, Marine Pollution
Bulletin, http://www.stateoftheocean.org/pdfs/Bijma-et-al-2013.pdf (accessed 5/4/14)
Although the human-induced pressures of overexploitation and habitat destruction are the main causes
of recently observed extinctions (Dulvy et al., 2009) climate change is increasingly adding to this. Changes in
ocean temperatures, chemistry and currents mean that many organisms will find themselves in
unsuitable environments, potentially testing their ability to survive. Adaptation is one means of accommodating
environmental change, migration is another. However, global warming asks for a poleward migration whereas ocean
acidification would require an equatorward migration as colder waters acidify faster. Hence, the ‘‘green pastures’’
become scarce and will experience stronger competition. The recent IUCN Red List Assessment on
shallow-water reef-forming corals identified a dramatically increased threat to these organisms posed
by the climate change effect of mass coral bleaching (Carpenter et al., 2008). Habitat suitability modelling has also identified
a threat to deep-water corals from the shoaling of the aragonite saturation horizon, a further symptom of ocean acidification (Tittensor et al.,
2010). There are observed trends for some species shifting ranges polewards and into deeper, cooler
waters (Reid et al., 2009), but range shifts within short time frames may be unlikely for many species, such as
long-lived, slow growing, sessile habitat-forming species, leading to increased extinction risk. In the case of
coastal species, a poleward-shift in distribution may be limited by geography as organisms simply ‘‘run out’’
of coastline to migrate along and are faced with a major oceanic barrier to dispersal. Modelling studies
have also indicated the likelihood of range shifts, extinctions and invasions in commercial marine species
resulting from ocean warming with serious implications in terms of food security, especially for developing states
(Cheung et al., 2010). In the present paper we examine the current and potential future impacts of global climate change through temperature
rise, ocean acidification and increasing hypoxia, 3 symptoms of carbon pertubations. Carbon pertubations have occurred before in Earth history
and have left their fingerprints in the geological archive. We examine these changes in the light of the palaeontological record to see if there
are comparisons to be made to historical climate change and mass extinction.
Oceans Alt Cause – Climate Change

Climate change makes ocean destruction inevitable.
Environment News Service, October 18, 2013, http://ens-newswire.com/2013/10/18/climate-
change-to-cause-massive-ocean-damage-by-2100/ (accessed 5/4/14)
By the year 2100, about 98 percent of the oceans will be affected by acidification, warming
temperatures, low oxygen, or lack of biological productivity, and most areas will be hit by a multitude of
these stressors, finds a new study of the impacts of climate change on the world’s ocean systems. These
biogeochemical changes triggered by human-generated greenhouse gas emissions will not only affect marine
habitats and organisms, but will often also occur in areas that are heavily used by humans, concludes
the international team of 28 scientists. “When you look at the world ocean, there are few places that will be free of changes;
most will suffer the simultaneous effects of warming, acidification, and reductions in oxygen and productivity,” said lead author Camilo Mora,
an assistant professor at the Department of Geography at the University of Hawaii at Manoa. “The
consequences of these co-
occurring changes are massive – everything from species survival, to abundance, to range size, to body
size, to species richness, to ecosystem functioning are affected by changes in ocean biogeochemistry,”
said Mora.
New Regulations Solve Oceans

New treaty will solve ocean impacts.
Thalif Deen, UN Bureau Chief and Regional Director IPS North America, April 3, 2014, Inter Press
Service, http://www.ipsnews.net/2014/04/u-n-aims-treaty-protect-marine-biodiversity/ (accessed
5/4/14)
UNITED NATIONS, Apr 3 2014 (IPS) - At a political level, when the United Nations speaks of a “high seas alliance”, it is probably a coalition of
countries battling modern piracy in the Indian Ocean. But at
the environmental level, the High Seas Alliance (HSA) is a
partnership of more than 27 non-governmental organisations (NGOs), plus the International Union for the Conservation of
Nature (IUCN), fighting for the preservation of marine biodiversity. As a U.N. working group discusses a
proposed “international mechanism” for the protection of oceans, the HSA says high seas and the
international seabed area, which make up about 45 percent of the surface of the planet, “are brimming with biodiveristy
and vital resources.” But they are under increasing pressure from threats such as overfishing, habitat destruction and the impacts of
climate change. The HSA has expressed its strong support for negotiations to develop a new agreement to
establish a legal regime to safeguard biodiversity in the high seas. Any such treaty or convention will be a new
implementing agreement under the 1994 U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). The Working Group, which is expected to conclude
its four-day meeting Friday, says it is at a critical juncture of its work, and discussions
are expected to continue into the future.
“The next three meetings present a clear opportunity to try and overcome remaining differences and to
crystallise the areas of convergence into concrete action,” U.N. Legal Counsel Miguel de Serpa Soares said in his
opening remarks Monday.
New US executive policy solves ocean policy.

Allison Winter, writer for Greenwire, September 18, 2009, New York Times,
http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2009/09/18/18greenwire-broad-ocean-conservation-goals-pose-
significan-24019.html?pagewanted=all (accessed 5/5/2014)
The report includes a set of recommendations for implementation, with more detail and strategy than
many marine advocates had expected. For example, Zeitlin Hale was encouraged by the specific requirements
for the new interagency ocean council, which must meet several times a year to review whether agency
actions are in line with the ocean policy. It is significant that Obama's team started the ocean policy
recommendations so early in the administration, she said, indicating that the oceans are a high priority to
Obama's environment team and giving the administration time to try to put the words into action. "These are major steps
forward," Zeitlin Hale added. The council builds on a similar committee developed in the Bush administration but adds a host of new
requirements and goals for the panel. Top-level officials must meet at least twice a year, with more frequent staff-level
meetings. The council is supposed to create "sustained high-level engagement" within the federal
government on ocean stewardship, according to the report.
AT: Ocean Ecosystems/Biodiversity

Marine reserves solve biodiversity.
New York Times, December 3, 2013, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/04/opinion/sustaining-
resilience-at-sea.html?_r=0 (accessed 5/4/2014)
New research indicates that marine reserves may have an even greater importance than scientists previously
supposed. A study recently published in Nature Climate Change found that marine reserves do more than merely
shelter species that live within them. By enhancing the resilience of marine communities, reserves help
ward off some of the effects of climate change, including invasion by species from warmer waters. The
study was based on research conducted at the Maria Island Marine Reserve, just off the coast of Tasmania. Though the reserve was only
established in 1991, data on marine life there had been collected for more than 70 years. Comparing
the reserve’s ecosystem
with similar but unprotected waters where fishing was allowed, scientists found greater long-term and
short-term stability. The overall health of the ecosystem helped create what the authors of the study
called “a feedback mechanism to promote stability.” The scientists found a substantial increase in the
number of large-bodied fish and much less fluctuation, year to year, in the population of smaller fish.
AT: Overfishing
Overfishing claims exaggerated – new research proves studies are flawed.
Felicity Barringer, Environmental reporter for the New York Times, May 1, 2011, New York Times,
http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/05/01/one-fish-two-fish-false-ish-true-ish/ (accessed 5/5/2014)
Two University of Washington scientists have just published a study in the journal Conservation Biology in
collaboration with colleagues from Rutgers University and Dalhousie University arguing that the gloomiest predictions about
the world’s fisheries are significantly exaggerated. The new study takes issue with a recent estimate that
70 percent of all stocks have been harvested to the point where their numbers have peaked and are
now declining, and that 30 percent of all stocks have collapsed to less than one-tenth of their former numbers. Instead, it finds
that at most 33 percent of all stocks are over-exploited and up to 13 percent of all stocks have collapsed.
It’s not that fisheries are in great shape, said Trevor Branch, the lead author of the new study; it’s just that they are not
as badly off as has been widely believed. In 2006, a study in the journal Science predicted a general collapse in global fisheries by
2048 if nothing were done to stem the decline.
US protections already solve areas we control.

Jane Lubchenco, Valley Chair in Marine Biology at Oregon State University, February 3, 2014, UN
Sustainable Development Goals—Oceans & Seas, Biodiversity and Forests Keynote,
http://www.icsu.org/science-for-policy/sustainable-development-goals-
1/pdfs/OWG8_Oceans_Jane_Lubchenco.pdf (accessed 5/4/14)
Countries that have mandated that overfishing end and depleted stocks be rebuilt are demonstrating
that remarkable progress is possible and can bring rich rewards. After decades of overfishing, the U.S.
has turned the corner in ending overfishing. It now has management plans in place for every one of the
fisheries the U.S. manages. Each plan includes annual catch limits and accountability measures. And with
assistance of fishermen, the tough measures are working. The number of overfished species continues to
decline and over 30 previously depleted fisheries have been rebuilt since 2000, with most of those in rebuilt the last
few years.
AT: Coral Reefs

Alternate causality - Climate change causing irreversible coral reef destruction.
Jelle Bijma et al, Alfred-Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research, 2013, Marine Pollution
Bulletin, http://www.stateoftheocean.org/pdfs/Bijma-et-al-2013.pdf (accessed 5/4/14)
The appearance of the ‘‘deadly trio’’ of risk factors, ocean warming, acidification and deoxygenation are
all consequences of a perturbation of the carbon cycle (fast release of carbon dioxide and/or methane) and are a
major cause of concern. Historically these factors have combined to contribute to mass extinction
events. The present rate of change is unprecedented. Perhaps most worrying is that this is happening to ecosystems that
are already undermined by many man-made stressors such as overfishing, eutrophication and pollution (Harnik et al., 2013). To re-emphasize
one example, the
combination of temperature rise, increased frequency and intensity of extreme events
and acidification may irreversibly destroy coral reefs, the most species-rich ecosystems in the ocean,
within 50–100 years (Veron et al., 2009).
Biorock regeneration solves coral reefs.

Eoghan Macguire, staff writer, January 26, 2012, CNN,
http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/26/world/biorock-coral-regeneration/index.html (accessed 5/5/2014)
A little over ten years ago the coral reefs of Pemuteran Bay in Bali, Indonesia, were in a state of terminal
decay. Fishing with dynamite and cyanide, untreated sewage and rising water temperatures had all pushed the reefs, and life they supported,
close to the limit. "Tourist numbers fell due to destruction of dive and snorkeling sites (while) fishermen had to go further and fish longer for
less catch. Hunger was a real threat," says Narayana Randall Dodge, project manager of the Pemuteran Coral Regeneration project. The fact
that the reef also acted as a natural flood barrier increased the town's exposure to coastal erosion from rising sea levels, he adds. Today
however, Pemuteran Bay's coral reefs are once again teeming with life thanks to Biorock -- an
electrically-powered coral reef growing scheme. Coral is placed on underwater electrified steel frames
that are connected to a power source on land. The electrification speeds up a process called "mineral
accretion" that helps damaged corals grow and repair themselves. "Living corals are carefully collected
and transplanted onto the structures by attaching with wires or wedged between (electric) steel bars," says Narayana The
project has been so successful that not only has it preserved the reef and surrounding marine ecosystem
but it has also become a tourist attraction in its own right, says Narayana.
AT: Ocean Acidification

Studies prove acidification threat is alarmist hype.
Rupert Darwall, Consulting Director at the White House Writers Group, February 14, 2014, Wall Street
Journal, http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304558804579376823612993090
(accessed 5/4/14)
The current crisis is supposedly ocean acidification, a term for a reduction in alkalinity coined more for its
public-relations value than its accuracy. A marine biologist known for his extreme views on coral survival tells Ms. Kolbert that
Australia's Great Barrier Reef will be reduced to rubble by 2050. Yet an unmentioned 2010 meta-analysis of 372 papers—
the most comprehensive analysis of experimental studies of the topic—concluded that marine biota are
"more resistant to ocean acidification than suggested by pessimistic predictions identifying ocean
acidification as a major threat to marine biodiversity," a distinctly less alarming conclusion than Ms. Kolbert's.
Acidification threats exaggerated – new studies prove.

Matt Ridley, writer with DPhil in Zoology and former visiting professor at Cold Spring Harbor
Laboratory, January 7, 2012, Wall Street Journal,
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052970203550304577138561444464028 (accessed
5/5/2014)
But do the scientific data support such alarm? Last month scientists at San Diego's Scripps Institution of
Oceanography and other authors published a study showing how much the pH level (measuring alkalinity versus
acidity) varies naturally between parts of the ocean and at different times of the day, month and year. "On
both a monthly and annual scale, even the most stable open ocean sites see pH changes many times larger than
the annual rate of acidification," say the authors of the study, adding that because good instruments to
measure ocean pH have only recently been deployed, "this variation has been under-appreciated." Over
coral reefs, the pH decline between dusk and dawn is almost half as much as the decrease in average pH
expected over the next 100 years. The noise is greater than the signal. Another recent study, by scientists
from the U.K., Hawaii and Massachusetts, concluded that "marine and freshwater assemblages have always
experienced variable pH conditions," and that "in many freshwater lakes, pH changes that are orders of
magnitude greater than those projected for the 22nd-century oceans can occur over periods of hours."
This adds to other hints that the ocean-acidification problem may have been exaggerated. For a start,
the ocean is alkaline and in no danger of becoming acid (despite headlines like that from Reuters in 2009: "Climate Change
Turning Seas Acid"). If the average pH of the ocean drops to 7.8 from 8.1 by 2100 as predicted, it will still be
well above seven, the neutral point where alkalinity becomes acidity.
US China No Conflict
No Conflict - General
Interdependence ensures US/China conflict is limited
Chen Weihua, Staff Writer, January 6, 2014,“China-US relations can go to a whole new level in 2014”,
http://usa.chinadaily.com.cn/epaper/2014-01/06/content_17218238.htm, Accessed 4/28/14
To Cui Tiankai, China's ambassador to the United States, China-US relations are like a big ship that will continue to forge
ahead despite occasional stormy seas ahead. The two countries marked the 35th anniversary of their diplomatic ties this
month, a milestone Cui described as "an event of great international significance". The US announced on Dec 15, 1978, it would sever
diplomatic ties with Taiwan and establish diplomatic ties with the People's Republic of China.¶ In Cui's view,
China-US relations have
always been based on shared interests, from the initial strategic security needs to the present
broadening and deepening shared interests in bilateral, regional and global issues. "Great changes have
taken place in the world, in China and in the United States in the past 35 years, but our bilateral
relationship has generally kept its momentum moving forward," Cui told a press briefing on Friday in Washington.¶
Both nations have benefitted from the relationship. While bilateral trade each year has grown from almost
non-existence in the 1970s to approaching $500 billion, China and the US have become ever more intertwined in
almost every field.
No conflict – China prioritizes stability

Robert Sutter, Professor of International Affairs at George Washington University, March 19, 2014,
“China-U.S. Focus, Why China Avoids Confronting the U.S. in Asia,”
http://www.chinausfocus.com/foreign-policy/why-china-avoids-confronting-the-u-s-in-asia-2/, accessed
4/22/14
Forecasts talk of U.S. retreat from domineering China or an inevitable U.S.-China conflict. However, enduring circumstances hold
back Chinese leaders from confronting America, the regional leader.¶ Domestic preoccupations Chinese economic
growth and one-party rule require stability. And protecting Chinese security and sovereignty remains a
top concern. Though China also has regional and global ambitions, domestic concerns get overall
priority.
Nuclear deterrence checks US/China conflict

Keck 13 (Zachary – Assistant Editor of The Diplomat, 7/12, “Why China and the US (Probably) Won’t Go
to War”, The Diplomat, http://thediplomat.com/flashpoints-blog/2013/07/12/why-china-and-the-us-
probably-wont-go-to-war/)
But while trade cannot be relied upon to keep the peace, a U.S.-China war is virtually unthinkable because of two other
factors: nuclear weapons and geography. The fact that both the U.S. and China have nuclear weapons is
the most obvious reasons why they won’t clash, even if they remain fiercely competitive. This is because war
is the continuation of politics by other means, and nuclear weapons make war extremely bad politics. Put differently, war is fought in
pursuit of policy ends, which cannot be achieved through a total war between nuclear-armed states. This
is not only because of nuclear weapons destructive power. As Thomas Schelling outlined brilliantly, nuclear weapons have not actually
increased humans destructive capabilities. In fact, there is evidence to suggest that wars between nomads usually ended with the victors
slaughtering all of the individuals on the losing side, because of the economics of holding slaves in nomadic “societies.” What makes nuclear
weapons different, then, is not just their destructive power but also the certainty and immediacy of it. While extremely ambitious or desperate
leaders can delude themselves into believing they can prevail in a conventional conflict with a stronger adversary because of any number of
factors—superior will, superior doctrine, the weather etc.— none of this matters in nuclear war. With nuclear weapons, countries don’t have to
prevail on the battlefield or defeat an opposing army to destroy an entire country, and since
there are no adequate defenses for
a large-scale nuclear attack, every leader can be absolute certain that most of their country can be
destroyed in short-order in the event of a total conflict
No Conflict – East China Sea
ADIZ won’t provoke East China Sea conflict

As the largest developing nation and the largest developed nation with different histories, cultures, traditions and social systems, it
is
inevitable that China and the US have differences and even frictions, according to Cui."But both sides have
been working hard to find convergence of shared interest and effective ways to manage the
differences," he said. "Various mechanisms to facilitate communications and dialogue have been set up."
Cui dismissed the hype over China's announcement in November of the East China Sea Air Defense
Identification Zone as being an issue of major difference between the two nations. China only added itself to a
long list of ADIZs announced a long time ago by countries including the US. "The two sides have open lines of
communication," he said.¶ For Cui, reviewing the past 35 years of China-US relations provides very beneficial lessons on how to push the
relationship forward in the future.
China is bluffing – no conflict risk in East China Sea

Perry Chiaramonte, Staff Writer, February 19, 2014, “China preps military for 'short, sharp war' with
Japan, US Navy analyst says,” Fox News, http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/02/19/china-preps-
military-for-short-sharp-war-with-japan-says-us-navy/, accessed 4/20/13
The Chinese have conducted training exercises aimed at Taiwan for decades--but haven't invaded,” Peters,
also a Fox News military analyst, told FoxNews.com. “The latest Chinese exercises that appear to rehearse an invasion of
the Senkaku Islands are probably in that vein: Military exercises as a show of strength, a closed-fist tool
of diplomacy, and, yes, a threat, but not one on which Beijing really desires to act.” Peters adds that the
exercises are likely China’s attempt at posturing.¶ “At present, China would have a great deal to lose by
attacking or otherwise provoking a confrontation with Japan,” he said. “At the same time, the Chinese feel they're the regional
(and global) rising power and they rather enjoy flexing their muscles. You might say they're proud of their
physique, but don't really want a fight. In that sense, these exercises are a strategic ‘selfie.’”
Interdependence checks East China Sea conflict

Justin McCurry, Econ and Japanese Studies from London University, February 5, 2014, “Why will Japan
and China avoid conflict? They need each other,” Christian Science Monitor,
http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia-Pacific/2014/0205/Why-will-Japan-and-China-avoid-conflict-
They-need-each-other, accessed 4/22/14
Despite dark allusions to Germany and Britain in 1914, the two powers' economies are deeply intertwined, and
Japanese doing business in China are guardedly optimistic. One of the most striking warnings that Sino-Japanese tensions
could descend into conflict came from none other than Japan’s prime minister, Shinzo Abe. Speaking at the recent World Economic Forum in
Davos, Abe suggested that Japan’s relationship with China was in a “similar situation” to that between Britain and Germany before the
outbreak of World War I in 1914. The most common interpretation: that close economic ties between nations are not always enough to
prevent them from going to war with each other.¶ Japanese officials insisted that Mr. Abe’s comments, as reported by some foreign media, had
been taken out of context. But his analogy raises an important question about the ongoing territorial dispute between Japan and China:
whether strong
bilateral trade will be enough to pull them back from the brink or, at the very least, help
them weather the current diplomatic storm.
No Conflict – South China Sea

China won’t go to war – threats are a diplomatic bargaining tool
Michael Kelly, Professor of Law and Associate Dean for International Programs at Creighton School of
Law, December 7, 2013, “Why China Doesn't Really Want the Senkaku Islands”,
http://jurist.org/forum/2013/12/michael-kelly-china-senkaku.php, accessed 4/14/14
Whatever the origins of the revived Senkaku claim forty three years ago, Mr. Xi knows he can get much more fossil fuel to feed his carbon-thirsty
economy from the South China Sea deposits than he could from the comparatively meager East China Sea. His strategy is to create the biggest fuss possible with
bring a frayed and twitchy Japan to the bargaining table, with the
brinksmanship tactics over the Senkaku Islands in order to
US nervously in the background pushing hard for peace. And then, he will pitch his grand bargain. In
exchange for relinquishing China's claim to the Senkakus, Mr. Xi would want Japan to support China's
claim to the South China Sea. Politically, the Japanese government comes home with a huge victory that
costs it virtually nothing. But of course, what Japan gives China in this grand bargain is far more valuable to China than a handful of rocks near
Okinawa. With Japan backing its claim in the South China Sea and the US backing off, China will be in a
position to deal bilaterally with the claims of the smaller states. Unable to withstand the political, economic and military might
of their vastly larger neighbor, the claims of Vietnam, Malaysia and the Philippines will eventually collapse through bribery, bullying and benevolence alternately
applied. Long the object of Euro-Japanese grand bargains that carved up its territory and subjugated its people, China
now seeks a grand bargain
of its own. Mr. Xi understands that his country has the leverage to pull one off, and he is gambling that
this feint to the Senkakus will get him the support from the other Great Powers to do it.
No South China Sea conflict – interests aren’t strong enough

Terry Wing, Staff Writer, September 4, 2012, “Will South China Sea Disputes Lead to War?” Voice of
America, http://www.voanews.com/content/south-china-sea-war-unlikely/1501780.html, accessed
4/26/14
A South China Sea War is Unlikely But that doesn’t mean a war. Storey said an escalation into full-blown conflict is
unlikely. “It is in no country’s interests to spill blood or treasure over this issue – the costs far outweigh
the benefits,” Storey said. Other experts agree.¶ James Holmes of the U.S. Naval War College says admires how China has
been able to get its way in spreading it claims of sovereignty without becoming a bully.¶ “[China]
gradually consolidated the nation's maritime claims while staying well under the threshold for triggering
outside -most likely American -intervention,” said Holmes.¶ “Is war about to break out over bare rocks? I
don't think so.” writes Robert D. Kaplan, Chief Political Strategist for the geopolitical analysis group Stratfor.¶ Kaplan, however, doesn’t
give much hope for negotiations. “The issues involved are too complex, and the power imbalance between China and its individual neighbors is
too great,” he said. For that reason, Kaplan says China holds all the cards.
No impact to South China Sea conflict – no interventionism

Lyle Goldstein, 11, Associate professor in the China Maritime Studies Institute at the U.S. Naval War
College, July 11, 2011, “The South China Sea's Georgia Scenario,”
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/07/11/the_south_china_seas_georgia_scenario, accessed
4/17/14
The brutal truth, however, is that Southeast Asia matters not a whit in the global balance of power. Most of the
region comprises small, poor countries of no consequence whatsoever, but the medium powers in the region, such as
Vietnam, Indonesia, and Australia will all naturally and of their own accord stand up against a potentially more aggressive China. If China and Vietnam
go to war over some rocks in the ocean, they will inevitably both suffer a wide range of deleterious consequences,
but it will have only a marginal impact on U.S. national security
No Conflict - Taiwan
Relations are at an all-time high – economic and political integration
Felix Forbes, Staff Writer, March 11, 2014, “Fresh hope for China-Taiwan relations”, Nouse,
http://www.nouse.co.uk/2014/03/11/fresh-hope-for-china-taiwan-relations/, accessed 4/29/14
The People’s Republic of China and Taiwan have held their highest level talks since Taiwan’s secession from China
during the Chinese Civil War, which ended in 1949. During a meeting in Nanjing last month, described by Taiwan’s Mainland
Affairs minister Wang Yu-chi as formerly being “unimaginable”, the two nations agreed to open representative
offices in each other’s countries as soon as possible. Chinese media has hailed the talks as an important
step, with the shared view seeming to be best summed up by China Daily, which called the talks “a promising new starting
point
Relations have upward momentum – recent talks and trade agreements prove
Austin Ramzy, Staff Writer, February 12, 2014, “China and Taiwan Hold First Direct Talks Since ’49”,
NYT, http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/12/world/asia/china-and-taiwan-hold-first-official-talks-since-
civil-war.html, accessed 5/1/14
Representatives of Taiwan and China held their first official talks on Tuesday since the end of China’s civil war
in 1949, a meeting expected to produce few concrete results but one that was a symbolic development in the easing of the
two sides’ longtime rivalry.¶ The setting was a resort hotel in the Chinese city of Nanjing, which was at times the capital of Chiang Kai-
shek’s Republic of China before its government fled to Taiwan after being defeated by Mao Zedong’s Communist forces.¶ “Before today’s
meeting, it was hard to imagine that cross-strait relations could get to this point,” said Wang Yu-chi, head of
Taiwan’s Mainland Affairs Council.¶ The improved ties were “hard-earned through efforts of generations,” said Zhang
Zhijun, head of China’s Taiwan Affairs Office, according to the state-run Xinhua news agency. “We should cherish it and work
together to maintain this favorable momentum
No conflict – relations stable and improving

Scott L. Kastner, Professor of Government at Maryland, August 15, 2013, "A Relationship
Transformed? Rethinking the prospects for conflict and peace in the Taiwan Strait,"
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2300070, accessed 4/26/14
After long being viewed as potential flashpoint, relations across the Taiwan Strait have stabilized tremendously
in recent years, reflecting moderation in the approaches both Beijing and Taipei have taken with regard to the
cross-Strait sovereignty dispute. This moderation has been most evident in Taiwan, where Ma Ying-jeou was elected president in 2008 (and reelected in
2012) after campaigning on an explicitly pro-status quo platform. But Beijing also moderated its Taiwan policies in recent years,
most notably by adopting a more flexible approach to the “one China” principle, de-emphasizing the “one country,
two systems” model for cross-Strait political integration (which was widely seen in Taiwan as being a non-starter), and consenting to the use of the “1992
consensus” as a basis for restarting quasi-official cross-Strait dialogue (which had been moribund for nearly a decade before 2008). The
result has been
an unprecedented improvement in relations across the Taiwan Strait, reflected in frequent dialogue
between officials from the two sides, numerous cooperative agreements (including, most notably, the 2010 Economic Cooperation
Framework Agreement), the establishment of direct travel and commercial linkages across the Strait, and a sharp
reduction in PRC threats of military force.
US Russia No Conflict
No Conflict – Ukraine
No US/Russia war over Ukraine
Peter Weber, Senior editor at TheWeek.com, March 5, 2014, "What would a U.S.-Russia war look
like?" https://theweek.com/article/index/257406/what-would-a-us-russia-war-look-like, accessed
5/4/14
The chances that the U.S. and Russia will clash militarily over Moscow's invasion of Ukraine are very,
very slim. Ukraine isn't a member of NATO, and President Obama isn't likely to volunteer for another
war. But many of Ukraine's neighbors are NATO members, including Poland, Romania, Slovakia, and Hungary. And so are the the Baltic states
— Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia — further north and right on Russia's border. If any of those countries come to Ukraine's aid and find
themselves in a war with Russia, NATO is obliged to intervene. That's also true if Russia comes up with some pretext to invade any of those
countries, unlikely as that seems. If we learned anything from World War I, it's that huge, bloody conflicts can start with tiny skirmishes,
especially in Eastern Europe. Again, the U.S. and Russia almost certainly won't come to blows over Ukraine. But what
if they did?
Nuclear deterrence checks Ukraine conflict

Michael Peck, Defense and National Security editor for Foreign Policy Magazine, March 5th, 2014,
Forbes, “7 Reasons Why America Will Never Go To War Over Ukraine”,
http://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelpeck/2014/03/05/7-reasons-why-america-will-never-go-to-war-
over-ukraine/, accessed 4/23/14
America is the mightiest military power in the world. And that fact means absolutely nothing for the Ukraine crisis. Regardless of
whether Russia continues to occupy the Crimea region of Ukraine, or decides to occupy all of Ukraine,
the U.S. is not going to get into a shooting war with Russia. This has nothing to do with whether Obama
is strong or weak. Jimmy Carter or Ronald Reagan would face the same constraints. The U.S. may threaten to impose
economic sanctions, but here is why America will never smack Russia with a big stick:Russia is a nuclear
superpower. Russia has an estimated 4,500 active nuclear warheads, according to the Federation of American
Scientists. Unlike North Korea or perhaps Iran, whose nuclear arsenals couldn’t inflict substantial damage, Russia could totally
devastate the U.S. as well as the rest of the planet. U.S. missile defenses, assuming they even work, are
not designed to stop a massive Russian strike
Russia won’t risk conflict – market response deters.

Cowen 14 (Tyler Cowen, NYT, “Crimea Through a Game-Theory Lens”, 3/15/14,
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/16/business/crimea-through-a-game-theory-lens.html)
A more reassuring kind of deterrence has to do with the response of Russian markets to the crisis. Russia
is a far more globalized economy than it was during the Soviet era. On the first market day after the
Crimean takeover, the reaction was a plunging ruble, and a decline in the Russian stock market of more
than 10 percent. Russia’s central bank raised interest rates to 7 percent from 5.5 percent to protect the ruble’s value. Such market
reactions penalize Russian decision makers, who also know that a broader conflict would endanger
Russia’s oil and gas revenue, which makes up about 70 percent of its export income. In this case, market
forces provide a relatively safe form of deterrence. Unlike governmental sanctions, market-led penalties
limit the risk of direct political retaliation, making it harder for the Russian government to turn falling
market prices into a story of victimization by outside powers.
No Conflict – Arctic
Status quo forums solve Arctic conflict
Igor Alexeev, Center for Research and Globalization, February 20, 2014, “Russia Chooses ‘Soft’
Approach to the Arctic”, http://www.globalresearch.ca/russia-chooses-soft-approach-to-the-
arctic/5369725, accessed 5/5/14
Existing international law framework and forums like the Arctic Chiefs of Defense Staff Conference
provide all the necessary mechanisms to treat and resolve all overlapping claims on the basis of
negotiations. In any case, there is no need for screaming headlines about “the new cold war”. Recent
examples of economic cooperation prove that business has become a gateway to regional political
accord, debunking popular myths about the race for resources in the Arctic.
Cooperation not conflict in the Arctic

Jonas Grätz, Center for Security Studies, International Relations and Security Network, July 2012, “The
Arctic: Thaw With Conflict Potential”, http://www.isn.ethz.ch/Digital-Library/Articles/Detail/?id=157922
oday, the Arctic is characterised by a mixture of cooperation, competition, and conflicts of interest. There are indications that the growing
presence of non-Arctic players prompts more cooperation among the coastal states. Open conflicts are
unlikely to break out in the foreseeable future: While existing mechanisms for cooperation may be too weak to resolve some
conflicts of interest, the costs of military conflict will likely be considered too high in light of uncertain gains. If
conflicts were to occur, they would probably be limited in both time and space, aiming at the
enforcement of interpretations of international law. Having said that, as the involvement of all key political players
increases, the Arctic is also the scene of overarching geo-strategic competition and conflict. The extent to which the thawing of the Arctic
means conflict or rapprochement and cooperation will therefore also depend on the shape of the future world order and the relationships
between the different power centres.
Arctic relations high now – cooperation overcomes disputes.

Edle Astrup Tschudi, Brown Political Review, March 5, 2014, “As Ice Melts, the Arctic Warms Up to a
Global Presence”, http://www.brownpoliticalreview.org/2014/03/as-ice-melts-the-artic-warms-up-to-a-
global-presence/, accessed 5/2/14
Though diplomatic relations with Russia are cooling globally, one region stands out: the Arctic. The members
of the Arctic Council — Canada, Denmark (Greenland), Finland, Iceland, Norway, Russia, Sweden and the United States (Alaska) –
are making impressive diplomatic progress in the North. Here, the Russians and their neighbors are
marking the end of an often icy relationship that has persisted even after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Meetings of
the Arctic Council and other summits take a friendly and businesslike form, with politicians and
businessmen intermingling. The Arctic thaw is translating into a diplomatic thaw – a thaw that is
benefiting all parties involved. Perhaps the time is ripe not only for a Nordic model, but also for an Arctic
model for diplomacy. Over the last few years, enormous Russia has amped up relations with
comparatively minuscule neighbors such as Norway, seemingly benefiting the smaller party; Russia’s usual power
politics are clearly not as prominent in the area. Most surprisingly, Russia’s relationship with the NATO
countries Canada, Denmark, Iceland and Norway is blossoming. These relationships stand in stark contrast to Russia’s
problematic relationship to post-Soviet states like Ukraine and Georgia or the Baltic NATO members, to mention a few. The reason for this,
ironically, may be that the Arctic NATO member nations used to be Russia’s enemies during the Cold War. As a result, dependency
upon
“Mother Russia” was never established, which enables the Arctic countries to negotiate with Russia on a
relatively even footing. The threat of inclusion or exclusion from a Russian trade union is not a major
concern for Russia’s resource-rich Arctic neighbors. In other words, Russia’s bargaining power is completely
different in the Arctic than near its southern or western borders.
No Conflict – Missile Defense

Talks still occurring – doesn’t hurt relations
Russia Behind the Headlines, February 1, 2014, “Russia still hopes to reach consensus on missile
defense with U.S. – diplomat,”
rbth.com/news/2014/02/01/russia_still_hopes_to_reach_consensus_on_missile_defense_with_us_-
_diplo_33758.html, accessed 5/5/14
Moscow is still hopeful that it could reach an agreement with Washington on a missile defense system, Director of
the Russian Foreign Ministry Security and Disarmament Department Mikhail Ulyanov said. "Such a chance certainly exists. Everything
depends on the U.S.'political will," Ulyanov said. U.S.-Russia relations More about U.S.-Russia relations The U.S. administration is
aware of Russia's reasons as to how a global missile defense system's threat to strategic stability could be reduced, he said. Russian and
U.S. experts are continuing consultations on the matter through military and diplomatic channels, he said. Asked
about the liquidation of an interagency task force on Russian-U.S. interaction on missile defense, Ulyanov said it was purely technical. "A
decision was made on its rearrangement. The newly established interagency task force on missile defense held its first session
on January 17," Ulyanov said. "Surely, it would be wrong to deny that a dialogue on missile defense has in fact reached a deadlock. However,
as is seen from the latest events surrounding, for instance, Iran or Syria, progress is possible even on the most
problematic issues if there is political will," he said.
Other issues overwhelm

Stewart Powell, Staff Writer, April 12, 2014, “U.S. talks tough, but keeps key ties with Russia”
http://www.myrecordjournal.com/news/national/4194131-129/us-talks-tough-but-keeps-key-ties-with-
russia.html, accessed 4/28/14
President Obama and members of Congress are finding it’s easier to talk the talk than to walk the walk when it
comes to punishing Russia for meddling in the Ukraine. The U.S. space program is relying on Russia to ferry U.S.
astronauts to and from the orbiting, U.S.-built International Space Station at a rate of $70 million a seat. Texas-based Exxon Mobil and
other far flung U.S. energy companies are deeply invested in multibillion-dollar oil exploration and production deals with Russia. And
despite U.S.-Russian tensions, the Pentagon is moving ahead to complete a politically sensitive, $1.1 billion deal to
provide 61 Russian-built helicopters to beleaguered Afghan allies as U.S. troops withdraw from a 13-year war. U.S. officials are
talking tough, but with so much invested in the U.S.-Russian relationship since the end of the Cold War,
questions persist over whether threatened U.S. penalties can make a difference.
Missile talks irrelevant – talks died years ago

Rio Novosti April 3, 2014, “OPINION: US Pullout on Missile Defense Talks Won’t Impact Russia”
http://en.ria.ru/military_news/20140403/189019932/OPINION-US-Pullout-on-Missile-Defense-Talks-
Wont-Impact-Russia-.html, accessed 4/25/14
MOSCOW, April 3 (RIA Novosti) - The Pentagon's recent talk of suspending anti-missile consultations
with Russia is hot air, as the negotiations lost their significance long ago, experts have told RIA Novosti.
The Russia-NATO missile shield talks have been treading water for years, ever since the two agreed at a 2010 Lisbon summit
to cooperate on the European project. The partners eventually deadlocked on the issue after Washington refused to
provide Moscow with legal guarantees that its strike forces in Europe would not target Russia's deterrence
capabilities. Elaine Bunn, a US Department of Defense official overseeing nuclear policy, earlier said that Russia's stance on the Ukrainian
crisis was a reason for the Pentagon putting its cooperation with Moscow on hold. Now experts say that Russia-NATO consultations were bound
to grind to a halt, citing Washington's reluctance to meet Moscow halfway. So the freeze on them now accurately reflects the
already existing state of affairs. "It's a matter of ritual. The consultations had been nothing but a failure for the
past four years," said Lt. Gen. Yevgeny Buzhinsky, who used to head the department of international agreements in Russia's Defense
Ministry. Buzhinsky underscored that the United States had long been blocking anti-missile talks. "Talks or no talks, they don't make a
difference anyway. I don't think they are a big loss," he told RIA Novosti.
No Conflict – Syria
No conflict over Syria – mutual goals outweigh tensions
Jordain Carney, Staff Writer at National Journal, March 6, 2014, “Despite Ukraine Tensions, Russia Still
Involved in Syria”, http://www.nationaljournal.com/defense/despite-ukraine-tensions-russia-still-
involved-in-syria-20140306, accessed 4/30/14
Despite increasing tensions over Russia's occupation of Crimea, a top State Department official said that the
situation in Ukraine isn't impacting a push to destroy Syria's chemical-weapons arsenal. "I believe Russia
remains committed to the object here, which is the removal and destruction of all of Syria's chemical-
weapons stockpile," Deputy Secretary of State William Burns said at a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing Thursday about Syria
and Ukraine. Despite being seemingly unrelated, senators focused on a common thread the two scenarios have: Russia's involvement. And
Burns acknowledged that the United States has been "frustrated" about the Russian government's unwillingness to push harder on Syrian
President Bashar al-Assad's regime on areas including increasing access to humanitarian aid. Despite multiple delays by the Syrian government
to turn over chemical materials, Burns said he believes it
is still possible to meet a midyear deadline to destroy the
country's chemical-weapons program. "That's an area where I believe Russia has a self-interest in trying
to ensure that that happens, it's not a favor to the United States. It's something that Russia has
committed to, and I hope we can accomplish that goal," Burns said.
U.S.-Russian cooperation over Syria improving – no conflict now.

Leena Carmenates, Staff Writer at Foreign Policy Today, February 26, 2014 “Syria’s crisis: Why Geneva
II was not a complete failure”, http://www.fptoday.org/syrias-crisis-why-geneva-ii-was-not-a-complete-
failure/, accessed 5/1/14
With the conclusion of the Geneva II talks in mid-February, there seems to be little to no progress toward the hoped-for
diplomatic solution between the Syrian government and the opposition. However, there are small fragments of hope that can still
be built upon, provided the necessary participants agree to cooperate. The most notable success is the
recent passing of UN Security Council Resolution 2139 demanding access for humanitarian aid convoys.
The resolution is non-binding and diplomats were immediately skeptical as to the prospects of effective implementation. However, it passed
unanimously, marking a positive turn of events when compared to previous resolutions vetoed by
Russia. This success comes on the heels of the not-so-successful Geneva talks, which attempted to come up with a workable agenda for
achieving the parameters of the Geneva Communique of 2012. A sharp divergence of goals led to very little interaction between the two parties
in Geneva. The opposition focused on developing a transitional government, whereas Syrian government officials were keen on halting violence
by anti-Assad forces. Signs of progress Despite the disheartening turnout of the talks, elements of it show hope for some progress.The mere
presence of both sides at the table shows some degree of will on each side, regardless of how small. Though there
was a lack of negotiations, at least the meeting took place and if it happened once, it can happen again. The Syrian
opposition selected a new leader and is allegedly working to become a more organized force – a crucial step in ensuring a unified body of
organized response to the Assad regime. The lack of negotiations pressured outside actors to come to the fore. This
forced the hands
of the international community, namely the U.S. and Russia, to come up with alternative approaches.
Resolution 2139 is a testament to this. The unanimous vote on the resolution shows that Russia is not as
stubborn as may have been thought, indicating the possibility of future progress.
No Conflict – Syria
No risk of Russian conflict over Syria – rhetoric is domestic hype.
Stephen Sestanovich, Senior Fellow for Russian and Eurasian Studies, September 6, 2013, Council on
Foreign Relations, “Syria & U.S.-Russian Relations: Three Things to Know,”
http://www.cfr.org/syria/syria-us-russian-relations-three-things-know/p31353, accessed 4/29/14
Same Taste, New Injury: Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russian leaders have had a tendency to engage
in anti-American rhetoric. "This was true even of a pro-American figure like Boris Yeltsin," Sestanovich says.
Russian provocation of the United States regarding Syria also has roots in its decades-long relationship
with the Syrian regime, which allows Russia to enjoy "access to naval facilities, arm sales, military and intelligence cooperation,"
Sestanovich adds. Injecting Personality Into Policy: Russian foreign policy reflects elements of Putin's personality,
according to Sestanovich. Putin places a premium on Russian sovereignty and largely "ignore[s]
international criticism," Sestanovich says. "For Putin, Assad is right to oppose outside pressure," he says. No Confrontation:
Putin and his generals have no desire to involve Russian military personnel in the Syria conflict. The Russians
may go as far as re-supplying the Syrian military, says Sestanovich, but unless the tide of the civil war turns against Assad, their policy will
not change. "Yes, he wants Assad to survive; no, he does not intend to go down in flames with him," he says.
Aquaculture Neg
1NC Urban Aquaculture CP
SAMPLE TEXT: The United States federal government should invest in sustainable
urban aquaculture
The counterplan solves the aff while avoiding the environment and disease turns
Garrett Wheeler, J.D., Golden Gate University School of Law, 2013 “A Feasible Alternative: The Legal
Implications of Aquaculture in the United States and the Promise of Sustainable Urban Aquaculture
Systems,” Golden Gate University Environmental Law Journal, Volume 6, Issue 2, [accessed 5/7/2014]
As the United States begins to implement a variety of new ¶ aquaculture techniques in the ocean and on land, it will likely play a ¶ major role in
shaping a regulatory structure that can encourage the ¶ growth of environmentally responsible aquaculture practices. Whether ¶ that
development takes place on land, near the coast, or miles out to sea will largely depend on the outcome of future legal forays and policy¶
initiatives.¶ Although
considerable scholarly analysis has been devoted to the¶ environmental problems and
legal complexities surrounding the¶ development of open-ocean aquaculture, little has been written on
the¶ alternative: sustainable land-based facilities . These systems are models¶ of modern ecological
engineering and can be located anywhere,¶ including urban settings such as brownfields,abandoned
industrial¶ sites, and warehouses. They can feed local populations and provide local jobs without
compromising the health of our oceans and wild fish stocks . Sustainable land-based systems are already
operating in American cities¶ like Brooklyn, Baltimore, and Milwaukee. Recirculating aquaculture systems
(RAS) and aquaponic systems¶ are closed-loop, land-based farms that re-use water and are capable of¶
producing fish, vegetables, flowers, fruits, and herbs. RAS technology¶ eliminates the environmental problems
associated with conventional¶ aquaculture methods, such as outdoor pond systems and ocean net pen¶
systems. RAS facilities are “sustainable, infinitely expandable,¶ environmentally compatible, and have the ability to guarantee both the¶
safety and the quality of fish produced.” Unlike conventional systems,¶ which are limited by environmental and
geographic constraints, as well¶ as the threat of disease transference, indoor systems can produce fish
in¶ completely controlled environments without risk of escapement or spread of disease .18 Moreover, RAS
conserves heat and water through water¶ reuse, running on ninety to ninety-nine percent less water than¶ conventional systems and providing
environmentally safe wastemanagement¶ treatment.
2NC Solvency/Net Benefit Extension

The counterplan avoids massive environmental and disease impacts of the aff
New technologies are allowing operators to cultivate fish and other¶ seafood in exposed, open-ocean environments that were inaccessible¶
only twenty years ago. However, the
rise of offshore aquaculture poses¶ significant threats to sensitive marine
environments and “represents a¶ fundamental transition in the human claim on the Earth’s surface.”¶
Open-ocean aquaculture facilities operate in largely pristine areas¶ and are intimately connected with
their surrounding aquatic¶ ecosystems. Common species cultivated in the open ocean include¶ mostly
finfish such as salmon, cod, and tuna . Large underwater cages¶ are placed in the water, and as ocean
currents flow through the cages, the¶ spread of waste and chemical byproducts can implicate the health
of the¶ seafloor and the surrounding water column. Escaped fish also pose a threat to marine ecosystems by introducing
non-indigenous species,¶ compromising the genetic fitness of native populations through¶ interbreeding, and disease translocation. Disease
and parasites may also¶ spread to nearby native populations, and attempts by operators to apply¶ drugs
and chemicals to contain those threats can damage the surrounding¶ ecosystem. Predatory fish and marine
mammals are also drawn to¶ cages full of captive fish, leading to injury, death, and harassment by¶ operators trying to protect their stocks.
Finally, operational failures are¶ all but inevitable: in at least one instance, an entire fish cage broke free¶ from a tow vessel and was sent
floating adrift in the open ocean,¶ endangering marine species as well as any ocean-going vessels¶ unfortunate enou 48¶ Compared to
the negative environmental impacts of ocean-based¶ aquaculture facilities, the negative impacts of
land-based systems are¶ easily minimized. Unlike ocean-based operations, isolated terrestrial¶
facilities have fewer problems with escapement . The spread of disease¶ is also easier to control
because fecal matter and feed waste are not in¶ direct contact with the surrounding marine
ecosystem.
2NC Avoids the Antibiotic Turn
The counterplan avoids the antibiotic turn on case

While the effects of antibiotic resistance on marine life are beyond¶ the scope of this Comment, it
is worth noting that the FDA’s
regulation¶ of aquaculture has come under heavy scrutiny owing to potential¶ oversight problems
regarding antibiotic approval, genetic engineering¶ provisions, and labeling. The actual prevalence of
antibiotic use on¶ fish farms is also heavily underreported.161 Operators of sustainable¶ aquaculture
facilities , however, will have little trouble complying with¶ FDA requirements because technologies like
RAS systems have little¶ need to use antibiotics due to the increased ability to limit the entrance of¶
pathogens into the contained environment . Moreover, in the case of a¶ disease event, alternative treatments are more
effective in the RAS¶ context because of the relatively small quantity of water that must be¶ treated.
Politics Links
The plan causes massive political backlash AND it must be pushed
Johns, J.D., University of Southern California Law School, 2013, “Farm Fishing Holes: Gaps in Federal
Regulation of Offshore Aquaculture,” 86 S. Cal. L. Rev. 681
Despite being endorsed by many environmental organizations, the National Sustainable Offshore Aquaculture bill died
in the 112th Congress and was referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources, having received zero co-
sponsors . The bill's failure may be due in part to the actions of the usual aquaculture opponents. Indeed,
after the bill was first introduced in 2009, an organization of commercial fishermen (SIC) sent a letter to
the House of Representatives voicing its opposition, criticizing the bill for allowing "offshore
aquaculture to be permitted in federal waters with limited safeguards and little or no accountability," and
urging the House to "develop legislation to stop federal efforts to rush growth of the offshore
aquaculture industry ." Furthermore, NOAA has yet to publicly endorse [*721] or even issue a position on the
bill . Agencies such as NOAA and other environmental organizations must soon come forward in loud
support of the bill to see that it is reintroduced and successful in Congress . If they do not, the current lack of any
comprehensive regulatory regime may very well sink the entire offshore aquaculture industry.
Massive grassroots opposition to aquaculture makes the plan politically difficult

Panorama Aquicola, 2013, “The Political Economics of United States Marine Aquaculture,”
http://www.panoramaacuicola.com/interviews_and_articles/2013/01/09/the_political_economics_of_
united_states_marine_aquaculture.html [accessed May 5th, 2014]
4. NGO’s have systematically and effectively opposed U.S. marine aquaculture. Numerous U.S. Non-
Governmental Organizations (NGOs) have invested significant funding and effort to advocate banning, delaying
,restricting, or regulating U.S. marine aquaculture. These organizations have played a major role in
influencing the public, the press, politicians, and regulators in ways which have contributed to
unfavorable leasing and regulatory policies towards marine aquaculture.This NGO’s include the Packard
Foundation, Greenpeace,the Environmental Defense Fund, and others. The scale, objectives, strategies, and
arguments of these groups vary widely, making it difficult to generalize about their motives, methods, and effects. ¶ Advocacy groups can
provide avaluable service by acting as an impartial watch dog of environmental issues and calling attention to legitimate concerns. However, a
very real and frustrating challenge for marine aquaculture supporters is that some NGO’s appear
willing to say anything to oppose marine aquaculture , with casual and sometimes blatant disregard for objectivity, truth,
or the complex reality of what experience and science have shown about the hugely varied effects of the hugely varied kinds of activities
collectively known as aquaculture.
Case Debate/Turns
1NC Environment Turn
Aquaculture causes HUGE environmental impacts

Naylor, Julie Wrigley Senior Fellow at the Center for Environmental Science and Policy (CESP) at
Stanford University, PhD in applied economics from Stanford, 2004, “Threats to Aquatic Environments:
Is Aquaculture a Solution?,” [accessed 5/6/2014]
Additional environmental threats¶ Marine aquaculture places a variety of stresses on¶ the marine environment.
Like industrial livestock¶ systems, marine netpens contain large densities of¶ fish in confined spaces which pollute
surrounding¶ waters. By one estimate, a relatively modest¶ salmon farm of 200 000 fish releases an amount of¶ nitrogen, phosphorous
and fecal matter roughly¶ equivalent to the nutrients in untreated sewage¶ from 20 000, 25 000, and 65 000 people respectively¶ (Hardy 2000).
Antibiotics added to fishmeal¶ or chemicals placed directly in open netpens to¶ prevent the spread of
diseases and parasites also¶ flow directly into the marine environment (Goldburg¶ et al. 2001).¶ Aquaculture
presents risks of disease outbreaks, a¶ proliferation of possible disease transmission¶ routes in the
environment, and decreased immunity¶ of wild fish to disease — all of which can harm¶ wild fish
populations and the aquatic environments¶ in which they live. Transmission of pathogens and¶ diseases from
aquaculture to vulnerable wild fish¶ can occur through populations that are infected at¶ the hatchery source, contact with wild hosts of the¶
disease, infected fish that escape from netpens, and¶ wild fish migrating or moving within plumes of an¶ infected pen or disease outbreak
(Naylor et al.¶ 2004).Dense
cultures often lead to clinical expressions¶ of disease and a shedding of pathogens
into¶ the environment, and hence to a higher prevalence¶ of disease overall.
Environment Turn-Extensions
Aquaculture destroys coastal ecosystems-fish waste release proves

Ocean Conservancy, 2011 “Right From the Start: Open-Ocean Aquaculture in the United
States,”
http://www.aces.edu/dept/fisheries/education/documents/Open_Ocean_Aquculture_R
ight_from_the_Start_bytheOceanConservancyorganization.pdf (accessed 5/1/2014)
In reviewing the experience of ocean ¶ fish farming internationally, the
scientific literature identifies five types ¶ of
environmental risk. Each must be ¶ addressed if there is to be environmentally ¶ responsible industry
expansion in the US.¶ 1. Pollution : Fish farms release fish waste, ¶ uneaten food, and chemical wastes ¶
directly into the ocean with meaningful ¶ consequences for the health of the water column and the
seafloor below. Like the poultry farms of Maryland’s Eastern shore, whose wastes flow onto Chesapeake Bay, such “over-
enrichment” of coastal ecosystems has generally emerged as a major environmental problem , occasionally
resulting in algal blooms, habitat loss, and the serious depletion of dissolved oxygen. Aquaculture must
proceed only in ways that do not contribute to the general problem of coastal eutrophication (over-
enrichment.)
Aquaculture destroys the ocean environment

Naylor, Julie Wrigley Senior Fellow at the Center for Environmental Science and Policy (CESP) at
Stanford University, PhD in applied economics from Stanford, 2004, “Threats to Aquatic Environments:
Is Aquaculture a Solution?,” [accessed 5/6/2014]
¶
In addition, the escape of farmed fish from ocean¶ netpen systems — a common occurrence due to¶
storms and human error — can lead to competition¶ and interbreeding with populations of already¶
threatened wild fish (Naylor et al. 2001, 2004).¶ Most literature on the harmful effects of interbreeding¶ between introduced (farmed
and hatchery)¶ fish and wild fish concerns salmon. These¶ anadromous fish (i.e. they go from the ocean to¶ coastal waters or streams to spawn)
have subpopulations¶ adapted genetically to local conditions in¶ river drainages, and they are particularly prone to¶ reduced fitness from
interbreeding with escaped,¶ genetically distinct farmed and hatchery fish.¶ Other marine fish species now beginning to be¶ farmed are less
genetically differentiated, which¶ may lessen the genetic impact of interbreeding between¶ wild and farmed or hatchery fish. All the¶ same,
some marine fish do have distinct subpopulations.¶ Atlantic cod, for instance, form aggregations¶ that are genetically differentiated and
appear¶ to have little gene flow among them (Ruzzante et¶ al. 2001).¶ Pollution, disease and escapes from marine netpens¶ add to the
underlying environmental degradation¶ already plaguing marine ecosystems from¶ other human activities. Although
the geographic¶
extent of aquaculture is limited, the ecological impact¶ on marine resources if often much greater¶ than
the area suggests, since fish farming heavily¶ depends upon and interacts with wild fisheries.
Aquaculture causes massive biodiversity loss through invasive species

States,”
2. Escaped Fish: Farmed fish invariably ¶ escape from aquaculture operations . ¶ In October 2009, 40,000 adult salmon
¶ escaped from Canada’s largest farm. ¶ From 2004 to 2008, Norwegian ¶ authorities reported cod escapes from ¶ farms in excess of 800,000
fish. Annual ¶ escapes of farmed salmon in Norway ¶ ranged from 2 million fish to 10 million ¶ fish per year from 1995 to 2005. ¶ These are very
large numbers. Without ¶ careful broodstock management, ¶ even the escape of native species can ¶
compromise the genetic fitness of wild ¶ fish through interbreeding . ¶ In Europe and the US, there are
already ¶ legitimate concerns that escaped ¶ Atlantic salmon could contribute to ¶ the eventual
extinction of wild salmon ¶ populations . If the fish that escape ¶ are exotic, or are genetically modified,
¶ the risks increase considerably, with ¶ the potential to permanently upset ¶ ecosystem balance as
these newly ¶ introduced fish out-compete, displace, ¶ or prey on native species . Invasive ¶ species are
listed second only to habitat ¶ destruction as a driver of extinction and ¶ are classified by the World Conservation ¶
Union as one of the four greatest ¶ threats to the world’s ocean. The kinds ¶ of fish and the ways in which they are ¶
farmed must be carefully controlled to ensure ocean ecosystems are not ¶ harmed by fish escapes from ocean fish farms.
Aquaculture causes environmental degradation

Sinead Lehane, ¶ FDI Research Analyst, 2013, “Fish for the Future: Aquaculture and Food
Security,” Future Directions, http://www.futuredirections.org.au/publications/food-and-water-
crises/1269-fish-for-the-future-aquaculture-and-food-security.html [accessed 5/4/2014]
Environmental Degradation¶ ¶ A
key concern with the practice of aquaculture is its environmental impact and
water quality degradation from its production processes. Effluent water from ponds causing
environmental pollution, nutrient buildup (mostly organic nitrogen and phosphorus) and wastes in ecosystems, land
clearing and chemical pollution, are just a few of the negative impacts if systems are not managed
correctly.Of particular concern is the environmental damage to oceans from marine aquaculture.
Chemical and effluent pollution can severely deplete oxygen levels in water, create algal blooms and kill
corals and other habitats. Antibiotics added to fishmeal, or chemicals added to pens as a disease preventative, flow directly into the
water. Large densities of fish populations in net pens increase pollutant outputs into surrounding waters,
putting increased stress on the marine ecosystem. Estimates indicate that a salmon farm of 200,000 fish releases levels of
nitrogen, phosphorus and fecal matter equivalent to the untreated sewage from over 20,000 people. ¶ ¶ Land degradation and changed river
ecology caused by inland farming are also challenges which need to be addressed to ensure production has a minimal effect on natural
biodiversity and ecosystems.
Commercial aquaculture poses a particular set of problems, with large-scale
production and limited management in some instances leading to critical environmental damage and
irreversible ecosystem degradation.
1NC Disease Turn

Ocean aquaculture causes major disease outbreaks that spread
States,”
Diseases, Parasites, and Chemicals: ¶ Ocean fish farms can amplify and ¶ spread deadly diseases and parasites ¶
into natural environments . In turn, ¶ farm operators often apply drugs and ¶ chemicals to contain these
threats, ¶ sometimes with subsequent harm to wild ¶ animals. White spot disease decimated ¶ the
global shrimp farming industry in ¶ the 1990s . Today, infectious salmon ¶ anemia (ISA) is plaguing the
salmon ¶ farming industry in Chile, leading to the ¶ intentional destruction of millions of ¶ farmed fish,
with impacts confirmed on ¶ wild shrimp and likely on wild salmon. ¶ Several accounts have linked
salmon ¶ farms to disease outbreaks in wild fish ¶ populations .¶ In recent years, there has been a ¶ dramatic
spread of parasitic sea lice from ¶ farms to wild salmon at a cost of nearly ¶ $5 billion annually. As for
chemicals, ¶ fish farmers are known to regularly ¶ apply pesticides, antibiotics, fungicides, ¶ antifoulants, and
other chemicals. These ¶ chemicals dissolve in the water and are ¶ carried outside the farms, sometimes ¶
with marked effects on surrounding ¶ ecosystems. Responsible aquaculture ¶ management must ensure that farms ¶
minimize the use of all drugs and ¶ chemicals, and that farms don’t grow to ¶ a scale at which they become reliant on ¶ regular use of such
substances as has ¶ happened in other parts of the world.
Extensions-Disease Turn
Aquaculture causes disease spread

Sinead Lehane, ¶ FDI Research Analyst, 2013, “Fish for the Future: Aquaculture and Food
Security,” Future Directions, http://www.futuredirections.org.au/publications/food-and-water-
crises/1269-fish-for-the-future-aquaculture-and-food-security.html [accessed 5/4/2014]
Disease and chemical contamination of farmed fish is an ongoing management issue for farmers. Disease is
most often caused by stress factors, induced by environmental changes. Lowered environmental health, increased levels of waste and
pollutants in waterways, high stock density and low quality, all increase stock susceptibility to disease. Closed
farming systems
where the breeding environment is closely monitored, are considered the safest option for disease
prevention and water quality control. Closed systems prevent escape, ensure the availability of optimum
levels of feed and water, and eliminate any danger of predators. The movement of live aquatic animals
across boundaries is a major cause of the spread of diseases and pathogens within the aquatic
environment . Improved technology and management systems are required to better regulate disease, improve water quality and ensure
sustainable production can be increased to meet future demands.
Aquaculture causes huge disease risk

Peter J. Walker, Head of Aquaculture and Aquatic Animal Health in CSIRO Livestock Industries, Adjunct
Chair in the Centre for Marine Studies at the University of Queensland, 2004, “Disease Emergence and
Food Security: Global Impact of Pathogens on Sustainable Aquaculture Production,” [accessed 5/5/2014]
Aquaculture is one of the most rapidly developing¶ sectors of global food production, contributing¶ significantly to socio-economic¶
development by providing food security and¶ export earnings from high-value products. The¶ importance of the industry to the expanding¶
world population is underscored by the growing¶ gap between supply and demand for seafood.¶ However, rapidgrowth in
aquaculture¶ has been accompanied by increasing problems¶ with disease, and disease is now seen¶ as a
very significant threat to sustainable production¶ and trade. During the past decade,¶ disease has devastated prawn farming
in Asia¶ and Latin America, with annual losses of up to¶ US$3 billion. Devastating losses have also hit¶ the salmon farming
industries of Europe and¶ North America, the diverse fish farming industries¶ of Japan, Taiwan and
China, and shellfish¶ production in Asia and Europe. Disease in¶ aquaculture is the result of ecological
disturbances¶ that disrupt the natural balance between¶ pathogens and their host. Farming is¶ often conducted
in unnatural habitats which¶ provide opportunities for exposure to new¶ pathogens. Culture conditions may be potentially¶
stressful, causing existing infections to¶ become more severe and precipitate disease¶ outbreaks.
Stocking densities are often high, increasing the risk of disease transmission¶ and spread. There is also a
growing trade in¶ live aquatic animals, inevitably resulting in¶ trans-boundary spread of disease and
subsequent¶ imposition of trade barriers. Solutions to the¶ growing disease menace lie in improved¶ methods for rapid disease
diagnosis and¶ pathogen detection, increased regulation of¶ trans-boundary movement of live aquatic animals,¶ closed-cycle breeding and
selection for¶ disease resistance, and improved education¶ and training for both health professionals and¶ farmers.
A2 Food Instability Advantage

Chinese decline in production isn’t coming-They still export despite domestic demand
The World Bank, 2013, “Fish to 2030: Prospects for Fisheries and Aquaculture,”
Agriculture and Environmental Services Discussion Paper 03 [accessed 5/7/14]
Seafood demand from China, the single largest market for seafood,¶ has grown substantially, and its
influence on the global fi sh markets¶ and trade has intensified. China’s per capita fish consumption
grew¶ to 33.1 kilograms per year in 2010, at an annual rate of 6 percent¶ between 1990 and 2010. So
far, due particularly to growth in aquaculture¶ production, fish production in China has kept pace
with¶ the growth in consumption demand from population and income¶ growth . While Asia
accounted for 88 percent of world aquaculture¶ production by volume in 2011, China alone accounted
for 62 percent.¶ Aquaculture now represents more than 70 percent of the¶ total fi sh produced in China.
With the rapid growth in production,¶ China’s share in the global fish production grew from 7 percent in¶
1961 to 35 percent in 2011. Notwithstanding that China consumes¶ 34 percent of global food fi sh
supply, it is still a net exporter of food fi sh . Nevertheless, China is both an importer and exporter of
fish.
Disease turns the food security advantage

Peter J. Walker, Head of Aquaculture and Aquatic Animal Health in CSIRO Livestock Industries, Adjunct
Chair in the Centre for Marine Studies at the University of Queensland, 2004, “Disease Emergence and
Food Security: Global Impact of Pathogens on Sustainable Aquaculture Production,” [accessed 5/5/2014]
Conclusion¶ The devastating white spot pandemic and other¶ major disease outbreaks impacting on food
security¶ have been catalysts for profound changes in¶ the structure and operation of the aquaculture
industry,¶ and have led governments to address more¶ seriously the issue of aquatic animal disease
management.¶ The messages have been clear. Disease¶ emergence and spread are not simply unfortunate¶
natural disasters that are beyond our control. They¶ are a predictable consequence of the massive
sociological,¶ ecological and geo-economic changes¶ that have accompanied the development of this¶
new industry. As aquaculture continues to expand,¶ evolve and diversify, new diseases will emerge¶
and , if we are not adequately prepared , the consequences¶ will be devastating for food security , socio-economic
development and trade. The vast¶ potential for aquaculture development in Africa¶ remains relatively untapped, but will surely be the¶ source
of new disease challenges. To meet the¶ challenge of containing disease and ensuring efficient¶ and sustainable aquaculture production, we¶
must continue to improve our understanding of¶ aquatic animal pathogens and our diagnostic capabilities,¶ improve disease surveillance and
emergency¶ response capabilities, improve the¶ regulation of trans-boundary movement of aquatic¶ animals and other high-risk commodities,
and develop¶ improved technologies for low-cost, chemical-¶ free treatments and disease resistance. To¶ ensure food security at the level of
small-scale¶ farmers, we must also improve education and¶ training in practical disease management practices¶ that are effective and
affordable at the subsistence¶ level.
No aquaculture shortage now-And it’s continuing to grow even absent the plan
The World Bank, 2013, “Fish to 2030: Prospects for Fisheries and Aquaculture,”
Agriculture and Environmental Services Discussion Paper 03 [accessed 5/7/14]
In contrast,the rapid expansion of global aquaculture production¶ has continued with no sign of peaking .
During the past three¶ decades, global aquaculture production expanded at an average¶ annual rate of more
than 8 percent, from 5.2 million tons in 1981¶ to 62.7 million tons in 2011 (FishStat). Aquaculture’s contribution to¶ total food
fi sh supply grew from 9 percent in 1980 to 48 percent in¶ 2011 (FAO 2013). The estimated number of fish
farmers also grew¶ from 3.9 million in 1990 to 16.6 million in 2010. The rapid and massive¶ growth of
aquaculture production has contributed significantly¶ to increased production of species whose supply
would be otherwise¶ constrained given the lack of growth in capture fisheries production.¶ As a result, the
prices of these species (for example, salmon¶ and shrimp) declined, especially during the 1990s and in the early¶
2000s (FAO 2012).
Solvency
Opt-out provision means the bill fails

Rosamond L. Naylor and Julie Wrigley Senior Fellows at the Center for Environmental
Science and Policy, Stanford, 2013, “Environmental Safeguards for Open-Ocean
Aquaculture,” Issues in Science and Technology, http://issues.org/22-3/naylor/
(accessed 5/3/2014)
The proposed bill gives coastal states an important role in influencing the future development of
offshore aquaculture. Indeed, coastal states would be permitted to opt out of offshore aquaculture activities. The bill states that offshore aquaculture
permits will not be granted or will be terminated within 30 days if the secretary of Commerce receives written notice from the governor of a coastal state that the
state does not wish to have the provisions of the act apply to its seaward portion of the EEZ. The
governor can revoke the opt-out
provision at any time, thus reinstating NOAA’s authority to issue permits and oversee aquaculture
operations in that portion of the EEZ. Although the bill does not grant coastal states any jurisdiction over that part of the EEZ, it does provide
them with potential exclusion from offshore aquaculture activities. ¶ This amendment ensures a role for coastal states that is stronger than that which would apply
through the Consistency Provision (section 307) of the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA). Section 307 of the CZMA requires that federally permitted projects
be consistent with select state laws that safeguard coastal ecosystems, fisheries, and people dependent on those fisheries (collectively called the state’s “coastal
zone management program”). To
complete the permitting process for an offshore aquaculture project, the project
applicant must certify the project’s consistency with the state’s coastal zone management program to
NOAA. Even if the state objects to the applicant’s consistency certification, the secretary of Commerce
can override the state’s objection and issue the permit simply by determining that the project is
consistent with the objectives or purposes of the Federal Coastal Management Act or that the project is
necessary in the interest of national security. Thus, the Department of Commerce retains ultimate authority over whether state laws apply
to the EEZ.¶ Although the decision by different coastal states to opt out of the proposed offshore aquaculture bill is yet to be determined, some states have already
adopted policies related to aquaculture development within state waters. In Alaska, state law prohibits finfish farming within the 3-mile state zone. In Washington,
House Bill 1499 allows the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife to have more control over environmental damages caused by near-shore salmon farming. In
California, salmon farming and the use of genetically modified fish are prohibited by law in marine waters, and a new bill currently being reviewed in the state
assembly (SB. 210) requires strict environmental standards for all other forms of marine aquaculture introduced into state waters. The California legislation, in
particular, provides an excellent model for a redrafting of the National Offshore Aquaculture Act.
Industry expansion won’t solve because of alt causes

Rosamond L. Naylor and Julie Wrigley Senior Fellows at the Center for Environmental
Science and Policy, Stanford, 2013, “Environmental Safeguards for Open-Ocean
Aquaculture,” Issues in Science and Technology, http://issues.org/22-3/naylor/
(accessed 5/3/2014)
In the United States, aquaculture growth for marine fish and shellfish has been below the world average,
rising annually by 4% in volume and 1% in value. The main species farmed in the marine environment are Atlantic salmon, shrimp, oysters, and
hard clams; together they account for about one-quarter of total U.S. aquaculture production. Freshwater species, such as catfish, account for
the majority of U.S. aquaculture output.¶ The technology
is in place for marine aquaculture development in the
United States, but growth remains curtailed by the lack of unpolluted sites for shellfish production,
competing uses of coastal waters , environmental concerns, and low market prices for some major
commodities such as Atlantic salmon. Meanwhile, the demand for marine fish and shellfish continues to rise more rapidly than
domestic production, adding to an increasing U.S. seafood deficit (now about $8 billion annually).
Antibiotic Resistance Turn
Aquaculture expansion causes antibiotic resistance

Sara Hughes, Bren School of Environmental Science and Management, University of California, Santa
Barbara, and Joan B. Rose, Michigan State University, 2014 “Governing Aquaculture for
Human Security,” http://www.fisheriessociety.org/proofs/sf/hughes.pdf [accessed May
3rd, 2014]
One newly arising concern is the potential of antibiotic use in fish farms to spread antibiotic¶ resistance
in aquatic environments and within microbial populations. The main antibiotics used in¶ aquaculture systems include
furazolidone, niturpirinol, oxolinic acid, oxytetracycline, sulfamerazine,¶ trimethoprim/sulfadiazine, and florfenicol, with a majority of
these used in large finfish operations.¶ Throughout Europe and North America, such compounds are regulated for use in
aquaculture, and¶ Japan has a slightly wider range of antimicrobials (WHO 1999). However, while overall use of antimicrobials¶
in inland aquaculture and coastal shrimp farming is relatively low, as the intensity of farming¶ operations
increase so does the use of antimicrobials . Both human and animal health could be endangered¶ as
result of overuse of antibiotics and resistance . Fernández-Alarcón et al. (2010) studied fish¶ farms in
Chile and found that 21.8% of the Pseudomonas-type bacteria carried resistance to Florfenicol.¶
Interestingly, these resistant strains of bacteria were also resistant to streptomycin, chloramphenicol,¶ and
oxytetracycline, thus indicating that genetic resistance to one antibiotic can confer resistance¶ to many
other antibiotics.
Biodiversity Defense
Biodiversity isn’t key to survival
Calgary Herald, August 30, 1997
Ecologists have long maintained that diversity is one of nature's greatest strengths, but new research suggests that diversity alone
does not guarantee strong ecosystems. In findings that could intensify the debate over endangered species and habitat conservation,
three new studies suggest a greater abundance of plant and animal varieties doesn't always translate to better ecological health. At
least equally important, the research found, are the types of species and how they function together. "Having a long list of Latin names
isn't always better than a shorter list of Latin names," said Stanford University biologist Peter Vitousek, co-author of one of the studies
published in the journal Science. Separate experiments in California, Minnesota and Sweden, found that diversity often had little
bearing on the performance of ecosystems -- at least as measured by the growth and health of native plants. In fact, the communities
with the greatest biological richness were often the poorest when it came to productivity and the cycling of nutrients. One study
compared plant life on 50 remote islands in northern Sweden that are prone to frequent wildfires from lightning strikes. Scientist
David Wardle of Landcare Research in Lincoln, New Zealand, and colleagues at the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, found
that islands dominated by a few species of plants recovered more quickly than nearby islands with greater biological diversity. Similar
findings were reported by University of Minnesota researchers who studied savannah grasses, and by Stanford's Vitousek and
colleague David Hooper, who concluded that functional characteristics of plant species were more important than the number of
varieties in determining how ecosystems performed. British plant ecologist J.P. Grime, in a commentary summarizing the research,
said there is as yet no "convincing evidence that species diversity and ecosystem function are consistently and causally related." "It
could be argued," he added, "that the tide is turning against the notion of high biodiversity as a controller of ecosystem function and
insurance against ecological collapse."
Species loss is inevitable: they can’t solve all causes

New Straits Times (Malaysia), February 4, 2001
Monash University Malaysia's Bachelor of Science in Environmental Management trains students for careers with the
government, industry, nongovernmental organisations such as WWF, Greenpeace, Malaysian Nature Society, Friends of the Earth,
schools and universities, consulting firms and research organisations. According to Monash lecturer specialising in the ecology
of tropical rivers and streams, Dr Catherine Yule, the programme ensures that students understand how the natural
environment works and how best to manage it and utilise it in a sustainable fashion. Students study subjects including of
environmental science, marine and freshwater biology, chemistry, ecology, soil science, environmental health, forest management,
atmospheric processes and microbiology, Yule said. She added that students are introduced to a wide range of laboratory techniques
and much of the practical work will be undertaken in the field, leading to careers both in laboratories and in the field. Graduates will
be able to conduct scientific studies, develop and enforce regulatory environmental standards and understand the broader social,
economic, political and legal aspects of environmental management, Yule said. Having worked as an environmental consultant in
Australia, Papua New Guinea, Indonesia and Malaysia for over 20 years, Yule said that environmental management is simply managing
the environment to ensure that all species, including human beings, work in harmony with the environment. "There are two ways of
looking at environmental management," Yule said. The environment in national forests and recreational parks are "managed from the
perspective of plants and animals, where we study what the animals and plants need to survive and multiply". From a human
perspective, environmental scientists study ways of protecting the environment in view of new developments in the country, such as
setting up of manufacturing plants, housing developments, mining activities, she said. Yule added that managing the environment
from a human perspective also includes the safety of the workers themselves. "There is a great need to protect our environment for
without it, humans will not survive. A cascade of events from pollution and natural disasters to famine will happen to cause the
extinction of the human race," she said. There are also economical reasons for sustainable management of natural resources, Yule
said. "Natural resources are a source of income and with these resources depleted, the world economy will not be able to survive. In
the end, it is for our own safety and interests to protect the environment. "Esthetically, people enjoy the outdoors and protecting the
environment is for self-satisfaction." Yule rates the loss of biodiversity as the number one environmental crisis. "The
extinction of species that we know and don't not know of is happening at an alarming rate, caused by
pollution and the destruction of habitats. Other crises include global warming, river and air pollution, destruction of
rainforests and even over population."
Biodiversity Keystone Flawed Theory

Keystone is FLAWED-It’s a myth
Mark Plummer, Senior Fellow at the Discovery Institute, and Charles Mann, Noah’s Choice, 1995, p.
130
In the 1970s, this thinking generated an outpouring of eco-"philosophy for the common man, as exemplified by the lovely vision that
"everything is connected to everything else"—to cite the first of biologist Barry Commoner's famous Three Laws of Ecology.
But this picture has been tested and found wanting. Indeed, some ecologists question whether ecosystems actually exist as
such. "There are the self-perpetuating, self-regulating systems you see in popular accounts." Daniel Simberloff told us, "but I am
unaware of any rigorous proof that [such perfectly meshed systems] occur frequently in nature." Biological
communities, he argued, are little more than creations of contingency. Collections of organisms that happen to share the
same living quarters. Species interact with one another, but so do the denizens of an apartment complex, and
nobody thinks the building will fall down if one family leaves.
Redundancy prevents ecosystem collapse-keystone theory is wrong

Chris Maser, internationally recognized expert in forest ecology and governmental consultant, 1992,
Global Imperative: Harmonizing Culture and Nature, p. 40
Redundancy means that more than one species can perform similar functions. It’s a type of ecological
insurance policy, which strengthens the ability of the system to retain the integrity of its basic relationships. The insurance of
redundancy means that the loss of a species or two is not likely to result in such severe functional
disruptions of the ecosystem so as to cause its collapse because other species can make up for the functional loss.
Species evolve to replace those lost
Larry D. Martin, professor of ecology and evolutionary biology and curator of

vertebrate paleontology at the University of Kansas, World and I, February 1, 2001
Wells does not claim that there were any fish in the Cambrian seas, let alone fishermen. In fact, he accepts the fossil record and geological
time as presented by the geologists. There has been a lot of extinction at different times. Probably 95 percent of all the
species that have ever lived are now extinct, but this doesn't mean that at any time in the past there was nearly twenty times
the biodiversity there is today. Many extinctions were followed by the appearance of new taxa. Either there is a
Creator who operates according to the old motto "if at first you don't succeed, try again" or there is some
mechanism, like evolution, to replace lost diversity.
Marine Reserves Negative
Topicality: Reserves and Protection Are Not Development

A. Definition and interpretation: Development of the ocean means extractive
development of resources.
Walter F. Clark, Ocean and Coastal Law Specialist at North Carolina Sea Grant College Program, and
Steven E. Whitesell, Research Assistant at North Carolina Sea Grant College Program, July 1, 1994
"North Carolina's Ocean Stewardship Area: A Management Study," Division of Coastal Management,
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources.
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CZIC-ht393-n8-n67-1994/html/CZIC-ht393-n8-n67-1994.htm (accessed
5/1/2014)
Drilling related to the exploration or extraction of oil or gas from North Carolina's coastal ocean would
constitute development as defined by CAMA. Development includes: any activity in a duly designated
area of environmental concern involving, requiring or consisting of the costruction or enlargement of a
structure; excavation; dredging; filling; dumping; removal of clay, silt, sand, gravel or minerals;
bulkheading; driving of pilings; clearing or alteration of land as an adjunct of construction; alteration or
removal of sand dunes; alteration of the shore, bank or bottom of the Atlantic Ocean or any sound, bay,
river, creek, stream, lake or canal.
B. Violation: Reserves specifically ban ocean development

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, November 22, 2013
"Oregon Marine Reserves," Marine Resources: Commercial and Recreational Marine Fisheries,
http://www.dfw.state.or.us/MRP/marinereserves.asp (accessed 5/1/2014)
In 2012, Oregon completed designation of five marine reserve sites within its state waters (0-3 nautical
miles offshore). Each site consists of a no take marine reserve and most also include one or more, less
restrictive marine protected area(s). The marine reserves prohibit all take of fish, invertebrates, wildlife
and seaweeds as well as ocean development, except as necessary for monitoring or research. The
protected areas have varying levels of protection; allowing or prohibiting specific take and prohibiting all
ocean development.
C. Best for ground: Allowing preservation to be a subset of development makes

the topic bidirectional and precludes the negative from arguing an anti-
development, pro-conservation position
D. Topicality is a voting issue for reasons of fairness, community cohesion, and
education
Topicality: Reserves and Protection Are Not Development

Development activities degrade rather than replenish oceans
Biliana Cicin-Sain, fellow at Gerard J. Mangone Center for Marine Policy, University of Delaware, and
Stefano Belfiore, NOAA International Program Office, 2006
"Linking marine protected areas to integrated coastal and ocean management: A review of theory and
practice," http://cmsdata.iucn.org/,
http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/linking_mpas_to_integrated_coastal_management.pdf (accessed
5/3/2014)
Development activities in beach and dune systems can change patterns of sediment transport or alter
inshore current systems. Marine aquaculture activities in tropical areas which often involve removal of
mangrove forests to create aquaculture ponds, can interfere significantly with the many functions
mangrove systems perform, such as serving as buffers for coastal storms and nursery habitats for
juvenile fishes. Port development and dredging can degrade coral reefs and seagrasses through the
build up of sediments. Inland activities such as logging, agricultural practices (e.g., burning of cane
sugar), and animal husbandry practices (e.g., pollution of streams by animal waste) damage estuarine
and ocean areas through increased flow of sediment, nutrients, pesticides, and other pollutants into
riverine and estuarine systems.
Literature indicates protected areas are opposite of development

Biliana Cicin-Sain, fellow at Gerard J. Mangone Center for Marine Policy, University of Delaware, and
Stefano Belfiore, NOAA International Program Office, 2006
"Linking marine protected areas to integrated coastal and ocean management: A review of theory and
practice," http://cmsdata.iucn.org/,
http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/linking_mpas_to_integrated_coastal_management.pdf (accessed
5/3/2014)
A wide variety of economic and social activities taking place in the coastal zone and ocean affect the
functioning of MPAs. In addition to economic and social activities taking place in the coastal zone,
activities further inland and upland (and even upwind) can have significant impacts on coastal/ocean
areas and MPAs. Coastal and ocean development activities can significantly affect the ecology of the
coastal zone and the functioning of coastal and ocean processes and resources, as the following
examples indicate: Industrial development in the coastal zone can decrease the productivity of wetlands
by: introducing pollutants, including heavy metals and nutrients, and by changing water circulation and
temperature patterns. Diking and water withdrawals for agriculture can affect the functioning of
wetlands through reduced freshwater inflows and through changes in water circulation.
Protected Areas Don’t Solve

Political and economic pressures cause protected areas to be isolated in low-value
locations, undermining biodiversity solvency
Bob Pressey, Professor and Program Leader, Conservation Planning at James Cook University, January
17, 2013
"Australia’s new marine protected areas: why they won’t work," The Conversation,
http://theconversation.com/australias-new-marine-protected-areas-why-they-wont-work-11469
On land and in the sea, we’re losing sight of what nature conservation is about. We’ve become
dangerously focused on protected areas, but rarely consider what they’re supposed to achieve. One
result is that biodiversity is declining almost everywhere while protected areas expand. Why the
apparent paradox? An important reason is that protected areas tend to be in the wrong places. On land,
it’s a safe generalisation that protected areas are biased to “residual” places - those with least promise
for commercial uses. In some regions, this is because only residual landscapes survive in anything like
their natural state. But another important factor is political pragmatism. Electorates in many countries
like the idea of nature conservation but are undiscerning about exactly what this means. Governments
can therefore present residual protected areas - and the more extensive the better - as real progress for
conservation.
Political pragmatism strips solvency, reducing protected areas to residual, giving us a

false sense of security and obscuring actual threats
Bob Pressey, Professor and Program Leader, Conservation Planning at James Cook University, January
17, 2013
"Australia’s new marine protected areas: why they won’t work," The Conversation,
http://theconversation.com/australias-new-marine-protected-areas-why-they-wont-work-11469
Meanwhile, the processes that threaten biodiversity continue largely unabated and declines in
biodiversity continue. Second, by giving a false impression of conservation progress, residual protected
areas use up societies’ tolerances of protection, progressively making future protected areas, especially
those that might be effective in averting threats, more difficult to establish. Third, residual protected
areas place the onus of real conservation on off-reserve measures. These vary greatly in effectiveness
and many can be diluted, ignored, or removed at political or administrative whim. These problems mean
that measuring conservation progress in terms of the extent of protected areas is usually meaningless.
Another implication is that residual protected areas can produce outcomes that are worse than neutral.
By failing to avert present or impending threats while pre-empting later protected areas that could be
more effective, their contribution can be irretrievably negative.
Protected Areas Don’t Solve

Benefits of protected areas are exaggerated; biodiversity gains aren’t that high
Churchill B. Grimes and Stephen Ralston, National Marine Fisheries Service, 2012
"Marine Reserves: The Best Option for our Oceans?" Ecology and the Environment,
http://palumbi.stanford.edu/manuscripts/marine%20reserves%20the%20best%20option%20for%20our
%20oceans.pdf (accessed 4/30/2014)
We need to ask whether the biodiversity benefits inside the protected area are more valuable than the
biodiversity costs of additional fishing pressure outside. Once we realize that MPAs are effort-shifting
programs, we recognize that the comparison of abundance inside and outside protected areas is flawed;
the benefits estimated by comparing abundance inside and outside reserves, or before and after
reserves are established (Halpem and Warner 2002) will be exaggerated.
Policy and value conflict undermines solvency

Camilo Mora, Department of Biology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, and Peter F. Sale,
Institute for Water, Environment and Health, United Nations University, July 28, 2011
"Ongoing global biodiversity loss and the need to move beyond protected areas: a review of the
technical and practical shortcomings of protected areas on land and sea," Marine Ecology Progress
Series, Vol. 234, http://www.int-res.com/articles/theme/m434p251 (accessed 4/28/2014)
The establishment of PAs is known to generate several types of conflict among local residents, e.g.
among members of a community, among communities, between communities and the state, and among
stakeholder groups (Christie 2004). The nature of these conflicts is varied and may be derived from
accurate or erroneous perceptions of an inequitable distribution of the benefits of protection among
individuals or groups (Katon et al. 1999, Christie 2004). Conflicts may include power struggles, heavy-
handed enforcement methods, competing management goals (e.g. fisheries enhancement vs. tourism
development; Agardy et al. 2003, Christie et al. 2003, Christie 2004), and land- and resource-use
displacement (West et al. 2006).
Barriers to PA Solvency
Small areas increase risk of poaching
Populations inside such small MPAs are also more vulnerable to the effects of poaching compared to
those in larger ones (Kritzer 2004). The deleterious effects of small PAs, via home ranges overlapping
their boundaries, also occur in terrestrial systems (Buechner 1987, Woodroffe & Ginsberg 1998), where
nearly 60% of the PAs are <1 km2 (Fig. 2e).
Coral loss caused by other stressors undermines solvency

Human stressors not regulated in PAs can preclude the benefits of even well-managed PAs. In the case
of coral reefs, for instance, MPAs can have no direct effects on preventing the loss of corals due to
warming, acidification, or pollution (Jones et al. 2004, Coelho & Manfrino 2007, Graham et al. 2008,
Mora 2008). Given that corals play a key role in the supply of food and a structurally complex habitat
offering fish protection against predators, many species of fish inside well managed MPAs have
experienced comparable population declines due to the effects of coral loss, as have fish outside MPA
borders (Jones et al. 2004, Graham et al. 2008).
Protected Areas Don’t Solve Biodiversity

Human consumption outstrips biodiversity replenishment of protected areas
Recognizing that biodiversity loss is intrinsically related to our high demand for ecological resources
suggests to us that global initiatives need to address our demand for resources more directly if
preservation of biodiversity is to be achieved. While we can limit human use of natural resources locally
through the effective implementation of PAs, this will only address some causes of biodiversity loss, and,
as shown in this review, there are numerous challenges to implement this strategy adequately across
the world. As long as our demand for ecological goods and services continues to grow so will the extent
of those challenges and the difficulty of using PAs to reduce biodiversity loss (Fig. 3). Therefore,
alternative solutions targeting human demand for ecological goods and services, while ensuring human
welfare should be prioritized and brought to the forefront of the international conservation agenda.
Climate change overwhelms solvency of PAs

In the ocean, the ecological responses of biodiversity to different human threats are intricate and pose a
number of challenges to the proper design and success of MPAs. For animals with pelagic larval stages,
increases in temperature might accelerate development, reducing larval period and the scales at which
propagules will disperse (Almany et al. 2009, Munday et al. 2009). At the same time, habitat loss
resulting from ocean warming, acidification and catastrophic weather might cause suitable patches to
become more isolated (Hoegh-Guldberg et al. 2007). Thus, climate change, by increasing habitat
isolation and reducing dispersal capabilities, can increase the extinction debts of MPAs as more and
more resident populations lose viability because they lose connectivity. Similar scenarios have been
described on land where climate change is displacing suitable habitats, which, depending upon
migration capabilities, is causing differential impacts on species and could lead to numerous extirpations
and possibly extinctions (Parmesan & Yohe 2003, Root et al. 2003). Existing statistics suggest, for
instance, that for Europe alone, between 58 and 63% of species of plants and terrestrial vertebrates
could lose suitable climate inside PAs by 2080, given conservative scenarios of climate change (Araujo et
al. 2011). The worldwide deterioration and increased patchiness of habitats due to human impacts is a
major challenge for the biological success of even rigorously managed PAs on land and sea (Klausmeier
2001, Jameson et al. 2002, McClanahan et al. 2002).
Protected Areas Don’t Increase Fish Stocks

Protected areas only effectively protect species that don’t migrate, with small
populations
Michael J. Fogarty, Associate Scientist at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution and NOAA Fisheries,
and Steven A. Murawski, Director, NOAA Office of Science and Technology, December 2004
"Do Marine Protected Areas Really Work?" Oceanus, http://www.whoi.edu/oceanus/feature/do-
marine-protected-areas-really-work (accessed 4/25/2014)
MPAs have now been established throughout the world ocean, from the tropics to the poles. Most are
relatively small. Many are neither adequately enforced nor monitored to determine their effectiveness.
Of those that have been scientifically monitored, many are in tropical and sub-tropical areas. Fish in
these regions live most of their lives in specific habitats, such as reef structures, and don’t stray from
them. Their fidelity to a small territory is an important part of the potential success of their marine
reserve. Populations do increase in such reserves, and some studies suggest a spillover effect from the
reserve that augments fisheries nearby. By contrast, in temperate, boreal, and subarctic systems—
where most of the major world fisheries reside—many fish populations are wide-ranging and often
exhibit extensive seasonal migrations.
Solvency is dependent on spillover, which requires migration, difficult to predict

Despite increases in biomass, MPAs only benefit a fishery if fish eggs and larvae are exported from
closed areas to replenish open, harvested areas, and/or if some harvestable-size stock “spills over,”
moving from closed to open areas to be caught. But if fish at any age leave closed areas at high rates, it
will prevent a buildup within the reserve and cancel out any positive effects from the MPA. Estimating
the export of eggs and larvae is extremely difficult. But we can use the location of spawning
aggregations and hydrodynamic models to estimate the magnitudes and directions of eggs and larvae
dispersal.
Shift Disadvantage
The shift to more vulnerable and less accountable sources will result in a net decline in
biodiversity
Ray Hilborn, professor of aquatic and fisheries science, University of Washington, April 12, 2014
"Protecting Marine Biodiversity with 'New' Conservation," Cool Green Science: The Science Blog of the
Nature Conservancy, http://blog.nature.org/science/2014/04/12/nature-longread-protecting-marine-
biodiversity-new-conservation-ray-hilborn/ (accessed 4/30/2014)
The protected-area approach in marine conservation has two major disadvantages. The first problem is
effort displacement. When an area is closed to fishing, the vessels move elsewhere, adding fishing
pressure to some areas that potentially equals or outweighs the benefits seen in the protected areas
(Pastoors et al. 2000). Hamilton et al. (2010) found that abundance of target species declined outside
reserves and increased inside reserves, yielding no net increase in abundance. The second biodiversity
problem is a reduction in the total sustainable yield of fish stocks when marine reserves are large. This
loss will almost certainly be made up by some other form of food production with negative biodiversity
consequences (Hilborn 2013). At the extreme, if lost fish production is compensated by cutting
rainforest to grow crops or cattle, we can be very sure that the total biodiversity consequences will be
negative.
Protected areas are ineffective and increase unsustainable fishing elsewhere

Closed areas are a very blunt and not very effective instrument to protect the biodiversity from this kind
of by-catch, although closed areas have generally been part of the package. A recent review of by-catch
mitigation for three species including a turtle, an albatross and a small cetacean (Senko et al. 2013)
concluded: “Time–area closures appeared to be of limited effectiveness for the focal species.” Many
have argued for closing biodiversity hot-spots (Worm et al. 2003). But since many of the species of
concern are highly mobile, closed areas will have the effect of intensifying fishing effort elsewhere with
little real reduction in mortality of these species.
Shift Disadvantage
Shift inevitable and risks harvesting in more vulnerable areas
But by themselves, MPAs cannot attain all of today’s fishery management objectives. And they can
create unintended consequences. Preventing harvesting in some areas, for example, inevitably results in
people fishing in other, perhaps more vulnerable, locations.
Illegal overfishing undermines solvency

Ocean Sentry, August 21, 2009
"Overfishing: Oceans are Dying," oceansentry.org, http://www.oceansentry.org/en/2557-sobrepesca-
muerte-de-los-oceanos.html#sthash.oon8AdUC.dpuf (accessed 5/5/2014)
Today, the number of fish we pull in is actually shrinking. Illegal and unreported fishing, whose
magnitude has only recently been estimated by researchers, has contributed massively to the depletion
of the oceans, accounting for an estimated 30 per cent of global annual catches in recent years. Roughly
two thirds of the ocean is practically free of laws and the vessels only follow the laws ratified for their
flag country. However many fishing countries have not ratified any international convention to protect
the sea. Currently, 170 vessels with flag of convenience have a European charterer, half of them are
Spanish and, in addition, 600 illegal vessels fish in the Mediterranean Sea.
Negative: Anthropocentrism Links

The conversation on protected areas begins with the assertion that humans have a
right to use the oceans
James Mize, Seattle Attorney, former NOAA Counsel, 2007
"Stakeholder engagement strategies for designating New Zealand marine reserves," Victoria University
of Wellington,
http://researcharchive.vuw.ac.nz/xmlui/bitstream/handle/10063/366/thesis.pdf?sequence=3 (accessed
5/3/2014)
Coward et al. (2000) discuss fisheries ethics at length, focussing on “four kinds of justice: distributive,
productive, restorative and creative.” Of these, the most relevant to the present discussion is
“restorative justice” which refers to a need to restore degraded ecosystems, both for the benefits of the
plants and animals which live in the ecosystem, and the humans which depend on the ecosystem for
food and livelihood. In conclusion, they suggest: “Recognizing that we have the right to use our
environment as a necessary resource… we must also recognize the concurrent responsibility not to
abuse that right by taking more than we need, or more than the ecosystem can sustain…” Their
recommendations include promotion of the precautionary principle, and promotion of marine protected
area development.
Protected areas are plotted and enacted using human-centered criteria and values
James Mize, Seattle Attorney, former NOAA Counsel, 2007
"Stakeholder engagement strategies for designating New Zealand marine reserves," Victoria University
of Wellington,
http://researcharchive.vuw.ac.nz/xmlui/bitstream/handle/10063/366/thesis.pdf?sequence=3 (accessed
5/3/2014)
Mill’s premise is an anthropocentric viewpoint, as is Rawls’; the happiness of non-humans does not
factor in the equation. As applied to the case of marine reserves, this anthropocentrism has
implications. The various sentient marine organisms or a given location’s marine ecology is irrelevant to
the calculation of worth except inasmuch as it impacts on some human value. Human values of marine
resources not only include extractive uses such as fishing, but also include in situ values such as
recreation (i.e. fish to look at while diving) or option values (i.e. the possibility of human use in the
future, such as protection of biodiversity for “bioprospecting” for medical research). Some ecologists
argue in favour of an inherent value of a marine organism for its own sake, however, under a utilitarian
perspective such does not exist. But “existence value” does exist in terms of human perception, that is,
the utility or “happiness” correlated with the thought of the existence of the marine organism regardless
of whether the organism is put to use.
The ultimate aim of marine conservation is future social and economic development
Jon Nevill, director of OnlyOnePlanet Consulting (specialising in aquatic conservation policy), April 26,
2008
"Ethics, fisheries, and marine protected areas," Onlyoneplanet.com,
http://www.onlyoneplanet.com/marineProtectedAreaEthics.doc (accessed 5/4/2014)
Terrestrial scientists do have a track record, if somewhat uneven, in using ethical arguments to justify
the creation of protected areas – with Aldo Leopold being one of the most celebrated (more below). A
well known example from more recent times is the controversial judgement of Justice Douglas (US
Supreme Court) who argued that the moral rights of nature should be given legal recognition – based
partly on the arguments of terrestrial ecologists (see Stone 1996). Jim Chen, a prominent academic US
lawyer, continues to press such arguments (Chen 2005) again based on the findings of terrestrial
biologists. As a fairly typical example of a marine scientist arguing for the creation of marine protected
areas, Professor Terry Hughes argued that a substantial proportion (30% or more) of coral reef
ecosystems need to be protected from harvesting pressures in order to ensure ecosystem stability.
According to Hughes (2004) (my emphasis): “Our final recommendation, the most challenging, is for the
creation of institutional frameworks that align the marketplace and economic self-interest with
environmental conservation. The ultimate aim is to secure future options for social and economic
development” (my emphasis).
Incentives Counterplan Solvency

Incentives and cooperation solve better than PAs because many areas can’t be
mapped, but can be functionally controlled through agreements among stakeholders
And while protected areas seem to be an ideal solution for keeping sensitive habitats from the ravages
of bottom-contact gear, the data suggest that “new conservation” may be a more effective tool for even
this problem. For instance, the British Columbia continental shelf is subject to a bottom trawl fishery
that tends to fish soft grounds that are not particularly sensitive. The ocean floor there is a patchwork of
hard and soft areas, with corals and other sensitive structures scattered at various places along the
coast. Any protected areas approach would require a highly detailed map (which does not exist) of
these sensitive features and a very complex patchwork of closed areas. What does exist, however, is an
agreement negotiated between local environmental groups and the British Columbian fishing industry
that includes specific closed areas; individual vessel limits on the allowable catch of corals and sponges
that provide incentives for fishermen to avoid any place these might be caught; a reporting requirement
to broadcast immediately any large catch of corals and sponges to the entire fleet so that these sensitive
spots are identified and known; and a consultative process between government, NGOs and industry to
monitor and revise these methods.
Protected areas fail; incentives solve

But mixed-species fisheries may catch dozens of species in one set of the net, and the sustainable
exploitation rate may differ greatly between species. So how to harvest the most productive species and
avoid the least productive ones? “Old conservation” strategies would close the areas where the most
vulnerable species are typically found; the new conservation provides incentives to fishing vessels to
find areas where the target species can be caught and the vulnerable species can be avoided. These
latter approaches have been shown to be highly effective when applied (Branch and Hilborn 2008) and
are in fact much more effective at reducing the catch of vulnerable species than closed-area strategies.
Status Quo Fishery Management Solves

Status quo fisheries are better-managed and fishing is widely restricted
The justification that is most often cited for establishing domestic MPAs is that traditional fisheries
management in the US is a failure. However, this is ill-informed. The present low levels of many fish
stocks reflect poor management decisions made many years ago. A closer look at current exploitation
rates reveals that current management is doing far better. Although many fisheries (eg cod in the
northwest Atlantic and certain rockfish stocks along the west coast of the US) are in severe decline,
many others, such as king mackerel in the Gulf of Mexico, summer and yellowtail flounder, Atlantic
mackerel, and sea scallop along the US Atlantic coast, are at sustainable levels. In fact, of the 283 (25%)
of 905 fish stocks managed by NMFS for which the status is known, only 15% are overfished and 39% are
fished at or near their long-term potential yield (NRC 2002). Moreover, many US fisheries are already
managed under severe spatial management regimes; for example, virtually the entire continental shelf
of the west coast is presently closed to groundfishing.
20 percent is unnecessary; fishery management corresponds to area controls,

resulting in optimal management
One simplistic generalization being touted by MPA advocates is that, at a minimum, 20% of a species'
habitat needs to be protected to realize the benefits of an MPA (Agardy 2003). This figure is apparently
based upon theoretical results showing that when fishing mortality is excessive, overall fishery yields
could be enhanced by substantial area closures. However, many studies also show that traditional
fishery management controls on fishing effort correspond directly to area controls, and that it is possible
to manage fisheries optimally just using effort controls (Mangel 1998; Hastingsand Botsford 1999),
which has been the general paradigm practiced within the US.
Status Quo Fishery Management Solves

Lower population is self-correcting and sustainable; MPAs are unnecessary for
enhanced fishery levels
Moreover, the claim has been frequently made that MPAs will promote sustainable fisheries and
enhance fishery yields (Nowlis and Roberts 1998), but density-dependent theory tells us that per- capita
production is lowest at carrying capacity (ie in the absence of fishing), and that compensation at lower
population levels produces a surplus that can be sustainably harvested.
Sufficient arctic marine protections exist now

Jeanine Stewart, Americas Editor at Undercurrent News, April 15, 2014
"Greenpeace cries foul over Alaska canyons coral reef study decision," Undercurrent News,
http://www.undercurrentnews.com/2014/04/15/greenpeace-cries-foul-over-alaska-canyons-coral-reef-
study-decision/ (accessed 4/22/2014)
Over 1.2 million square miles of Marine Protected Areas (equal in size to 40% of the continental
United States) have already been established in waters off Alaska as a result of a science-based
precautionary approach to management, according to these industry groups.
High Seas Closure Counterplan: Solvency

Nation-state and EEZ reserves can't solve; a global high seas approach is necessary
Greenpeace, 2008
"Closing Time For Overfishing- Creating Pacific High Seas Marine Reserves," Greenpeace International,
http://www.greenpeace.org/international/Global/international/planet-2/report/2008/5/closing-time-
for-overfishing.pdf (accessed 5/7/2014)
Both legal and IUU fishing are taking vast quantities of tuna from the Pacific. Scientific warnings are
repeatedly made about the WCPO, which contains the largest and one of the last abundant tuna
fisheries left in the world. However, bigeye and yellowfin tuna are now being fished at unsustainable
levels that threaten the future viability of these stocks. The modern fishing reality is dominated by
industrial fishing vessels that far out-match nature's ability to replenish fish. Super-sized fishing vessels
using state-of-the-art fish finding sonar and helicopters or spotter planes can pinpoint schools of fish
quickly and accurately. These vessels also have fish processing and packing plants, huge freezing
systems, fishmeal processing plants and powerful engines to drag enormous fishing gear through the
ocean. In many cases, regulation of these fishing vessels is woefully inadequate – fish stocks are
plummeting and little regard is paid to the resulting impact on marine ecosystems. Many species are
being fished to commercial extinction with more on the way.
Closure allows replenishment and massively increases yields, solving overfishing

Nick Wilson, Staffwriter at San Luis Obispo Tribune, April 7, 2014
"Closing high seas to fishing would be beneficial, Cal Poly Professor says in study," sanluisobispo.com,
http://www.sanluisobispo.com/2014/04/07/3010484/close-high-seas-fishing-study.html (accessed
5/7/2014)
Costello and White’s research concludes that closing international waters to fishing could help rebuild
stocks of migratory species, ultimately aiding coastal fishing worldwide when those fish swim within 200
nautical miles of shore, where a nation has exclusive fishing rights.
Complete high seas closure allows state-by-state coordination of protection, reduces

overall exploitation, and facilitates stock rebuilding
Christopher Costello, professor of resource economics at UC Santa Barbara and Crow White,
assistant professor of biological sciences at Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, March 25, 2014
"Close the High Seas to Fishing?" Public Library of Science: Biology,
http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.1001826 (accessed
5/7/2014)
Smaller MPAs, increasingly common and well-studied in coastal waters, are too small to produce
significant benefits for most migratory stocks [26]. Also, closing only a portion of the high seas may
simply displace fishing effort to other open-access areas [29], thereby leaving the problem unsolved.
Instead, a complete closure of the HS may simultaneously achieve three desirable outcomes: (1) It acts
as a coordination mechanism across EEZs; (2) it reduces overall exploitation rates; and (3) it protects a
sufficient range of the stock to allow rebuilding.
High Seas Closure Counterplan: Solvency

High seas closure increases stocks within EEZs by 30 percent, increasing yields and
doubling profits
Jason G. Goldman, cognitive scientist and science writer based in Los Angeles, April 16, 2014
"Should we close the high seas to fishing?" http://www.eco-business.com/opinion/should-we-close-
high-seas-fishing/ (accessed 4/24/2014)
White and Costello created a mathematical model that accounted for the fraction of a fish stock’s range
covered by EEZs, the number of EEZs which is included in that species’ range, the biological parameters
of the stock (such as reproduction or life expectancy), and so on, in order to better understand what
would happen under various protection plans for the high seas. It’s notable that the current status quo,
in which the high seas are completely open and 42% of oceans are in EEZs, resulted in the worst
outcomes for fisheries, both in terms of sustainability and economics. But the answer isn’t to simply
enlarge the EEZs, because that just shifts the problem to one of overharvesting on the high seas to one
of conflict between nations. When their model allowed for a complete closure of the high seas, stocks
increased throughout the oceans: 400% on the high seas and 30% within EEZs. That is, even though
fishing would continue within the EEZs, stocks there would still increase. Monetary profit would more
than double, and yield would increase by more than 40 percent.
High seas closure results in huge spillovers to EEZs

5/7/2014)
When the HS were closed, countries would compete across EEZs, but no fishing would occur on the HS:
stock increased everywhere (4-fold on the HS and 30% in EEZs), profit more than doubled, and yield
increased by 42% (though profit and yield are still only 68% and 84% of their theoretical values under
complete cooperation). The disproportionate increase in profit is due to interacting effects of
elimination of the inefficient overexploitation on the HS, enhanced coordination across EEZs incentivized
by the spillover and protection of fish from the HS, and reduced fishery cost from harvesting a higher
stock density in the EEZs. Collectively, these factors raise profit (and yield) beyond the loss from not
fishing on the HS.
Enforcement is feasible
5/7/2014)
Finally, although perfect compliance with a HS closure may not be necessary for gains to emerge (Figure
S6), enforcement is a concern [8],[25]. Yet major advances in fishery surveillance technology [23], recent
increases in the scope and use of agreements on the HS (including with MPAs) [8],[23],[25],[37],[38],
and perhaps part of the fishery gains due to the HS closure, could be used to support its enforcement.
Politics Links
Reserves and protected areas are politically contentious and poorly debated
Trevor J. Willis, National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research, New Zealand, 2013
"Scientific and biodiversity values of marine reserves," DOC Research and Development Series 340,
http://eprints.port.ac.uk/14319/1/Willis_2013_drds340entire_copy.pdf (accessed 4/29/2014)
Marine reserves are areas of marine habitat that are permanently closed to all fishing or any type of
human disturbance (apart from permitted activities). They tend to engender controversy during their
establishment, at least partly because their goals are often not clearly expressed (Agardy et al. 2003),
because Fishery professionals and environmental advocates present conflicting information about their
usefulness (Polunin 2002; Russ 2002; Kaiser 2005), or because the conclusions drawn from the science
to date (Willis et al. 2003e; Sale et al. 2005) remain contentious.
Empirically fishing limits cause lobbyists to overwhelm the political process and are
contentious
Michael Conathan, Director of Ocean Policy at American Progress, May 3, 2013
"Fish on Fridays: A ‘Day of Reckoning’ for the New England Groundfishery," Center for American
Progress, Fish on Fridays: A ‘Day of Reckoning’ for the New England Groundfishery (accessed 5/1/2014)
Back in January, at a meeting of the New England Fishery Management Council, John Bullard, the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s top official in the northeast region, told the
assembled crowd that a “day of reckoning” was coming to America’s oldest fishery. New science had
shown that the populations of several fish species were in far worse shape than previously thought, and
under the law that meant 2013 would be the first year catch limits would have to reflect this new reality.
Still, NOAA officials have faced increasing pressure from powerful politicians, acerbic journalists, and
stalwarts of the fishing industry, who have all demanded that it find a way to circumvent the law and
impose less drastic catch limits on several species of fish.
Politics Links
NOAA is always politically controversial

Jacob Levenson, marine biologist who has worked with National Marine Fisheries Service’s Fishery
Statistics Office, April 23, 2010
"New top cop for NOAA, same problems for fishermen," Tradeonlytoday.com,
http://http://blog.tradeonlytoday.com/tradetalk/?p=168 (accessed 5/1/2014)
It is absolutely unfair how the regulations for fishing are stacked against fishermen. One simple mistake,
and suddenly a law has been violated and a fine must be paid. No wonder Dale Jones was so unpopular.
But here’s the thing. If fishery regulations don’t change — if they stay as complicated as they are today
— then NOAA’s top cop will always be unpopular. There’s no way to win if the rules you need to enforce
are too complicated to understand and affect a popular group of people.
Empirically, fishing restrictions spark GOP blocking tactics requiring further political
maneuvering to overcome
Bill Estep, staffwriter at Herald-Leader, May 21, 2013
"Congress approved bill barring fishing restrictions near dams on Cumberland River," Kentucky.com,
http://www.kentucky.com/2013/05/21/2648443/congress-approves-bill-barring.html (accessed
5/2/2014)
The U.S. House on Tuesday approved a measure barring enforcement of controversial fishing restrictions
at dams on the Cumberland River, according to Republican U.S. Sen. Mitch McConnell. The U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers planned to cut off fishing from boats in zones above and below dams because of
safety concerns. Three people had been killed in turbulent waters below dams since 2009, the Corps
said. People who fish the river and lakes protested, however, saying the rule would eliminate some
prime fishing spots, including tailwaters at Wolf Creek Dam in Russell County and at Lake Barkley in
Western Kentucky. McConnell, along with GOP Sens. Rand Paul of Kentucky and Lamar Alexander and
Bob Corker of Tennessee, introduced a measure barring the Corps from enforcing the restrictions. The
Senate first passed the measure as part of a larger bill. It could have taken months for that proposal to
get through the House, so McConnell then pushed through a separate rule barring the Corps from
putting the fishing restrictions in place for two years. That's the measure the House approved Tuesday.
Economy Links
Reserve costs are uniquely damaging: They fall disproportionately on particular
stakeholders and benefits take a long time to materialize; research and development
is expensive
Marjo Vierros, Adjunct Senior Fellow at the United Nations University Institute of Advanced Studies,
Biliana Cicin-Sain, Director of the Gerard J. Mangone Center for Marine Policy, Salvatore Arico,
Programme Specialist for Biodiversity at UNESCO's Division of Ecological and Earth Sciences, and
Christophe Lefebvre, Associate Professor at University Lille, 2010
"Draft Policy Brief on Preserving Life: Marine Biodiversity and Networks of Marine Protected Areas," 5th
Global Conference on Oceans, Coasts and Islands,
http://globaloceanforumdotcom.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/biodiversitypb_4web.pdf (accessed
5/2/2014)
The economic and social costs and benefits of biodiversity conservation are not equitably shared. The
short-term costs of, for example, establishing an MPA may be disproportionately borne by certain
communities or resource users, while benefits may be shared by a larger group of users and could take a
significant amount of time to materialize. In many developing countries, biodiversity conservation may
be too costly when compared to other more immediate needs. Certain research activities, that can lead
to improvements in scientific knowledge and provide a stronger basis for conservation efforts, can
prove to be beyond the financial and technical capabilities of many developing nations.
Initial expansion to solvency levels of 20-30% require massive expenditures

Sarika Cullis-Suzuki and Daniel Pauly, Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouver,
2010
"Marine Protected Area Costs as 'Beneficial' Fisheries Subsidies: A Global Evaluation," Coastal
Management Vol. 38,
http://www.seaaroundus.org/researcher/dpauly/PDF/2010/JournalArticles/MarineProtectedAreaCosts
AsBeneficialFisheriesSubsidies.pdf (accessed 5/1/2014)
Given that current MPAs cover only 0.7% of the entire ocean (Wood et al., 2008), but cost nearly 870
million US$ to maintain, one could assume that it would cost about 25–37 billion US$ annually to
protect 20–30% of the global oceans.
Economy Links
Costs are enhanced by small size of many reserves
Sarika Cullis-Suzuki and Daniel Pauly, Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouver,
2010
"Marine Protected Area Costs as 'Beneficial' Fisheries Subsidies: A Global Evaluation," Coastal
Management Vol. 38,
http://www.seaaroundus.org/researcher/dpauly/PDF/2010/JournalArticles/MarineProtectedAreaCosts
AsBeneficialFisheriesSubsidies.pdf (accessed 5/1/2014)
This value is higher than the 5–19 billion US$ cost estimate in Balmford et al. (2004) because it is
affected by the many small, and hence relatively costly, MPAs. In the MPA database we used in this
study, which is comprised of over 4,400 entries, the mean size of an MPA is 544 km2, whereas the
median is 4.6 km2. This vast disparity between mean and median values is a result of the world’s ten
largest MPAs, which together make up 68% of the world’s cumulative MPA area (Wood et al., 2008). In
contrast, Balmford et al. (2004) based their projections on 83, generally larger MPAs.
Short-run costs are inevitable and will inform economic perceptions of the fishing
industry and community
Martin D. Smith, Nicholas School of the Environment at Duke University, John Lynham, Department
of Economics at University of Hawaii, James N. Sanchirico, Department of Environmental Science and
Policy at University of California-Davis, and James A. Wilson, School of Marine Sciences at University
of Maine, December 9, 2009
"Political Economy of Marine Reserves: Understanding the Role of Opportunity Costs," Proceedings of
the National Academy of Sciences, http://www2.hawaii.edu/~lynham/Welcome_files/PNAS-2010-Smith-
0907365107-2.pdf (accessed 5/1/2014)
Although our long-run model compares a world with the reserve and a world without one at each time
step, Fig. 2 implies that when a reserve is formed, fishermen’s perceptions of shortrun vs. long-run
benefits and costs hinge critically on their perceptions of the dispersal process. But from an opportunity
cost perspective, reserves are always costly in the short run, regardless of beliefs about dispersal. Even
in cases where fishermen would eventually be willing to pay to create the reserve, there are costs to the
fishery during the transition (6, 27). Therefore, opposition at the time a reserve is created depends on
how fishermen weigh the near-term costs against the potential but uncertain long-run benefits. For
conservation planners, it is important to acknowledge that fishermen will likely place greater weight on
the more certain short-term outcomes and discount the uncertain future returns.
Ocean Renewables MHK Negative
Off-Case
A-Spec / I-Spec violations

Identifying specific technologies is essential to predictable ground and
implementation
(OREC) Ocean Renewable Energy Coalition, November 2011, U.S. Marine and Hydrokinetic Renewable
Energy Roadmap, A National Strategy to Support U.S. Energy Security and Create Jobs through the
Commercialization of Marine Renewable Energy Technologies, http://www.oceanrenewable.com/wp-
content/uploads/2011/05/MHK-Roadmap-Final-November-2011.pdf, Accessed 4/26/2014
Since there are over one hundred different MHK technologies under investigation worldwide,
development should concentrate on maturing technologies and issues with broad application. The MHK
industry benefits from efforts that focus on critical path issues, areas of common interest, and shared
technical challenges, where knowledge gained can be leveraged across multiple implementations.
Therefore, the Roadmap concentrates on devices that capture wave energy, tidal energy and current
energy from oceans, rivers, and streams. The technologies for these devices are maturing and have
broad application. This overall R&D strategy emphasizes the essential roles of enabling technologies,
test facilities and resource characterization in realizing MHK commercialization.
Reg-Neg CP solvency (Regulatory-Negotiation)

The status quo is a regulatory nightmare that undermines MHK commercialization
MHK technology and project developers alike must coordinate efforts with the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM), the Bureau of
Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE), the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), the
Department of Energy (DOE) and several additional federal and state government agencies for
permitting projects. This regulatory burden results in a lengthy, arduous and expensive process, even for
just testing and demonstration activities. The status quo presents a significant barrier to the responsible
commercialization of the MHK industry.
Inconsistency and uncertainty plagued the current regulatory framework, which

creates a chilling effect for new development
Todd J. Griset, Attorney with Preti Flaherty’s Energy and Telecommunications Group, 2011,
“Harnessing the Ocean's Power: Opportunities in Renewable Ocean Energy Resources,” Ocean and
Coastal Law Journal, 395, pp. 151-190.
The history of federal regulation of ocean renewable power projects has involved regulation and
assertions of jurisdiction by a wide variety of federal agencies. Depending on the technologies involved
in a given project, as well as the proposed location of the project, project developers have been required
to seek out a variety of permits from numerous federal agencies. Indeed, federal law governing which
agencies may issue permits for ocean renewable energy projects has been variable and inconsistent
over time. This has led to regulatory uncertainty, which in turn has imposed increased costs, a decreased
ability of project developers to secure project financing, and an overall chilling effect on the
development of the nation’s marine renewable power resources. While the current regulatory status
quo is more favorable to project development than previous regimes were, federal regulation of
renewable ocean energy production continues to lack a holistic regulatory scheme.
Regulatory burdens are the #1 non-technical burden to development. Regulatory

negotiation reduces costs for marine renewables
Furthermore, clarification and simplification of the patchwork of regulatory regimes governing
renewable ocean energy projects will bring about additional reductions in the cost of energy from the
sea. As a general principle, uncertainty or inconsistency of regulation tends to deter development and
investment. Unknown or shifting regulatory regimes add risk to the development of any given project.
Indeed, in the context of ocean energy, regulatory uncertainty has been called “the most significant
non-technical obstacle to deployment of this new technology.” Consistent government commitment and
the simplification of licensing and permitting procedures, rank among the hallmarks of a well-planned
system for developing ocean renewable energy.
Reg-Neg CP solvency (Regulatory-Negotiation)

Despite reforms, offshore renewables development faces a web of regulations that
undermine cost-effectiveness
A developer of an offshore renewable energy project faces a relatively complex patchwork of legal
regimes. Although this regulatory structure has recently been partially clarified and streamlined, the
determination of which substantive and procedural regulations apply remains dependent on where the
project will be located. Even after this regulatory reform, the complexity of the regulatory regimes
applicable to renewable energy projects may not prove optimal for the cost-effective development of
such resources.
Studies CP solvency
We should learn more about the environmental impacts of MHK technologies before
deployed
Chad Augustine, Et al., National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 2012, Renewable Electricity Futures
Study, Volume 2: Renewable Electricity Generation and Storage Technologies,
http://www.nrel.gov/analysis/re_futures/, Accessed 4/27/2014
The possible environmental effects associated with new and emerging MHK technologies is not well
understood. Boehlert et al. (2008) reviewed the possible environmental effects of wave development,
and Grecian et al. (2010) independently reviewed the specific potential effect of wave development on
marine birds. Polagye et al. (2010) reviewed the potential environmental effects of tidal development,
and Gill (2005) and Inger et al. (2009) called for multi-disciplinary scientific research to develop a better
understanding of the environmental implications of MHK technologies before they are widely deployed.
MHK technologies are immature and unproven. The environmental questions means
people won’t invest
Today and for the foreseeable future, the MHK industry does not appear to have manufacturing,
transportation, facilities, or basic materials barriers to continued development or deployment. The
current size, complexity, and materials for fabricated of MHK devices do not represent a manufacturing
or deployment challenge. Even over the longer term, the manufacturing challenges are comparable in
many ways to the wind turbine and the oil and gas industry and are felt to be manageable with the
continued growth of the industry. The major challenges for the MHK industry are a consequence of its
newness, and lack of a proven record of accomplishment, as a renewable energy generator. The more
mature renewable technologies, such as solar and wind, have 30 or more years of experience and much
more is understood about their performance, cost, and environmental benefits and impacts. In contrast,
MHK technologies remain immature and unproven, and they have not been deployed in significant
numbers, resulting in costs that are estimated to be too high to be competitive. There also remain many
concerns about potential environmental impacts, which makes it difficult to site and permit projects.
Finally, the financial investors are unwilling to take on the amount of risk that MHK projects would
require with the current level of uncertainty.
The 1AC is not based on sound science. New research should be prioritized before
action
Olivia Langhamer, Department of Biology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 2012,
“Artificial Reef Effect in Relation to Offshore Renewable Energy Conversion: State of the Art,” The
Scientific World Journal, pp. 1-8.
Still, research on offshore renewable industry is in the beginning phase. Both long-term studies and
large scale effects are topics of high scientific value that need to be prioritised. Furthermore, there is a
lack of both replication and baseline studies that are very essential for reliable results that can be used
for more general decision makings. So far, the impacts during the construction phase of offshore
installations seem to be at its highest during this phase, including a lot of noise, boat traffic, cable laying,
and seabed disruptions. During maintenance, the noise generation of the turbines/generators,
vibrations from the installations, and their physical presence may be some of the critical impact factors.
The marine environment may on the other hand benefit from the installation of offshore renewable
energy, since trawling will be excluded and new hard substrate will be introduced. In this paper I will
discuss the opportunities of offshore renewable energy as a habitat enhancement. Specifically for
threatened or commercially interesting species, such as for example, juvenile whiting, cod and lobsters
this may lead to a great benefit for nature conservation. There is a high plausibility that offshore energy
installations act as artificial reefs which in its way can support both environmental and commercial
interests.
Studies CP solvency
Absent greater study, increasing marine renewables disrupts marine ecosystems in 7
ways
Peter J. Schaumberg, counsel and Ami M. Grace-Tardy, associate, both with Beveridge & Diamond,
P.C., Winter 2010, “The Dawn of Federal Marine Renewable Energy Development,” Natural Resources
& Environment, Vol. 24, No. 3, Accessed 4/28/2014,
http://www.bdlaw.com/assets/htmldocuments/2010%20The%20Dawn%20of%20Federal%20Marine%2
0Renewable%20Energy%20Development%20NRE%20P%20Schaumberg%20and%20A.%20Grace-
Tardy.pdf
As with many new technological advancements, marine renewable energy will have unknown impacts
on the marine environment. Efforts to better understand the environmental effects of marine
renewable energy development are underway at a number of federal agencies, including the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the U.S. Department of Energy. These government
agencies, as well as academics and technology developers, have identified a number of potential
impacts that renewable energy technologies could have on the marine ecosystem, including: (1)
alteration of currents and waves; (2) changes to sediment transport or deposition and benthic habitats;
(3) impacts from noise and electromagnetic fields; (4) impacts from releases of toxic chemicals; (5)
interference with fish and marine mammal movement and migration; (6) changes to the ocean’s visual
appearance or cultural resources; and (7) conflicts with other ocean users. U.S. Department of
Commerce, Ecological Effects of Wave Energy Development in the Pacific Northwest (Oct. 2007)
available at http://spo.nwr. noaa.gov/tm/Wave%20Energy%20NOAATM92% 20for%20 web.pdf; U.S.
Department of Energy, Presentation, Draft Potential Envtl. Effects of Marine and Hydrokinetic Energy
Technologies (Nov. 25, 2008), available at
www.ornl.gov/sci/eere/EISAReport/pdfs/webinar_presentation.pdf. All of these potential impacts will
require extensive study to ensure that marine ecosystems are not unduly harmed.
A2: Inherency
Federal support for MHK is high now

The federal government is supporting MHK technologies at unprecedented levels
Tardy.pdf
The federal government is supporting renewable energy at unprecedented levels. In February 2009,
President Obama and Congress agreed to significant U.S. support of renewable energy in the stimulus
bill. The president and Congress have dramatically increased funding for the U.S. Department of
Energy’s wave and tidal technologies program. In addition, President Obama has advocated that by
2012, 10 percent of our domestic energy supply should come from renewable resources, increasing to
25 percent by 2025. Also, now that federal regulation of greenhouse gas emissions is increasingly likely,
the focus on the renewable energy sector is sharpening.
Marine renewables have unprecedented support now through the A.R.R.A.

Tardy.pdf
The dawn of marine renewable energy is here. This new industry stands ready to catch up with the land-
based solar and wind energy sectors thanks to the recent convergence of several events. First, the
federal government is providing unprecedented support for marine renewable energy. The availability
of new renewable energy tax subsidies, loans, and billions of dollars in cash grants under the American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) has dramatically increased the federal government’s investment
in this technology and provided substantial financial incentives to development companies. Ocean
Renewable Energy Coalition, Stimulus Bill Promises to Buoy Marine Renewables Industry (Feb. 20, 2009),
available at www.oceanrenewable. com/2009/02/20/stimulus-bill-promises-to-buoy-marine-
renewables- industry/#more-527. The Omnibus Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2009 quadrupled U.S.
Department of Energy water power research funds, including funds for wave and tidal technology, and,
if approved as proposed, the Omnibus Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2010 will provide significant
new research funding in this area as well. U.S. Department of Energy, FY 2010 Control Table by
Appropriation (May 6, 2009), available at www.cfo.doe.gov/budget/10budget/Content/AppControl.pdf.
A2: Solvency
MHK technologies fail
MHK systems are only in the planning stages and won’t be cost-competitive
Joshua Hunt and Diane Cardwell, Staff Writers, April 28, 2014, “Experimental Efforts to Harvest the
Ocean's Power Face Cost Setbacks,” The New York Times, p. B3
Although some renewable energy technologies -- conventional hydropower, solar and wind -- have
reached commercial viability and can compete in some markets with fossil fuels, the emerging water-
based approaches called marine hydrokinetic technologies are far from meeting that mark. Tidal power,
which captures energy from currents moving in one direction at a time, as opposed to the wave-based
technology of the Ocean Power buoys, is farther along, said Paul Jacobson, ocean energy leader at the
Electric Power Research Institute. One reason, he said, is that tidal power is easier to engineer and has
been able to adapt expertise from the conventional hydroelectric industry. But electricity generation
from the ocean's waves is more complex, and only a few projects are in the planning stages, despite the
vast potential, even outside the best areas like the West Coast and Alaska. ''The cost is still greater than
the alternatives, even other renewables,'' Mr. Jacobson said. ''The expectation is that the cost will come
down, but we're not there yet.''
Despite progress, four major barriers prevent widespread deployment of marine

renewables
Tardy.pdf
Despite all the positive attributes of marine renewable energy and the technological advances in this
field, this energy sector must overcome substantial hurdles before it can become commercially viable in
the United States. Commercial-scale marine projects have yet to be tested in this country. Some also
believe that renewable energy projects will have economic limitations because they are ultimately
dependent on federal government subsidies or favorable climate change legislation. Moreover, private
funding, the primary source for the enormous upfront investment required for these projects, has
declined since the world’s economic crisis began in 2008. Finally, although FERC and MMS resolved the
jurisdictional uncertainty regarding hydrokinetic projects on the OCS, it remains to be seen whether
these agencies’ regulatory regimes can be harmonized and effectively implemented for renewable
energy projects.
Tidal/Wave Energy Bad
Tidal Energy – fails/not effective

Tidal power is not ready for commercialization because huge costs deter investment,
disrupts marine ecosystems, and cannot displace fossil fuels
Ken Silverstein, Staff Writer, June 6, 2013, “Tidal Energy Could Be Next Big Wave,” Forbes,
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ kensilverstein/2013/06/06/tidal-energy-could-be-next-big-wave/,
Accessed 5/3/2014
The Electric Power Research Institute performed feasibility studies in this area. The Palo Alto, Calif.-
based research arm of the electric utility sector said that unlike hydropower, tidal energy does not
require the permanent impediment of water flow and the subsequent harm to aquatic life. Existing tidal
plants, it adds, impound the water before releasing it into generators. And newer tools are even more
progressive and use underwater turbines that ultimately connect to cables to transport the power.
Scientists and engineers must still show that their work can be done on a large-scale basis. And rough
waters lay ahead. Environmentally, tidal power plants can impede sea life migration and can affect local
ecosystems. The optimal solution, says the Energy Department, is to carefully select sites that preserve
scenic shorelines. Economically, barriers also exist. Operational costs are reasonable. But building and
maintaining those plants is expensive. Therefore, the return on investment takes a long time. It is
furthermore problematic when it comes to getting the power to shore. While generally predictable, tidal
energy is still not as dependable as fossil-fired or nuclear generation.
Tidal energy is still in the development stage and will take a long time
Nasir Mehmood, College of Shipbuilding Engineering, Harbin Engineering University, Et al, September
15, 2012, “Harnessing Ocean Energy by Tidal Current Technologies,” Research Journal of Applied
Sciences, Engineering and Technology 4(18): 3476-3487.
Tidal power, also referred as tidal energy, is a wide source of consistent energy. Tidal energy
technologies include tidal barrages, tidal fence and tidal current technologies. Present efforts are
focused on tidal current technologies that utilize the kinetic energy of tidal currents. The growing
interest in exploring tidal current technologies has many compelling reasons such as environment
friendly nature, intermittent but predictable, security and diversity of supply and limited social and
environmental impacts. Tidal current technologies are still in development phase and need some time to
mature to prove their full potential.
Tidal power has huge construction costs and takes a decade to build
The Ocean Energy Council, 2014, “Tidal Energy,” http://www.oceanenergycouncil.com/ocean-
energy/tidal-energy/, Accessed 5/3/2014
Tidal power is a form of low-head hydroelectricity and uses familiar low-head hydroelectric generating
equipment, such as has been in use for more than 120 years. The technology required for tidal power is
well developed, and the main barrier to increased use of the tides is that of construction costs. There is
a high capital cost for a tidal energy project, with possibly a 10-year construction period. Therefore, the
electricity cost is very sensitive to the discount rate.
Wave Energy - fails/not effective

There is no proven design for ocean wave power
Dave Levitan, Staff writer for Yale Environment 360, April 28, 2014, “Why wave power has lagged far
behind as an energy source,” The Guardian,
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/apr/28/why-wave-power-has-lagged-far-behind-as-
an-energy-source, Accessed 5/3/2014
But a central challenge has proven to be the complexity of harnessing wave power, which has led to a
host of designs, including writhing snake-like attenuators, bobbing buoys, even devices mounted
discreetly on the ocean floor that work by exploiting differences in pressure as a wave passes by. Some
devices generate the electricity on the spot and transmit it via undersea cables to shore, while others
pass the mechanical energy of the wave along to land before turning it into electrical energy. Which of
these drastically divergent concepts might emerge as a winner is far from clear. “We may not have even
invented the best device yet,” said Robert Thresher, a research fellow at the National Renewable Energy
Laboratory. From a technical point of view, operating in the ocean is far more difficult than on land;
building offshore wind installations, for example, tends to be significantly more expensive than
constructing wind farms onshore. Saltwater is a hostile environment for devices, and the waves
themselves offer a challenge for energy harvesting as they not only roll past a device but also bob up
and down or converge from all sides in confused seas. This provides enticing opportunities for energy
capture, but a challenge for optimum design.
Past investments prove wave power is a non-starter
Todd Woody, Staff Writer, February 27, 2012, “The Next Wave In Renewable Energy From the Ocean,”
Forbes, http://www.forbes.com/sites/toddwoody/2012/02/08/the-next-wave-in-renewable-energy-
from-the-ocean/, Accessed 4/11/2014
And now the reality check: 5 megawatts. That’s how much electricity—enough to light about 4,000
American homes – is being currently generated by wave energy worldwide despite years of work by a
plethora of startups and many millions of dollars in government support, according to research firm
Bloomberg New Energy Finance. What happened? Before the financial crash, the great green tech boom
unleashed a rush of startups and speculators staking claims on federal waters to build massive wave
farms, while in Europe governments, including Portugal and Scotland, placed big bets on wave energy.
But making green off blue power soon proved to be so much California dreaming as plans for West
Coast wave energy arrays sank under opposition from surfers, fishermen and local residents.
Wave power requires massive research and investment and decades to even catch up
with other renewables
Wind and solar power have taken off in the past decade or two, as costs have come down rapidly and
threats from climate change have made clear the need to transition away from fossil fuels. Meanwhile,
numerous studies have concluded that wave power — and to a lesser extent, tidal power — could
contribute massive amounts to the overall energy picture. But while the industry has made halting
progress, experts agree that it remains decades behind other forms of renewables, with large amounts
of money and research required for it to even begin to catch up. No commercial-scale wave power
operations now exist, although a small-scale installation did operate off the coast of Portugal in 2008
and 2009. In February, U.S. corporate giant Lockheed Martin announced a joint venture to create the
world’s biggest wave energy project, a 62.5-megawatt installation slated for the coast of Australia that
would produce enough power for 10,000 homes. Scotland, surrounded by the rough waters of the
Atlantic and the North Sea, has become a hotbed of wave-energy research and development, with the
government last year approving a 40-megawatt wave energy installation in the Shetland Islands.
Wave Energy - fails/not effective

New wave developments take at least 5 years
Depending on its complexity, wave device development can take five or more years from concept to
ocean prototype testing. Typically, a new concept is simulated with a numerical model to explore its
performance and dynamic behavior at low cost. Next, scale models of the devices undergo tank tests to
validate and improve the modeling. After satisfactory vetting of the small-scale models, the developer
conducts open ocean prototype tests with a device at full, or near full, scale. Building and testing a full-
scale prototype is only warranted if there is a high probability of producing a superior device that can be
successfully commercialized.
Even DOE researchers doubt the potential of wave power. There are too many cost
and design barriers
“I’d like to be optimistic, but I don’t think realistically I can be,” said George Hagerman, a research
associate in the Virginia Tech University’s Advanced Research Institute and a contributor to the U.S.
Department of Energy’s assessment of wave energy’s potential. “You’ve got all those cost issues of
working in the ocean that offshore wind illustrates, and then you’ve got [an energy] conversion
technology that really no one seems to have settled on a design that is robust, reliable, and efficient.
With wind, you’re harnessing the energy as a function of the speed of the wind. In wave energy, you’ve
not only got the height of the wave, but you’ve got the period of the wave, so it becomes a more
complicated problem.”
Europe proves wave energy breaks down. Prototypes don’t translate to scale
Todd Woody, Staff Writer, February 27, 2012, “The Next Wave In Renewable Energy From the Ocean,”
Forbes, http://www.forbes.com/sites/toddwoody/2012/02/08/the-next-wave-in-renewable-energy-
from-the-ocean/, Accessed 4/11/2014
Even California regulators, who had green-lighted Pacific Gas & Electric’s contract to buy electricity from
a solar power station that would orbit the Earth, balked at the utility’s deal with a wave energy startup,
concluding the technology was too risky. And when companies finally began deploying their first wave
energy generators in Europe, punishing ocean conditions took their toll as some devices broke down or
failed to perform as expected. “They may work well in prototype in a very small size, but when you scale
them they don’t necessarily work as well in a harsh seawater environment,” says Angus McCrone, who
follows the wave industry for Bloomberg New Energy Finance.
Wave Energy – won’t displace fossil fuels

Wave energy can’t compete with fossil fuels
Joshua Hunt and Diane Cardwell, Staff Writers, April 28, 2014, “Experimental Efforts to Harvest the
Ocean's Power Face Cost Setbacks,” The New York Times, p. B3
Indeed, wave energy has at least a decade before it can compete with fossil fuels and other renewables
in major markets, said Bill Staby, chief executive of Resolute Marine Energy, a start-up that is working on
a demonstration project in a remote village in Alaska. ''Scale is not working in our favor yet,'' he said,
comparing the current state of wave energy with that of wind when different technologies were being
tested before the industry settled on the current three-blade, horizontal axis structure in use now.
Wave energy is not feasible and could only produce 6% of electricity at a maximum
In addition to the energy embodied in water flowing due to tides and currents, power can be extracted
from moving water in the form of waves. Looking strictly at coastal regions with a mean wave power
density greater than 10 kilowatts per meter, the United States may have a total wave power flux of
2,100 terawatt-hours per year. This figure is more than half of the entire United States electric power
industry’s recent annual generation. Unfortunately, practical considerations significantly limit the ability
to extract usable power from wave energy. For example, more than half of this estimated total wave
power flux falls on the southern coast of Alaska and the Aleutian island chain, areas generally remote
from significant load centers. Given current electricity transmission technology and cost, the remoteness
of this portion of the nation’s wave energy resource makes its commercial-scale development unlikely.
Furthermore, wave power devices fall short of 100 percent efficiency. However, extracting just 15
percent of this total flux and converting the power to electricity with an efficiency of 80 percent would
yield 252 terawatt-hours per year, about 6 percent of the nation’s current electricity consumption. As of
February 2011, FERC had issued ten preliminary permits for marine wave hydrokinetic projects with a
total projected capacity of 3,446 megawatts. Although wave energy is an immature technology, the
sheer magnitude of energy embodied in waves nevertheless offers great potential as a future electricity
resource.
A2: Biodiversity Advantage
Marine renewables kill species

Marine renewables kill fish and migratory birds
George W. Boehlert, Ph.D. in Marine Biology, former Director of the Hatfield Marine Center and
Andrew B. Gill, Ph.D., Senior Lecturer in Aquatic Ecology, Environmental Science and Technology
Department, School of Applied Sciences at Cranfield University, 2010, “Environmental and Ecological
Effects Of Ocean Renewable Energy Development, A Current Synthesis,” Oceanography, Volume 23,
Number 2,
http://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/1957/16152/23-
2_boehlert_hi.pdf?sequence=1, Accessed 4/13/2014
Moving parts of marine renewable devices can lead to “blade strike,” typically viewed as a problem with
migratory birds and wind energy devices. In-water turbines, such as current or tidal energy devices,
generally move at slower speeds and thus the likelihood of blade strike is lower. However, the speed of
the tip of some horizontal axis rotors could be an issue for cetacean, fish, or diving bird strikes, and
further analysis is merited. An additional consideration is that the energy withdrawn from air, water, or
waves may also have potential effects in both near- and far-field scales. Although not generally viewed
as an issue by wind energy engineers and scientists, energy removal by devices in water, as well as
blockage effects, can lead to localized changes in water movement energy and turbulence—these
changes, in turn, can cause benthic sediment scouring and resultant habitat changes. In the water
column, modifications to water movement energy and turbulence could lead to changes in turbulence
and stratification, potentially altering vertical movements of marine organisms and resulting in prey and
predator aggregation.
Marine renewables create a host of hazards for ocean life

George W. Boehlert, Ph.D. in Marine Biology, former Director of the Hatfield Marine Center and
Andrew B. Gill, Ph.D., Senior Lecturer in Aquatic Ecology, Environmental Science and Technology
Department, School of Applied Sciences at Cranfield University, 2010, “Environmental and Ecological
Effects Of Ocean Renewable Energy Development, A Current Synthesis,” Oceanography, Volume 23,
Number 2,
http://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/1957/16152/23-
2_boehlert_hi.pdf?sequence=1, Accessed 4/13/2014
As noted above, a diversity of concerns exists for marine mammals across all ORED technologies;
entanglement and collision, mainly for cetaceans, are primary concerns. Blade strike in the case of ocean
current or tidal devices may also be of concern. For those devices with cables and moorings, the nature
of mooring cables (slack or taut, horizontal or vertical, diameter) is critical to entanglement issues.
Should fish and invertebrates be concentrated around devices as predicted, both cetaceans and
pinnipeds could be attracted by the feeding opportunity (as has been suggested in studies around
Danish wind farms once construction has ceased; DONG Energy et al., 2006), thereby increasing the
likelihood of impact. Special attention should be paid to migratory routes or special feeding grounds. In
the case of gray whales along the Pacific coast of North America, the migration along the coast passes
through optimal regions for wave energy device deployment. The acoustic signature of the devices could
either attract or repel marine mammals. EMF effects on marine mammals is poorly known; for species
that rely on Earth’s geomagnetic field, there is the potential for orientation to the magnetic fields
emitted if they are large enough and/or discernible from background levels, and this should be
investigated. Fundamental baseline data will be needed (mammal biology, presence/absence/species
diversity, information on prey species) to understand projects’ impacts and the cumulative effects as
ORED reaches commercial scales. As pilot or demonstration projects are put in the water, immediate
monitoring of potential receptor cetaceans and pinnipeds (e.g., videography, beachings, tagging, vessel
surveys) will be needed to understand how they interact with OREDs.
A2: artificial “reef effect” – General answers

The artificial reef effect is offset by EMF and noise pollution
Angus Jackson, Ph.D. at the Environmental Research Institute, North Highland College UHI, University
of the Highlands and Islands, and Andrew Gill, Ph.D. at the Integrated Environmental Systems Institute,
June 19, 2013, “Marine Renewables, Biodiversity and Fisheries,” Plymouth Marine Institute at Plymouth
University, http://www.foe.co.uk/sites/ default/files/downloads/marine_ renewables_biodiver.pdf,
Accessed 4/28/2014
When measuring effects at an MRE device we are recording the combined effects of multiple
stressors/effectors. Some of these may be additive, other may counteract. A good example is that we
assume the artificial reef effect or the FAD effect will bring fish in and protect them from fishing, which
is good. However this MPA or No Fishing Zone effect may not occur if for example the operational EMF
or noise causes some counteracting effect. The change in effects over greater spatial and/or temporal
scale should be highlighted too. So whilst a small development may not be regarded as causing any
significant change (particularly in light of other influential factors) many of them or larger sized
developments may cause significant change. There is also the aspect of cumulative effect not just of
other MRE devices but other activities that need to be considered. This consideration should be
objective as there may be trade-offs whereby the MRE device reduces other pressures on species or
where a combination of different activities causes a differential outcome (there is a lot to develop within
this topic area but it all comes under cumulative aspects).
The artificial reef effect increases predators risking greater collisions, entanglement,
and noise exposure
Brendan Godley, Researcher at the Centre for Ecology & Conservation, University of Exeter, Et al.,
June 19, 2013, “Marine Renewables, Biodiversity and Fisheries,” Plymouth Marine Institute at Plymouth
University, http://www.foe.co.uk/sites/ default/files/downloads/marine_ renewables_biodiver.pdf,
Accessed 4/28/2014
Indirect positive effects of MRE installations on marine mammals have also been suggested. The
potential for MRE devices to act as new habitats has been advocated. These may act as artificial reefs,
increasing the available habitat for sessile marine species and consequently, attracting marine life in
search of food, hence providing prey for marine mammals. The floating nature of wave energy
converters may lend them to become fish aggregating devices, thereby attracting potential prey. This
could draw predatory species into the area increasing the risk of collision and/or entanglement, as well
as prolonged exposure to noise. Risks ought to be taken into consideration when designing the devices
and implementing mitigation measures. Commercial fishing may be reduced in the vicinity of the devices
to minimise the potential collision between fishing gear and MRE devices, which may lead to the
establishment of de facto marine protected areas albeit that there is still significant anthropogenic
influence within them. This could further enhance fish stocks and increase prey availability. Data to
examine whether these potential effects are manifested are only likely to be available after several
years of monitoring and only once devices are in operation. If there is evidence for creation of beneficial
habitats, these need to be maintained beyond the life span of the device, to ensure that the loss of
habitat during decommissioning is not more dramatic than during construction.
A2: Marine biodiversity – General impact answers

The size of the oceans means humans can’t have a significant impact
Bjørn Lomborg, Director of the Environmental Assessment Institute, 2001, The Skeptical
Environmentalist, p. 189
But the oceans are so incredibly big that our impact on them has been astoundingly insignificant - the
oceans contain more than 1,000 billion liters of water. The UN’s overall evaluation of the oceans
concludes: “The open sea is still relatively clean. Low levels of lead, synthetic compounds and artificial
radionuclides, though widely detectable, are biologically insignificant. Oil slicks and litter are common
among sea leans, but are, at present, a minor consequences to communities of organisms living in ocean
waters.
Ocean biodiversity is getting better. Previous government reforms are paying off and
deny their impact
Leon Panetta,, former US secretary of state, co-chaired the Pew Ocean Commission and founded the
Panetta Institute at California State University, Monterey Bay, July 17, 2013, “Panetta: Don't take
oceans for granted,” CNN, http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/17/opinion/panetta-oceans/index.html,
Accessed 5/2/2014
The situation the commission found in 2001 was grim. Many of our nation's commercial fisheries were
being depleted and fishing families and communities were hurting. More than 60% of our coastal rivers
and bays were degraded by nutrient runoff from farmland, cities and suburbs. Government policies and
practices, a patchwork of inadequate laws and regulations at various levels, in many cases made matters
worse. Our nation needed a wake-up call. The situation, on many fronts, is dramatically different today
because of a combination of leadership initiatives from the White House and old-fashioned bipartisan
cooperation on Capitol Hill. Perhaps the most dramatic example can be seen in the effort to end
overfishing in U.S. waters. In 2005, President George W. Bush worked with congressional leaders to
strengthen America's primary fisheries management law, the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation
and Management Act. This included establishment of science-based catch limits to guide decisions in
rebuilding depleted species. These reforms enacted by Congress are paying off. In fact, an important
milestone was reached last June when the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
announced it had established annual, science-based catch limits for all U.S. ocean fish populations. We
now have some of the best managed fisheries in the world. Progress also is evident in improved overall
ocean governance and better safeguards for ecologically sensitive marine areas. In 2010, President
Barack Obama issued a historic executive order establishing a national ocean policy directing federal
agencies to coordinate efforts to protect and restore the health of marine ecosystems. President George
W. Bush set aside new U.S. marine sanctuary areas from 2006 through 2009. Today, the
Papahanaumokuakea Marine National Monument, one of several marine monuments created by the
Bush administration, provides protection for some of the most biologically diverse waters in the Pacific.
Oceans are resilient

Victor Kennedy, PhD, Professor of Environmental Science, University of Maryland and Former
Director, Cooperative Oxford Laboratory, August 2002, Coastal and Marine Ecosystems and Global
Climate Change: Potential Effects on U.S. Resources, http://www.pewtrusts.org/
uploadedFiles/wwwpewtrustsorg/Reports/Protecting_ocean_life/environment_pew_climate_marine.pd
f, Accessed 5/2/2014
There is evidence that marine organisms and ecosystems are resilient to environmental change. Steele
(1991) hypothesized that the biological components of marine systems are tightly coupled to physical
factors, allowing them to respond quickly to rapid environmental change and thus rendering them
ecologically adaptable. Some species also have wide genetic variability throughout their range, which
may allow for adaptation to climate change.
A2: Marine Biodiversity – Alternate causes (general)

3 factors are converging to cause cascading disruptions in marine biology
IPSO, International Programme on the State of The Ocean, October 3, 2013, “Greater, Faster, Closer,
Latest review of science reveals ocean in critical state from cumulative impacts,”
http://www.stateoftheocean.org/pdfs/IPSO-PR-2013-FINAL.pdf, Accessed 5/1/2014
Among the latest assessments of factors affecting ocean health, the panel identified the following areas
as of greatest cause for concern: De-oxygenation: the evidence is accumulating that the oxygen
inventory of the ocean is progressively declining. Predictions for ocean oxygen content suggest a decline
of between 1% and 7% by 2100. This is occurring in two ways: the broad trend of decreasing oxygen
levels in tropical oceans and areas of the North Pacific over the last 50 years; and the dramatic increase
in coastal hypoxia (low oxygen) associated with eutrophication. The former is caused by global warming,
the second by increased nutrient runoff from agriculture and sewage. Acidification: If current levels of
CO2 release continue we can expect extremely serious consequences for ocean life, and in turn food and
coastal protection; at CO2 concentrations of 450-500 ppm (projected in 2030-2050) erosion will exceed
calcification in the coral reef building process, resulting in the extinction of some species and decline in
biodiversity overall. Warming: As made clear by the IPCC, the ocean is taking the brunt of warming in
the climate system, with direct and well-documented physical and biogeochemical consequences. The
impacts which continued warming is projected to have in the decades to 2050 include: reduced seasonal
ice zones, including the disappearance of Arctic summer sea ice by ca. 2037; increasing stratification of
ocean layers, leading to oxygen depletion; increased venting of the GHG methane from the Arctic
seabed (a factor not considered by the IPCC); and increased incidence of anoxic and hypoxic (low
oxygen) events. The ‘deadly trio’ of the above three stressors - acidification, warming and
deoxygenation - is seriously effecting how productive and efficient the ocean is, as temperatures,
chemistry, surface stratification, nutrient and oxygen supply are all implicated, meaning that many
organisms will find themselves in unsuitable environments. These impacts will have cascading
consequences for marine biology, including altered food web dynamics and the expansion of pathogens.
Ocean acidification disrupts marine food webs and ecosystems

Sasha Henriques, Division of Public Information. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA),
September 2013, “Healthy Oceans, Happy Planet,” IAEA Bulletin,
http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Magazines/Bulletin/Bull543/54305610506.pdf, Accessed 5/1/2014
One sign of an unhealthy marine environment is ocean acidification. This is the name given to the
disruption of the sea’s normal acid/alkaline balance, an imbalance that can cause some marine species
to die off, because they are incapable of adapting to a more acidic environment, thereby disrupting the
entire ecosystem and food webs.
Seabed destruction and water pollution kills off marine ecosystems

IPSO, International Programme on the State of The Ocean, 2014, “Big Threats: The main factors
destroying ocean health,” http://www.stateoftheocean.org/pdfs/IPSO-PR-2013-FINAL.pdf, Accessed
5/1/2014
We are destroying marine habitats in the Ocean in two significant ways. Firstly, when we directly
eliminate the habitat in question: by destroying seabed communities such as coral reefs through the
practice of bottom trawling, for example. And secondly, when we change the marine environment
through activities which alter water quality, making it unsuitable for the many marine animals with
precise environmental requirements. The result in either case is the loss of marine habitats that support
species, communities and - ultimately - ecosystems.
A2: Climate Change Advantage
Marine renewables cannot solve/bad

MHK technologies increase GHG emissions in at least 7 ways
MHK technologies do not burn fuel to generate electricity, so there are no GHG emissions associated
with generation of electricity from MHK like there are with conventional fuel-burning technologies.
However, MHK technologies contribute to GHG emissions during their life cycle stages, including the
extraction of raw materials, transportation, and manufacturing into mechanical components, plant
construction, O&M, dismantling, and disposal. However, because MHK technologies are not deployed in
RE Futures scenarios, their GHG emissions are not considered in this study.
Ocean energy sources face a host of barriers to prevent climate change. We won’t see
impacts from the plan until at least 2020
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 2011, IPCC Special Report on Renewable Energy
Sources and Climate Change Mitigation, O. Edenhofer, R. Pichs-Madruga, Y. Sokona, K. Seyboth, P.
Matschoss, S. Kadner, T. Zwickel, P. Eickemeier, G. Hansen, S. Schlömer,
C. von Stechow (eds), http://srren.ipcc-wg3.de/report/, Accessed 4/26/2014
Ocean energy offers the potential for long-term carbon emissions reduction but is unlikely to make a
significant short term contribution before 2020 due to its nascent stage of development. In 2009,
additionally installed ocean capacity was less than 10 MW worldwide, yielding a cumulative installed
capacity of approximately 300 MW by the end of 2009. All ocean energy technologies, except tidal
barrages, are conceptual, undergoing research and development (R&D), or are in the pre-commercial
prototype and demonstration stage. The performance of ocean energy technologies is anticipated to
improve steadily over time as experience is gained and new technologies are able to access poorer
quality resources. Whether these technical advances lead to sufficient associated cost reductions to
enable broad-scale deployment of ocean energy is the most critical uncertainty in assessing the future
role of ocean energy in mitigating climate change. Though technical potential is not anticipated to be a
primary global barrier to ocean energy deployment, resource characteristics will require that local
communities in the future select among multiple available ocean technologies to suit local resource
conditions.
No solvency / Emissions are not key

Even if we stopped CO2 emissions today, temperatures would be constant or increase
for another 50 years
Thomas Lukas Frölicher, Et al, November 24, ‘13, Environmental Physics, Institute of Biogeochemistry
and Pollutant Dynamics, and Program in Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, Princeton
University, “Continued global warming after CO2 emissions stoppage,” Nature Climate Change,
http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate2060.html, Accessed 4/30/2014
Recent studies have suggested that global mean surface temperature would remain approximately
constant on multi-century timescales after CO2 emissions are stopped. Here we use Earth system model
simulations of such a stoppage to demonstrate that in some models, surface temperature may actually
increase on multi-century timescales after an initial century-long decrease. This occurs in spite of a
decline in radiative forcing that exceeds the decline in ocean heat uptake—a circumstance that would
otherwise be expected to lead to a decline in global temperature. The reason is that the warming effect
of decreasing ocean heat uptake together with feedback effects arising in response to the geographic
structure of ocean heat uptake overcompensates the cooling effect of decreasing atmospheric CO2 on
multi-century timescales. Our study also reveals that equilibrium climate sensitivity estimates based on
a widely used method of regressing the Earth’s energy imbalance against surface temperature
change are biased. Uncertainty in the magnitude of the feedback effects associated with the magnitude
and geographic distribution of ocean heat uptake therefore contributes substantially to the uncertainty
in allowable carbon emissions for a given multi-century warming target.
Climate change impact answers

Humans will survive a climate change apocalypse
Annalee Newitz, Staff Writer, May 19, 2013, “Humans: We will survive!,” Boston Globe,
http://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/ 2013/05/18/humans-will-
survive/4xwoH2GARqtdyBx5EyvapL/story.html, Accessed 5/2/2014
We’re beginning to feel the effects of climate change, as superstorms and megadroughts strike with
increasing regularity. Extinctions are ripping through amphibian populations in the Americas, while bees
are threatened by colony collapse disorder. Indeed, many environmental scientists believe that we’re in
the early stages of a mass extinction, where over 75 percent of all species on Earth may eventually be
wiped out. When you look at humans—with our fleshy, vulnerable bodies, need for a 21 percent oxygen
atmosphere, and susceptibility to disease—the odds don’t exactly seem to be in our favor. But the
apocalypse is complicated. The planet has already suffered through five mass extinctions in the past
half-billion years, and geological history reveals that these catastrophes often take a million years. There
is no sudden tipping point or global zombie scourge: Doom usually comes slowly. And through the
shocks that Earth has experienced before, some organisms have always found a way to survive. So
here’s some encouraging news: Humans happen to have a lot in common with many of the species that
have made it through previous mass extinctions—plus a few advantages of our own. And that means
there just might be hope for human survival after all. Here are some of the reasons we might make it—
along with a few survivor role models from millennia past.
We have decades or centuries before the devastating impacts of warming

Geoffrey Lean, Staff Writer, April 5, 2013, “Global warming: time to rein back on doom and gloom?,”
The Guardian, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/globalwarming/9974397/Global-
warming-time-to-rein-back-on-doom-and-gloom.html, Accessed 5/3/2014
The research, moreover, comes at a time when many experts are beginning to despair that warming can
be prevented from running out of control. Six weeks ago, for example, Prof Sir Robert Watson – the
deeply respected former chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) – said he
believed the world had now missed its chance to keep the average rise in global temperature to less
than 2C – the level at which dangerous effects are thought inevitable. But if the new research is right, it
might be held below this ominous threshold after all, if determined worldwide action is taken.
Prediction, as they say, is tough, especially when it’s about the future – and that’s especially true when it
comes to the climate, whose complexity we only partially understand. It is, as we all know, naturally
immensely variable. And the effect of human intervention is subject to long timelags: it will be decades,
even centuries, before the full consequences of today’s emissions of carbon dioxide become clear.
TTL mitigates warming

ScienceDaily, Staff Writer, February 2, 2014, “Nature can, selectively, buffer human-caused global
warming, say scientists,” Science Daily, www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/02/140202111055.htm,
Accessed 5/3/2014
Can naturally occurring processes selectively buffer the full brunt of global warming caused by
greenhouse gas emissions resulting from human activities? Yes, find researchers from the Hebrew
University of Jerusalem, Johns Hopkins University in the US and NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center. As
the globe warms, ocean temperatures rise, leading to increased water vapor escaping into the
atmosphere. Water vapor is the most important greenhouse gas, and its impact on climate is amplified
in the stratosphere. In a detailed study, the researchers from the three institutions examined the causes
of changes in the temperatures and water vapor in the tropical tropopause layer (TTL). The TTL is a
critical region of our atmosphere with characteristics of both the troposphere below and the
stratosphere above. The TTL can have significant influences on both atmospheric chemistry and climate,
as its temperature determines how much water vapor can enter the stratosphere. Therefore,
understanding any changes in the temperature of the TTL and what might be causing them is an
important scientific question of significant societal relevance, say the researchers.
Alternate Causes to warming/climate change

The U.S. transportation sector emits more CO2 than most other countries
Union of Concerned Scientists, January 31, 2014, “Clean Vehicles,”
http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_vehicles/why-clean-cars/global-warming/cars-and-trucks-and-
global.html, Accessed 5/3/2014
Earth is warming because of global warming pollution, and transportation-related sources are a major
contributor. In fact, the U.S. transportation sector alone emits more carbon emissions than all but three
other countries' total emissions. Sixty percent of these emissions come from cars and trucks (the rest
come primarily from heavy-duty vehicles and airplanes).
Massive amounts of methane outweigh CO2 emissions. Methane is 21 times more

potent
Fox News, Staff Writer, November 26, 2013, “Big methane burp: Cow farts a greater problem than
EPA previously thought, study says,” http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013/11/26/big-methane-burp-
cows-refineries-spew-gas/, Accessed 5/3/2014
The United States is spewing 50 percent more methane — a potent heat-trapping gas — than the
federal government estimates, a new comprehensive scientific study says. Much of it is coming from just
three states: Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas. That means methane may be a bigger global warming issue
than thought, scientists say. Methane is 21 times more potent at trapping heat than carbon dioxide, the
most abundant global warming gas, although it doesn't stay in the air as long. Much of that extra
methane, also called natural gas, seems to be coming from livestock, including manure, belches, and
flatulence, as well as leaks from refining and drilling for oil and gas, the study says. It was published
Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science. The study estimates that in 2008, the
U.S. poured 49 million tons of methane into the air. That means U.S. methane emissions trapped about
as much heat as all the carbon dioxide pollution coming from cars, trucks, and planes in the country in
six months.
Even ending all emissions won’t solve. Arctic warming is post-brink and releasing
massive CO2 and methane
Bobby Magill, Staff Writer, May 1, 2014, “Arctic Methane Emissions ‘Certain to Trigger Warming’,”
Climate Central, http://www.climatecentral.org/news/arctic-methane-emissions-certain-to-trigger-
warming-17374, Accessed 5/3/2014
Warming and thawing permafrost stimulate methane release, which enhances the greenhouse effect,
creating a feedback loop, she said. “Even if we ceased all human emissions, permafrost would continue
to thaw and release carbon into the atmosphere,” Turetsky said. “Instead of reducing emissions, we
currently are on track with the most dire scenario considered by the IPCC. There is no way to capture
emissions from thawing permafrost as this carbon is released from soils across large regions of land in
very remote spaces.”
Offshore Wind Negative
Off-Case
A/I-SPEC Violations
Multiple agencies within the federal government have authority over the plan
Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Wind & Water Power
Program and Department of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and
Enforcement, February 2011, A National Offshore Wind Strategy: Creating an Offshore Wind Energy
Industry in the United States, http://www1.eere.energy.gov/wind/pdfs/
national_offshore_wind_strategy.pdf, Accessed 4/13/2014
Numerous state and federal entities have authority over siting, permitting, and installation of offshore
wind facilities. Table 2 below, adapted from Appendix A of Large‐Scale Offshore Wind Power in the
United States (W. Musial 2010), lists the key statutes and responsible agencies involved in the
permitting of offshore wind power projects. DOI, through the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management,
Regulation and Enforcement (BOEMRE), serves as the lead agency in permitting offshore wind energy on
the OCS. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), which is responsible for permitting any potential
obstruction or alteration of U.S. navigable waters, currently serves as the lead federal agency in
permitting offshore wind in state waters, including the Great Lakes. Several federal entities also have
mandates to review and/or approve certain aspects of offshore wind projects, such as the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), National Park Service (NPS),
Department of Commerce’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), NOAA’s National
Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Defense (DoD),
U.S. Coast Guard (USCG), and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Numerous state, local,
and tribal government entities, as well as other stakeholders, must also be consulted in the permitting
process. The mandates of these various entities include managing protected species, managing
commercial and recreational fisheries, protecting marine and coastal habitats, and designation and
protection of marine areas with special significance due to their conservation, recreational, ecological,
historical, scientific, cultural, archeological, educational, or aesthetic qualities.
There are tons of variations of design. That has a specific impact on the types of fish
attracted
Manuela Truebano, Ph.D., Lecturer in Marine Biology at the Plymouth Marine Institute, Plymouth
University, et al., June 19, 2013, “Marine Renewables, Biodiversity and Fisheries,” Plymouth Marine
Institute at Plymouth University, http://www.foe.co.uk/sites/ default/files/downloads/marine_
renewables_biodiver.pdf, Accessed 5/12/2014
There is considerable potential for variations in the design of the components of the installation to
influence the type of species they attract. Designs could potentially be adapted to maximize the
presence of certain species, as well as to increase the distribution of mobile species within the local
area. For example, the use of large boulders around the base of wind turbines creates a rocky
environment suitable for lobsters, crabs and reef fish. Wilhelmsson et al recorded different fish species
confined to certain structural fisheries of wind farm monopiles (e.g. small fish only found in pockets of
steel mouldings, eelpouts observed in the corner where the wall met the seabed, turbot on the seabed
near the turbine etc.) The low level of structural complexity provided by holes on wave power
foundations was sufficient to provide some level of protection for edible crabs, which were largely found
associated with the holes, but not for fish, which did not utilise them to any significant degree.
Andersson et al found that, during the first few months after submersion, different materials were
colonised by specific assemblages of epibenthic organisms. These studies highlight the importance of a
careful design and choice of materials.
Politics Links – GOP Hates the Plan

Amendments prove the plan is highly controversial along partisan lines
Blake A. Treu, J.D. and John Treu, Esq., LL.M., C.P.A., May 17, 2014, Fuller Professional Tax Education,
http://fulleredu.com/taxblog/ expire-act-hits-snag-in-senate-over-amendments/, Accessed 5/19/2014
The Senate yesterday began legislative proceedings as expected by considering the EXPIRE Act. From
there, things quickly declined. Senator Wyden (D-OR) first gave his oft-repeated plug for passage of the
bill. Senator Hatch (R-UT) then called for an “open process” that would give the senators who were not
part of the discussion of the EXPIRE Act during its spell in the Finance Committee a chance to “express
their views” regarding the bill and propose amendments. The Senate then moved on to a vote on a
motion for cloture on the matter of the EXPIRE Act, led by Senator Reid (D-NV). However, the motion
failed to secure the necessary two-thirds majority vote, with a final vote count of 53-40. In response to
this series of events, Reid attacked the Republicans by stating they have “voted against the second
bipartisan bill in less than a week” and insisted that the Republicans merely want to take advantage of
the EXPIRE Act by merely using the opportunity for amendments as a chance to “roll back part of
ObamaCare.” The Republicans, on the other hand, insist that they’re merely looking for the opportunity
to make improvements to the bill. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) stated, “We have a
tax bill here that members from both sides want to improve and support. Yet, we don’t get a chance to
amend it.”
Republicans hate the plan because it trades off with fossil fuel exploration
Zack Colman, Staff Writer, March 7, 2014, “Offshore wind lobbies for credit to keep industry from
blowing away,” Washington Examiner, http://washingtonexaminer.com/offshore-wind-lobbies-for-
credit-to-keep-industry-from-blowing-away/article/2545151, Accessed 5/14/2014
But the offshore credit has its detractors as well. Most of them are Republicans who say the White
House is putting subsidized clean energy ahead of fossil fuel production -- which is blocked in the
Atlantic Ocean through 2017 -- during what should be a time of fiscal belt-tightening. "Selling leases in
the Atlantic shouldn't be exclusive for the wind industry, especially when traditional energy is
completely shut out of the same area," said Sen. David Vitter, R-La., the top Republican on the
Environment and Public Works Committee.
The GOP hates wind energy

Michael Bastasch, Staff Writer, May 9, 2014, “Feds Fund 12 Offshore Wind Turbines… At $12 Million
Each,” Daily Caller, http://dailycaller.com/2014/05/09/feds-fund-12-offshore-wind-turbines-at-12-
million-each/, Accessed 5/14/2014
“The Energy Department is working with public and private partners to harness this untapped resource
in a sustainable and economic manner. The offshore wind projects announced today further this
commitment — bringing more clean, renewable energy to our homes and businesses, diversifying our
energy portfolio, and reducing costs through innovation.” Environmentalists and many Republicans have
hammered the Obama administration for its support of wind power. Republicans argue that the wind
industry has benefited from subsidies and green energy mandates for decades and federal funding for
such projects are wasteful.
Studies CP Solvency
Offshore wind causes acoustic and electromagnetic disruptions that interfere with air-
land-sea navigation and sonar. This undermines operations for the Dept. of Defense
and Homeland Security. We should study this first
It is possible that under certain conditions, offshore wind turbine arrays may cause electromagnetic or
acoustic interference with specific electronic navigation, detection, or communication equipment. This
potential for interference presents a serious concern for many stakeholders, including operators of
commercial, recreational, and fishing vessels, the Department of Defense (DoD) and the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS).
While many potential electromagnetic interference issues will be similar to those associated with land‐
based wind systems, there are also circumstances unique to offshore facilities that may potentially
affect equipment such as land‐based radar, airborne radar, Automatic Identification Systems (AIS),
Global Positioning Systems (GPS), shipboard radios, Sound Navigation & Ranging (SONAR) and Coastal
Ocean Dynamics Applications Radar (CODAR). Therefore, additional research is needed to effectively
assess any potential operational impacts, characterize the technical challenges and develop mitigation
options. Assessments of potential electromagnetic or acoustic challenges presented by offshore wind
energy facilities to sea surface, subsurface and airborne electronic systems must include engagement
with key stakeholders to proactively identify the full range of concerns, characterize potential impacts to
operations, identify known requirements and options for mitigation, and establish research and policy
needs.
Most studies on acoustic effects are short-term and small scale. Our conclusions will
likely change after better study and better maps
Lena Bergström, Department of Aquatic Resources, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences,
Skolgatan, et al., 2014, “Effects of offshore wind farms on marine wildlife—a generalized impact
assessment,” Environmental Research Letters, v. 9, http://iopscience.iop.org/ 1748-
9326/9/3/034012/pdf/1748-9326_9_3_034012.pdf, Accessed 5/11/2014
The strongest remaining uncertainties were seen for acoustic disturbances during the operational phase
and effects of fisheries exclusion. As most empirical information today is from short term studies in
relatively small scale OWF’s, it is likely that conclusions made today will change when information
accumulates from larger OWFs, over longer time scales, or when techniques to diminish negative
impacts are developed. Current studies have to no or limited extent addressed combined effects, such
as the effects of several marine activities within the same area, or long term effects on the food web.
Many potential negative effects of OWF can be reduced within the planning process, by avoiding
important recruitment habitats and by timing construction activities outside of important breeding
seasons. Obviously, such measures should be based on real knowledge on the distribution and
population status of local species and habitats. Given the high dependency of the obtained conclusion
on local environmental conditions, a fundamental issue for the sustainable development of OWF is the
availability of reliable seafloor and habitat maps and information on population connectivity.
There are major gaps in understanding that will cause delays and overrun the risk of
investment. Only long-term research investment before expansion of offshore wind
power solves
Hundreds of environmental studies have been conducted in Europe in conjunction with offshore wind
development. Although the United States can leverage lessons learned from these studies, few studies
have been done in U.S. waters. Consequently, major data gaps exist that can delay and add significant
risk to the installation of offshore facilities for both project developers and regulators. Filling these gaps
requires upfront investments in long‐term, expensive research that—while of substantial benefit to the
entire industry—falls largely to the first generation of individual project developers.
Current research is insufficient to avoid the risks. Only further study avoids the case
turns
Walter Musial, Principal Engineer, National Wind Technology Center at NREL and Bonnie Ram, Ram
Power, L.L.C., September 2010, “Large-Scale Offshore Wind Power in the United States, Assessment of
Opportunities and Barriers, National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NERL),
http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy10osti/40745.pdf, Accessed 5/10/2014
Research is also needed to fill gaps in the knowledge base and prioritize risks based on analysis of
uncertainties and potential impacts. Several important gaps and uncertainties include visual effects,
public perception of deployment risks, endangered and migrating species, conflicting use of military and
recreational spaces, and construction impacts. BOEM and other federal and state agencies are beginning
to fill these gaps with baseline surveys and studies. Sector-by-sector impact analyses, however, as
required with NEPA documentation, are limited in revealing the true risks to the ocean or lake ecologies.
Applying an integrated risk framework that compares costs and benefits of deploying offshore wind as
opposed to another energy option is needed to inform decisions about the actual risks. Developing
prudent siting policies will likely avoid coastal areas with intense competing uses and sensitive habitats
and will reflect the sensitivities of multiple stakeholder groups. Siting strategies are needed that go
beyond narrow technical appraisals of sites to include collaborative approaches with potential host
states and communities. Well-developed risk communication and stakeholder involvement strategies
need exploration and are essential to the successful development of offshore wind projects.
A2: Inherency
The federal government is increasing offshore wind now

The DOE just handed out $141 million to expand offshore wind development
Business Green, Staff Writer, May 8, 2014, “US awards $141m to innovative offshore wind farm
projects,” Accessed 5/13/2014, http://www.businessgreen.com/bg/news/2343636/us-awards-
usd141m-to-innovative-offshore-wind-farm-projects
The US Department of Energy (DoE) has handed out $141m to three developers planning wind farms off
the coasts of New Jersey, Oregon, and Virginia. The three projects are set to add 67MW of offshore wind
capacity in US waters by 2017 and make use of new technologies designed to drive down costs for
future wind farms, the DoE said in a statement. "Offshore wind offers a large, untapped energy resource
for the United States that can create thousands of manufacturing, construction and supply chain jobs
across the country and drive billions of dollars in local economic investment," said Energy Secretary
Ernest Moniz in a statement. "The offshore wind projects announced today further this commitment -
bringing more clean, renewable energy to our homes and businesses, diversifying our energy portfolio,
and reducing costs through innovation."
The Department of the Interior is increasing offshore wind now

Bureau of Ocean Management, 2014, “Offshore Wind Energy,”
http://www.boem.gov/Renewable-Energy-Program/Renewable-Energy-Guide/Offshore-Wind-
Energy.aspx, Accessed 4/9/2014
The first offshore wind project was installed off the coast of Denmark in 1991. Since that time,
commercial-scale offshore wind facilities have been operating in shallow waters around the world,
mostly in Europe. With the U.S. Department of the Interior’s “Smart from the Start” initiative, wind
power projects will soon be built offshore the United States. Newer turbine and foundation technologies
are being developed so that wind power projects can be built in deeper waters further offshore.
The DOE is already expanding offshore wind energy now

José Zayas, Director, Wind and Water Power Technologies Office, U.S. Department of Energy, January
2014, “Advancing Ocean Renewable Energy In the United States,” Sea Technology Magazine,
http://www.sea-technology.com/features/2014/0114/1.php, Accessed 4/11/2014
In 2013, the Energy Department finalized awards for support of the initial design and permitting phase
of seven competitively selected offshore wind demonstration projects. Through cost-share funding,
technical assistance and interagency coordination to accelerate the deployment of these projects, the
Department intends to validate new technologies to reduce costs, eliminate uncertainties and mitigate
risks to support growth of a robust offshore wind energy industry. In 2014, the Department plans to
select up to three of the seven projects to support, with up to $47 million in additional funding each to
progress through final design, fabrication, construction and, finally, to full operation. These projects are
anticipated to be grid-connected by the end of 2017.
A2: Advantage: Economy
A2: Manufacturing
They have it backwards. We have to rebuild the manufacturing base before we can
start on wind
Michael Hahn and Patrick Gilman, Navigant Consulting, Inc., October 17, 2013, Offshore Wind
Market and Economic Analysis, Prepared for: U.S. Department of Energy,
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/wind/pdfs/offshore_wind_market_and_economic_analysis.pdf, Accessed
5/10/2014
Offshore wind turbines are currently not manufactured in the United States. Domestic manufacturing
needs to be in place in the United States in order for the industry to fully develop. The absence of a
mature industry results in a lack of experienced labor for manufacturing, construction, and operations.
Workforce training must therefore be part of the upfront costs for U.S. projects.
A2: U.S. Key to Global Economy

China will outpace the U.S. role in global growth this year
The Economic Times, Staff Writer, April 30, 2014, “China poised to overtake US economy: World
Bank ranking,” http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/business/china-poised-to-
overtake-us-economy-world-bank-ranking/articleshow/34433509.cms, Accessed 5/18/2014
In 2005, on a PPP basis, Chinese output amounted to about 43.0 percent of US GDP, but in 2011 this had
risen to nearly 87.0 percent, doubling its relative performance. China has been catching up for several
years, since it became a player across the global economy. It now looks possible that in the course of
this year, the Asian behemoth will overtake the United States in terms of output on a purchasing-power
basis.
China will surpass the U.S. this year as the most important economy
Kevin Lamarque, Staff Writer, May 02, 2014, “No longer #1? China may replace US as biggest
economy this year – World Bank,” RT, http://rt.com/business/155892-china-overtake-us-economy/,
Accessed 5/18/2014
Sometimes size DOES matter. China may pass the US and become the world’s most important economy
this year, according to the World Bank. It would take the position the US has held since 1872. Previous
studies have suggested China could become the world's biggest economy by 2019. Ever since the 2008
financial crisis, the Chinese economy has contributed a quarter of total global growth. Between 2011-
2014, China’s economy will account for 24 percent, according to IMF estimates.
U.S. & Global Growth High Now

U.S. and global economic growth will grow this year
Moody's Investors Service, Staff Writer, May 8, 2014, “Advanced economies likely to drive global
growth in 2014-15 as emerging markets slow down,” Global Credit Research,
https://www.moodys.com/research/Moodys-Advanced-economies-likely-to-drive-global-growth-in-
2014--PR_298858, Accessed 5/18/2014
Moody's notes that reforms and accommodative monetary policy in the aftermath of the global financial
and the euro area crises are slowly bearing fruit in advanced economies. After a soft patch at the start of
the year, US economic activity is set to pick up during 2014 on the back of strong corporate balance
sheets, favourable financing conditions, a smaller fiscal drag and strong price competitiveness.
Moreover, after two years of recession, the euro area will contribute positively to global growth in 2014
as exporters benefit from competitiveness-improving reforms and as constraints on households'
budgets ease.
Global economic growth will be steady this year

Moody's Investors Service, Staff Writer, May 8, 2014, “Advanced economies likely to drive global
growth in 2014-15 as emerging markets slow down,” Global Credit Research,
https://www.moodys.com/research/Moodys-Advanced-economies-likely-to-drive-global-growth-in-
2014--PR_298858, Accessed 5/18/2014
Overall, positive developments in advanced economies will raise global growth this year to around 3%.
For emerging markets, growth in 2014 is likely to be lower than in 2013. In 2015, as stronger trade spills
over to improved domestic activity in most countries, global growth is expected to rise further, to reach
close to 3.5% for the G20 economies, in line with historical averages.
Impacts Answers
Economic doomsaying deters investment and lending, which hurts the economy
Zachary Karabell, Guest contributor and a money manager, May 1, 2014, “Cassandras Everywhere,”
Slate, http://www.slate.com/
articles/business/the_edgy_optimist/2014/05/global_economic_collapse_the_cassandras_who_are_pre
dicting_a_crash.html, Accessed 5/18/2014
The cult of doom has been thriving ever since the meltdown of 2008. With so many having been caught
off guard by the cascading crisis triggered by the collapse of Lehman Brothers in September 2008, a
never-again mentality took hold, especially in the United States. Europe had its own reckoning over the
euro soon after, and has been mired not just in stagnant growth but pessimism ever since. The reasons
for today’s caution verging on paranoia are understandable, but the effects are no less destructive.
Trillions of dollars sit on corporate balance sheets unused as companies and their CEOs wonder whether
now is a good time to spend. Banks, trying to preserve capital provided to them largely by government,
have been reluctant to lend, though they are certainly doing so more now than in the immediate
aftermath of 2008–2009. Believing that the financial system is imperiled by a Fed out of control and by
trillions in debt, wide swaths of the political class emboldened by the Tea Party continue to sound the
klaxon of austerity, forcing ever more shrinkage of what little government spending there is on
infrastructure, science, and investment.
Economic decline does not lead to war

Robert Jervis, Adlai E. Stevenson Professor of International Politics in the Department of Political
Science, and a Member of the Arnold A. Saltzman Institute of War and Peace Studies at Columbia
University, July 2011, “Force in Our Times,” Saltzman Working Paper No. 15,
http://www.siwps.com/news.attachment/saltzmanworkingpaper15-842/SaltzmanWorkingPaper15.PDF,
Accessed 5/18/2014
Even if war is still seen as evil, the security community could be dissolved if severe conflicts of interest
were to arise. Could the more peaceful world generate new interests that would bring the members of
the community into sharp disputes? 45 A zero-sum sense of status would be one example, perhaps
linked to a steep rise in nationalism. More likely would be a worsening of the current economic
difficulties, which could itself produce greater nationalism, undermine democracy, and bring back old-
fashioned beggar-thy-neighbor economic policies. While these dangers are real, it is hard to believe that
the conflicts could be great enough to lead the members of the community to contemplate fighting
each other. It is not so much that economic interdependence has proceeded to the point where it
could not be reversed – states that were more internally interdependent than anything seen
internationally have fought bloody civil wars. Rather it is that even if the more extreme versions of free
trade and economic liberalism become discredited, it is hard to see how without building on a pre-
existing high level of political conflict leaders and mass opinion would come to believe that their
countries could prosper by impoverishing or even attacking others. Is it possible that problems will not
only become severe, but that people will entertain the thought that they have to be solved by war?
While a pessimist could note that this argument does not appear as outlandish as it did before the
financial crisis, an optimist could reply (correctly, in my view) that the very fact that we have seen such
a sharp economic down-turn without anyone suggesting that force of arms is the solution shows that
even if bad times bring about greater economic conflict, it will not make war thinkable.
A2: Advantage: Hurricanes
A2: Hurricanes Getting Worse

Hurricanes will become less frequent
Bryan Walsh, Senior Editor, July 09, 2013, “Climate Change Could Make Hurricanes Stronger—and
More Frequent,” Time,
http://science.time.com/2013/07/09/a-new-study-says-hurricanes-will-get-stronger-and-more-
frequent-thanks-to-climate-change/, Accessed 5/14/2014
But there was one hopeful side effect to climate change, at least when it came to tropical storms. The
prevailing scientific opinion—seen in this 2012 report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change—is that while tropical storms are likely to become more powerful and rainier as the climate
warms, they would also become less common. Bigger bullets, slower gun.
Their hurricane predictions are false. Only 6.3% actually cause damage
Bryan Walsh, Senior Editor, May 24, 2013, “Tornadoes Were Just the Beginning. This Hurricane Season
Is Going to be Stormy,” Time,
http://science.time.com/2013/05/24/tornadoes-were-just-the-beginning-this-hurricane-season-is-
going-to-be-stormy/, Accessed 5/14/2014
It’s important to remember that NOAA is only predicting whether or not hurricanes and tropical storms
will develop—not whether they will make landfall like Superstorm Sandy did last fall. Only three of the
19 named storms that formed in the Atlantic last year made enough of an impact on the U.S. to cause
any real damage. Most storms form in the Atlantic and never leave. It’s not just the strength of a storm
that makes it dangerous—it’s location.
A2: Jacobsen / The Stanford Study

The Stanford study assumes more turbines than exist in the world
Wendy Koch, Staff Writer, February 26, 2014, “Offshore wind farms can tame hurricanes, study finds,”
USA Today, http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/02/26/offshore-wind-farms-tame-
hurricanes/5813425/, Accessed 5/10/2014
Jacobson says his study, published online in Nature Climate Change, is the first to look at how offshore
turbines interact with hurricanes. He says the impact may seem surprising but makes sense: Turbines
produce power by taking energy from wind and thus slowing it down. His team used complex modeling
to simulate the impact that tens of thousands of turbines — more than exist in any single wind farm
worldwide — would have had on three hurricanes: Sandy and Isaac, which struck New York and New
Orleans, respectively, in 2012 and Katrina, which devastated New Orleans in 2005.
Jacobsen’s wind farm proposal can’t suck out enough wind

Victoria Bekiempis, Staff Writer, April 9, 2014, “Taming hurricanes,” Sydney Morning Herald,
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/ weather/taming-hurricanes-20140408-36aal.html, Accessed
5/14/2014
And then there are the sceptics. When first asked about Jacobson's wind-farm hypothesis, Nicholas
Coch, an expert in northern hurricanes at Queens College in New York, exclaimed, "Holy cow!" Coch
then emphatically rejected the premise. "That wind farm couldn't possibly drain that much energy out
of the wind," he says. Despite his incredulity, Coch is not at all surprised by the proposal. Several years
ago, he and several other scientists, including Emanuel, participated on a PBS program on hurricanes
that included a call-in segment. One of the callers also wanted to deter these great storms with wind
farms. That gentleman "wanted to build windmills along the Florida coast to blow hurricanes back to
Africa," Coch recalls with a laugh.
Building enough turbines to stop hurricanes is not feasible

Wendy Koch, Staff Writer, February 26, 2014, “Offshore wind farms can tame hurricanes, study finds,”
USA Today, http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/02/26/offshore-wind-farms-tame-
hurricanes/5813425/, Accessed 5/10/2014
"This is a pretty neat idea, but it's expensive and borderline feasible," says Stephen Rose, an expert on
wind energy at Carnegie Mellon University. He led a 2012 study that said hurricanes could destroy some
turbines. Yet his team later issued a correction, saying there's only a 7% risk of hurricanes destroying at
least half of turbines off the Gulf Coast and almost no chance of such damage on the East Coast. "It's not
practical — 78,000 turbines," says Dominique Roddier, an engineer who's working on a new design for a
floating wind turbine by Seattle-based Principle Power, referring to the size of wind farms in Jacobson's
study. "That's an insane number of wind turbines. You can't build that many." The two largest pending
offshore U.S. wind farms — the Deepwater Wind Energy Center in New England and the Baryonyx Rio
Grande Wind Farms in Texas — are each slated to have at most 200 turbines.
A2: Biodiversity / Ecosystems

The damage from hurricanes is offset by environmental renewal. It’s key to some
species and ecosystems
Tricia Edger, Staff Writer, August 26, 2011, “A Fresh Start: Hurricanes, Forest Fires, and Renewal
Through Disaster,” Decoded Science,
http://www.decodedscience.com/a-fresh-start-hurricanes-forest-fires-and-renewal-through-
disaster/2699, Accessed 5/17/2014
Now, we can’t prescribe hurricanes. We can’t plan for them to take place in areas where there are very
few people. We don’t have the luxury of organization behind them, and so we fear these powerful
storms, and rightly so. They hurt people and their homes, and they change ecosystems. However, even
though hurricanes can cause profound changes to ecosystems, it is also possible to see these changes as
a new beginning. Hurricanes move warmth and water. They’re powered by warm tropical air, which they
redistribute to other, cooler parts of the globe. Thirsty deserts and landlocked areas benefit from the
water that hurricanes bring. They’re also nature’s cleanse. Need to flush out toxic substances from a
small water body? Just call up a hurricane. All right, we can’t do that yet, but we can thank hurricanes
for renewing the water quality in small bodies of water every year. For some animals and plants, the
hurricane is vital. It can move animals to new places, expanding their range. Many shorebirds cannot
nest in areas that have too much seaside vegetation. What removes this vegetation? Hurricanes do an
awfully good job. So even as you’re battening down the hatches, the piping plover is shouting hurrah.
And yes, even as the hurricanes are plowing through islands and reefs, they’re also leaving sand behind,
building up different parts of the islands. If the reefs are healthy, the pieces that have broken apart may
even start new colonies.
Hurricanes are natural ecosystem cleansers that are key to habitat protection
Peter Carlson, Staff Writer, September 20, 2003, “Divine wind?: Hurricane is punishing but creates
some benefits,” Seattle Times,
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=20030920&slug=benefits20, Accessed
5/17/2014
Maddock is an environmental analyst for the Center for Biological Diversity. He works on Hatteras
Island, off the mainland of North Carolina. Despite worries about the destructive power of the storm, he
is comforted by the thought that Isabel is creating some wonderful nesting places for the piping plover
and other seashore birds: the black skimmer and the common tern and the American oyster-catcher. "A
storm like this is so powerful," he said, "that it will push massive amounts of sand and water across the
island and you'll have large areas of open sand without vegetation, and those are the areas where next
summer the shore birds will breed." A hurricane is like a forest fire, Maddock said: It causes a lot of
destruction, but it also "plays an important role in protecting the habitat."

Hurricanes are good for ecosystems on multiple levels
Peter Carlson, Staff Writer, September 20, 2003, “Divine wind?: Hurricane is punishing but creates
some benefits,” Seattle Times,
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=20030920&slug=benefits20, Accessed
5/17/2014
"You have to look at the silver lining," said Frank Marks, a research meteorologist for the hurricane
research division of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. "They're good for the
ecosystem, even if they're bad for us." Not only are hurricanes good for the ecosystem, they're also
good for the aquifer. And for Florida's Lake Okeechobee. And for coral reefs. And for barrier islands. And
for the piping plover. In fact, if it wasn't for hurricanes, the poor piping plover would have no place to
mate. The piping plover is a seashore bird. It makes its nest in sandy stretches of beach. If too much
vegetation grows on the beach, the piping plover can't nest there. If they can't nest, they can't mate.
And the piping plover already is classified as a "threatened" species. "Hurricanes," Sidney Maddock said,
"create the habitat conditions that allow these birds to nest."
Because hurricanes are becoming clustered, it’s good for the environment
Global Change Institute, Staff Writer, October 18, 2011, “Clustered hurricanes reduce impact on
ecosystems, researchers find,” Science Daily,
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/10/111017155614.htm, Accessed 5/17/2014
New research has found that hurricane activity is 'clustered' rather than random, which has important
long-term implications for coastal ecosystems and human population. The research was carried out by
Professor Peter Mumby from The University of Queensland Global Change Institute and School of
Biological Sciences, Professor David Stephenson and Dr. Renato Vitolo (Willis Research Fellow) at the
University of Exeter's Exeter Climate Systems research centre. Tropical cyclones and hurricanes have a
massive economic, social and ecological impact, and models of their occurrence influence many
planning activities from setting insurance premiums to conservation planning. Understanding how the
frequency of hurricanes varies is important for the people that experience them and the ecosystems
that are impacted by hurricanes. The findings published in the journal Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences map the variability in hurricanes throughout the Americas using a 100-year
historical record of hurricane tracks. Short intense periods of hurricanes followed by relatively long quiet
periods, were found around the Caribbean Sea and the clustering was particularly strong in Florida, the
Bahamas, Belize, Honduras, Haiti and Jamaica. Modelling of corals reefs of the Caribbean found that
clustered hurricanes are 'better' for coral reef health than random hurricane events as the first
hurricane always causes a lot of damage but then those storms that follow in quick succession don't add
much additional damage as most of the fragile corals were removed by the first storm. The following
prolonged period without hurricanes allows the corals to recover and then remain in a reasonable state
prior to being hit by the next series of storms.

Ecosystems are resilient and ecological change from hurricanes are not bad
Tricia Edger, Staff Writer, August 26, 2011, “A Fresh Start: Hurricanes, Forest Fires, and Renewal
Through Disaster,” Decoded Science,
http://www.decodedscience.com/a-fresh-start-hurricanes-forest-fires-and-renewal-through-
disaster/2699, Accessed 5/17/2014
Just as humans are resilient, ecosystems are as well. Just as humans will change and adapt to the new
circumstances of their lives, ecosystems will also change, sometimes for the better. As the hurricanes
approach, know that there will be change. However, in ecological terms, change does not have a value
judgement. It’s not good or bad, it is just the way that ecosystems are. So, as Hurricane Irene and her
friends move closer, think about that silver lining – and keep yourself safe this storm season.
Sea level rise and storms make 233 at risk species extinction inevitable in the U.S.
alone
Center for Biological Diversity, Staff Writers, December 10, 2013, “New Report: Rising Seas
Threaten 233 Federally Protected Species,”
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2013/12/10/18747564.php, Accessed 5/14/2014
Sea-level rise driven by climate change poses a deadly threat to 233 federally protected animal and
plant species in 23 coastal states, according to a new scientific report from the Center for Biological
Diversity, and U.S. wildlife protection agencies are not doing enough to protect at-risk species. For the
“Deadly Waters” report, Center scientists analyzed data from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and
National Marine Fisheries Service, as well as scientific literature. The Center found that 17 percent — 1
in 6 — of the nation’s threatened and endangered species are at risk from rising sea levels and storm
surges. The report also details the specific danger to five of the species most threatened by sea-level
rise.
A2: Advantage: Climate
A2: IPCC Alarmism

Be skeptical of their warming claims. The IPCC consistently exaggerates their
estimates
The Australian, Staff Writer, November 8, ‘13, “Climate science should be read, not believed as
faith,” p. 13. , JT
Across five years, the dynamic of the global warming debate, as Mr. Howard says, has shifted. The
exaggerated acceptance of the worst possible implications of what climate scientists say has given way
to a more balanced and questioning approach. Even the UN's climate change chief, Rajendra Pachauri,
when questioned during a flying visit to Australia this year, said no issues should be off-limits for
discussion. He agreed debate about controversial science and politically incorrect views was an essential
part of dealing with climate change. On our front page, he also acknowledged the 17-year plateau in
global temperatures confirmed by Britain's Met Office. First principles, as Mr Howard points out, tell us
``never to accept that all of the science is in on any proposition''. The importance of remaining open to
the relevance of new research is a good reason for reading, rather than believing, scientific reports
on climate change. A detailed study of the IPCC and other reports during the past quarter century shows
climate models have consistently overstated the rise in global temperatures. In 2010, for example, the
IPCC was forced to apologise for its assertion three years earlier that glaciers in the Himalayas would
disappear by 2035 or sooner. Even the most ardent believers in the ``scientific consensus'' would find it
impossible to regard the unfolding science as infallible doctrine. Calculations by Bjorn Lomborg, an
adjunct professor at the Copenhagen Business School, show the average of all climate models since
1980 have overestimated actual temperature rises by 71 to 159 per cent. Some scientists have warned
of 6C rises.
Alarmist IPCC predictions are based on flawed computer models

Christopher Booker, Staff Writer, April 5, 2014, “How did the IPCC’s alarmism take everyone in for so
long?,” The Telegraph, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/10746497/How-
did-the-IPCCs-alarmism-take-everyone-in-for-so-long.html, Accessed 4/23/2014
Most of the particularly alarmist predictions came from a report by the IPCC’s Working Group II. This
was concerned with assessing the impact on the world of those changes to the climate predicted by the
equally flawed computer models relied on by Working Group I, which was charged with assessing the
science of climate change. The technical report published last week was its sequel, also from Working
Group II, and we can at once see, from its much more cautious treatment of the subjects that caused
such trouble last time, that they knew they couldn’t afford any repeat of that disaster.
Reducing Emissions Will Not Solve

Arctic warming means even ending all emissions will not solve
Bobby Magill, Staff Writer, May 1, 2014, “Arctic Methane Emissions ‘Certain to Trigger Warming’,”
Climate Central, http://www.climatecentral.org/news/arctic-methane-emissions-certain-to-trigger-
warming-17374, Accessed 5/16/2014
Warming and thawing permafrost stimulate methane release, which enhances the greenhouse effect,
creating a feedback loop, she said. “Even if we ceased all human emissions, permafrost would continue
to thaw and release carbon into the atmosphere,” Turetsky said. “Instead of reducing emissions, we
currently are on track with the most dire scenario considered by the IPCC. There is no way to capture
emissions from thawing permafrost as this carbon is released from soils across large regions of land in
very remote spaces.”
Temperatures would be constant or increase for 50 years after we stopped CO2

emissions
Thomas Lukas Frölicher, Et al, November 24, 2013, Environmental Physics, Institute of
Biogeochemistry and Pollutant Dynamics, and Program in Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, Princeton
University, “Continued global warming after CO2 emissions stoppage,” Nature Climate Change,
http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate2060.html, Accessed
12/14/2013, JT
Recent studies have suggested that global mean surface temperature would remain approximately
constant on multi-century timescales after CO2 emissions are stopped. Here we use Earth system model
simulations of such a stoppage to demonstrate that in some models, surface temperature may actually
increase on multi-century timescales after an initial century-long decrease. This occurs in spite of a
decline in radiative forcing that exceeds the decline in ocean heat uptake—a circumstance that would
otherwise be expected to lead to a decline in global temperature. The reason is that the warming effect
of decreasing ocean heat uptake together with feedback effects arising in response to the geographic
structure of ocean heat uptake overcompensates the cooling effect of decreasing atmospheric CO2 on
multi-century timescales. Our study also reveals that equilibrium climate sensitivity estimates based on
a widely used method of regressing the Earth’s energy imbalance against surface temperature
change are biased. Uncertainty in the magnitude of the feedback effects associated with the magnitude
and geographic distribution of ocean heat uptake therefore contributes substantially to the uncertainty
in allowable carbon emissions for a given multi-century warming target.
CO2 Emissions Good

CO2 increases forest and vegetative productivity that offsets warming
James M. Taylor, J.D., Senior Fellow, The Heartland Institute; Managing Editor, Environment and
Climate News, April 8, 2014, “Comprehensive Report Documents Beneficial Impacts of Global
Warming,” http://news.heartland.org/newspaper-article/2014/04/08/ comprehensive-report-
documents-beneficial-impacts-global-warming, Accessed 5/18/2014
Biological Impacts documents increasing productivity of forests and grasslands as CO2 levels have
increased both in recent decades and in centuries past, countering IPCC assertions to the contrary. The
new volume also presents the scientific evidence that a more productive biosphere effectively
sequesters much of the carbon dioxide IPCC claims will cause additional warming. “The ongoing rise in
the air’s CO2 content is causing a great greening of the Earth. All across the planet, the historical
increase in the atmosphere’s CO2 concentration has stimulated vegetative productivity. This observed
stimulation, or greening of the Earth, has occurred in spite of many real and imagined assaults on Earth’s
vegetation, including fires, disease, pest outbreaks, deforestation, and climatic change,” Biological
Impacts reports.
Studies prove CO2 is key to global agriculture

Craig D. Idso, October 21, 2013, Ph.D. Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, “The
Positive Externalities of Carbon Dioxide: Estimating the Monetary Benefits of Rising Atmospheric CO2
Concentrations on Global Food Production,” CO2 Science,
http://www.co2science.org/education/reports/co2benefits/MonetaryBenefitsofRisingCO2onGlobalFood
Production.pdf, Accessed 5/18/2014
Numerous studies conducted on hundreds of different plant species testify to the very real and
measurable growth-enhancing, water-saving, and stress-alleviating advantages that elevated
atmospheric CO2 concentrations bestow upon Earth’s plants. In commenting on these and many other
CO2-related benefits, Wittwer (1982) wrote that “the ‘green revolution’ has coincided with the period of
recorded rapid increase in concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide, and it seems likely that some
credit for the improved [crop] yields should be laid at the door of the CO2 buildup.” Similarly, Allen et al.
(1987) concluded that yields of soybeans may have been rising since at least 1800 “due to global carbon
dioxide increases,” while more recently, Cunniff et al. (2008) hypothesized that the rise in atmospheric
CO2 following deglaciation of the most recent planetary ice age, was the trigger that launched the global
agricultural enterprise.
A2: Advantage: Ocean Biodiversity
A2: Biodiversity – Avian Collisions

Only a site and species specific approach can avoid the risk of avian collisions
Anthony Bicknell, Ph.D., Marine Biology and Ecology Research Centre at the Plymouth Marine
Institute, Plymouth University, et al., June 19, 2013, “Marine Renewables, Biodiversity and Fisheries,”
Plymouth Marine Institute at Plymouth University, http://www.foe.co.uk/sites/
default/files/downloads/marine_ renewables_biodiver.pdf, Accessed 5/12/2014
The impact of these non-lethal effects will be highly dependent on the species and location, size, and
number of MRE installations. Wind-farms are of most concern as they are highly visible to birds and
known to invoke strong avoidance responses in some species, but tidal and wave may still cause
displacement from feeding habitat if badly located, especially during construction. A site- and species
specific approach needs to be taken to assess the effects, but sensible development planning to avoid
sensitive foraging areas and improve wind-farm design (e.g. spacing of turbines and flight corridors) will
help mitigate possible population impacts.
A2: Biodiversity – Noise Pollution

Wind renewables generate noise pollution that is lethal to fish
Fish utilise biological noise to obtain information about the environment in terms of presence of prey
and/or predators, communication and orientation using a number of morphological structures to detect
sound (noise and vibrations). These hearing structures are extremely diverse among fishes, resulting in
different auditory capacity and sensitivity and, consequently, different responses to noise between fish
species. Different aspects of the construction and operation of MRE devices result in noise levels that
could have a negative effect in some fish. During the construction phase, wind turbine foundation
installation can generate acute noise (peak levels around 206 dB re 1 μPa), potentially leading to
mortality, physical injury, hearing loss and avoidance responses. During wind farm operation, more
subtle effects could be expected, including physiological and behavioural changes, such as impairment
of aggressive and reproductive strategies through masking of communicative signals.
Offshore wind construction causes noise pollution that harms endangered marine
species
The University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science, Staff Writer, November 4,
2013, “Assessing impact of noise from offshore wind farm construction may help protect marine
mammals,” http://www.umces.edu/cbl/release/ 2013/oct/16/assessing-impact-noise-offshore-wind-
farm-construction-may-help-protect-marine-m, Accessed 5/18/2014
Growth in offshore wind generation is expected to play a major role in meeting carbon reduction targets
around the world, but the impact of construction noise on marine species is yet unknown. A group of
scientists from the United Kingdom and the United States have developed a method to assess the
potential impacts of offshore wind farm construction on marine mammal populations, particularly the
noise made while driving piles into the seabed to install wind turbine foundations. Their work is
published in the November issue of Environmental Impact Assessment Review. “Pile-driving during the
construction of offshore wind farms produces an incredible amount of noise,” said Helen Bailey, one of a
group of scientists at the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science who are studying the
impacts of wind turbines on the environment. “This is potentially harmful to marine species and has
been of greatest concern to marine mammal species, such as protected populations of seals, dolphins
and whales.”
A2: Solvency
General Solvency Answers

The plan cannot overcome resource characterization, high start-up costs, grid
connection, and infrastructure barriers
Significant challenges to offshore wind power deployment related to resource characterization, grid
interconnection and operation, and infrastructure will need to be overcome. The offshore wind resource
is not well characterized. This significantly increases uncertainty related to potential project power
production and turbine and array design considerations, which in turn increase financing costs. The
implications for adding large amounts of offshore wind generation to the power system need to be
better understood to ensure reliable integration and to evaluate the need for additional grid
infrastructure such as an offshore transmission backbone. Finally, with current technology, cost‐
effective installation of offshore wind turbines requires specialized vessels, purpose‐built portside
infrastructure, robust undersea electricity transmission lines, and grid interconnections. These vessels
and this infrastructure do not currently exist in the U.S. Although foreign‐flagged turbine installation and
maintenance vessels exist, legislation such as the Jones Act limits the ability of these vessels to operate
in U.S. waters.
Transmission planning issues will cause delays in development

5/10/2014
The offshore wind industry faces similar transmission planning issues as the land-based wind industry.
There has always been a “chicken and egg” dilemma when it comes to transmission expansion, often
leading to project delays. Wind developers often will not build wind farms without sufficient
transmission. Transmission operators often will not build new transmission lines without sufficient
assurances that they will be able to recover their costs. Cost allocation methodologies are complicated
as well, and require adequate advance planning time on the part of multiple stakeholders.
Technology Fails / Too Many Barriers

New tech developments and planning are required before offshore wind power
José Zayas, Director, Wind and Water Power Technologies Office, U.S. Department of Energy, January
2014, “Advancing Ocean Renewable Energy In the United States,” Sea Technology Magazine,
http://www.sea-technology.com/features/2014/0114/1.php, Accessed 4/11/2014
To effectively develop the vast U.S. offshore wind resource, technology innovations are needed to lower
system costs and address site-specific requirements, such as hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico and the
Atlantic, icing in the Great Lakes, and deep waters in the Northeast, Great Lakes and West Coast. In
addition, environmental impact assessments, multiuser planning and transmission grid interconnection
strategies are required.
The technology is not ready and there are too many barriers
The opportunities for advancing offshore wind technologies are accompanied by significant challenges.
Turbine blades can be much larger without land-based transportation and construction constraints;
however, enabling technology is needed to allow the construction of a blade greater than 70-meters in
length. The blades may also be allowed to rotate faster offshore, as blade noise is less likely to disturb
human habitations. Faster rotors operate at lower torque, which means lighter, less costly drivetrain
components. Challenges unique to the offshore environment include resistance to corrosive salt waters,
resilience to tropical and extra-tropical storms and waves, and coexistence with marine life and
activities. Greater distances from shore create challenges from increased water depth, exposure to
more extreme open ocean conditions, long distance electrical transmission on high-voltage submarine
cables, turbine maintenance at sea, and accommodation of maintenance personnel.
Lack of demand means we cannot overcome technical and infrastructure barriers. We

have to increase demand first
5/10/2014
The absence of strong demand for offshore wind in the United States makes it difficult to overcome
these technical and infrastructure challenges. In order to develop the required infrastructure and
technical expertise, there must first be sufficient demand for offshore wind, and that is not expected in
the near term due to the high cost of offshore wind and the low cost of competing power generation
resources, such as natural gas.
Technology Fails / Too Many Barriers

90% of offshore wind resources are out of reach for current technology
Bureau of Ocean Management, 2014, “Offshore Wind Energy,”
http://www.boem.gov/Renewable-Energy-Program/Renewable-Energy-Guide/Offshore-Wind-
Energy.aspx, Accessed 4/9/2014
Commercial-scale offshore wind facilities are similar to onshore wind facilities. The wind turbine
generators used in offshore environments include modifications to prevent corrosion, and their
foundations must be designed to withstand the harsh environment of the ocean, including storm waves,
hurricane-force winds, and even ice flows. Roughly 90% of the U.S. OCS wind energy resource occurs in
waters that are too deep for current turbine technology. Engineers are working on new technologies,
such as innovative foundations and floating wind turbines, that will transition wind power development
into the harsher conditions associated with deeper waters.
No Infrastructure
We don’t have the infrastructure for development or capability for operation and
maintenance
5/10/2014
The infrastructure required to install offshore wind farms, such as purpose-built ports and vessels, does
not currently exist in the United States. There is also insufficient capability for domestic operation and
maintenance. While turbine installation and maintenance vessels exist in other countries, legislation
such as the Jones Act may limit the ability of these foreign vessels to operate in U.S. waters. These issues
also apply to transmission infrastructure for offshore wind.
We only have about 2,000 megawatts in development now

Although the United States has built no offshore wind projects so far, about 20 projects representing
more than 2,000 MW of capacity are in the planning and permitting process. Most of these activities are
in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic regions, although projects are being considered along the Great Lakes,
the Gulf of Mexico, and the Pacific Coast. The deep waters off the West Coast, however, pose a
technology challenge for the near term.
Too Costly
Offshore wind is the second costliest energy source around
The Daily Caller News Foundation, Staff Writer, February 27, 2014, “Study claims giant offshore
wind turbines will blow away hurricanes,” Red Alert Politics,
http://redalertpolitics.com/2014/02/27/study-claims-giant-offshore-wind-turbines-will-blow-away-
hurricanes/, Accessed 5/14/2014
There is also the issue of cost. Wind power costs have been coming down in recent years, but are still
significantly higher than traditional energy sources like coal or natural gas. Offshore wind is one of the
costliest energy sources, according to the Energy Information Administration, costing about $222 per
megawatt hour — onshore wind only costs $86 per megawatt hour. The only source of energy that’s
more costly to generate than offshore wind is solar thermal energy at $261 per megawatt hour.
Investors still perceive it too risky to sign on

5/10/2014
Offshore wind has higher financing costs, due to the heightened perceived risk. Since it is not yet a
mature industry, investors still perceive offshore wind as risky, due to regulatory and permitting issues,
construction and installation risk, and long-term reliability of energy production. As a result, insurance
and warranty premiums remain high. There are also extremely high risks to early-stage capital, given the
uncertainty around the price and availability of future off-take agreements for offshore wind.
UNCLOS NEG
Case Answers
1NC Arctic
Can’t solve—allied free-riding and bureaucratic failures
Doug Bandow, senior fellow at the Cato Institute, specializing in foreign policy and civil liberties,
05/11/12, “Law of the Sea Treaty: A Tool to Combat Iran, China, and Russia?,”
http://www.cato.org/blog/law-sea-treaty-tool-combat-iran-china-russia, accessed 5/5/14
These international controversies will be magically resolved if only the Senate ratifies the convention. If
this sounds too good to be true, it is. It is not clear the treaty would do much at all to alleviate these
flashpoints. Especially since the two most important potential antagonists, China and Russia, already have ratified LOST. And it is
certainly not the best option policy-wise for the United States with each issue: Iran’s bluster in the Strait of
Hormuz may prove its weakness. U.S. policy in the South China Sea suffers from a far more serious flaw:
encouraging free-riding by allied states. Russia’s move into the Arctic has nothing to do with
Washington’s absence from LOST. The treaty itself, not substantially altered since 1994, is still plagued by
the same problems that have halted its ratification for decades. Primarily, it will cede decisionmaking on
seabed and maritime issues to a large, complex, unwieldy bureaucracy that will be funded heavily by—
wait for it—the Untied States.
Status quo solves—US already involved in multilateralism

Steven Groves, Bernard and Barbara Lomas Senior Research Fellow, 8/24/11, “Accession to the U.N.
Convention on the Law of the Sea Is Unnecessary to Secure U.S. Navigational Rights and Freedoms”,
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2011/08/accession-to-un-convention-law-of-the-sea-is-
unnecessary-to-secure-us-navigational-rights-freedoms, accessed 5/5/14,
The United States is an active participant in many multilateral organizations and forums that deal with
law of the sea issues, such as the annual meetings of the Major Maritime Powers, IMO proceedings, and
meetings of the states parties to UNCLOS, which the U.S. attends as an observer nation. Despite
repeated claims to the contrary, the United States effectively protects its Arctic interests, navigational
and otherwise, regardless of its nonmembership in UNCLOS. It was a founding member of the Arctic
Council, an eight-member intergovernmental body established to foster coordination among Arctic
nations that recently adopted an agreement on search and rescue cooperation in the Arctic Ocean.[145]
1NC Arctic
No Arctic War—capitalist peace theory
Chad P. Pate, Major, United States Air Force B.S., Iowa State University, 1996 M.S. Troy University,
2008, December 2010 “EASING THE ARCTIC TENSION: AN ECONOMIC SOLUTION”,
www.hsdl.org/?view&did=11038, accessed 5/5/14]
Climate change in the Arctic is affecting the ice melt more rapidly than previously anticipated and the
Arctic is now forecast to be ice-free by 2013. International borders, fossil fuel reservoirs and new sea
routes for navigation are just a few of the issues at stake due to the receding ice cover. Contrary to
those who perceive U.S.-Russian conflict arising out of the region and advocate a military response, this
thesis argues that the Arctic, precisely because of its rich hydrocarbon resources, may prove to be
amenable to a capitalist peace. Research suggests that nations linked by economic interdependence are
less apt to engage in conflict with each other. Nations seeking foreign direct investment will be less likely
to initiate conflict, as this would diminish the potential for attracting foreign capital. Russia’s economy is
dependent on oil and natural gas exports and these industries have created enormous wealth for the
nation. Yet Russia’s existing fossil fuel reservoirs are nearing exhaustion. Tapping into Arctic reserves is a
strategic imperative for Russia; however, it lacks the technological capacity to do so. The energy industry
in the West is farther along in developing such extractive technology. This thesis argues that Russia’s
need of foreign assistance in its hydrocarbon sector will make Russia more pacific, thereby offsetting
realist fears of a military conflict in the Arctic.
2NC Arctic—Status Quo Solves

Status quo solves—the arctic council promotes cooperation
Fabrizio Tansari non-resident Senior Fellow at the German Marshall Fund and the Head of Foreign
Policy and EU Studies at the Danish Institute for International Studies, 09/07/12, “Avoiding a Scramble
for the High North”, http://blog.gmfus.org/2012/09/07/avoiding-a-scramble-for-the-high-north/,
accessed 5/5/14
For a peaceful Arctic environment to emerge, the political discourse and ensuing practices need
rebalancing. Besides abstract musings about the normative virtues of multilateralism, straightforward considerations of enlightened self-
interest should justify the drive for cooperation. As The Economist put it in a recent report, “The five Arctic littoral countries … would sooner
develop the resources they have than argue over those they do not have.” Some recent developments point in this direction.
The Arctic Council, the main regional forum grouping the littoral countries plus Iceland, Sweden, and Finland, has grown into a
premier venue of high-level interaction among Arctic powers. The stature of outsiders queuing up for
permanent observer status, including China and the EU, testifies to the growing importance of this body. In
2011, the Council’s members strengthened cooperation on search and rescue operations (a crucial matter for such a territorially vast area). In
2008, the five littoral countries joined together in a statement, the Ilulissat Declaration, by which they
committed to settle in an orderly manner disagreements that may arise on issues such as navigation
rights and delineation of the outer limits of the continental shelf.
2NC Arctic—No War

Major powers want to cooperate
Michael Byers, Law and Politics Professor and senior expert on Arctic politics – University of British
Columbia, April 2nd, 2010, “Interview: Expert decodes Arctic conflict,” UPI,
http://www.upi.com/Science_News/Resource-Wars/2010/04/02/Interview-Expert-decodes-Arctic-
conflict/UPI-36031270235949/, accessed 5/5/14
Q. China is a country that has major interests in the Arctic. A. Yes, and these are all about shipping. China has become the
dominant export country in the world. We are talking about significant shortcuts -- up to 6,000 miles -- from China to Europe, so yes, they're
looking at this with great interest. At the same time China does not want a Wild West situation in the Arctic. It will worry
about piracy, the need for search and rescue, the need for ports of refuge that ships can sail to in the case of emergencies.
China will want the Arctic Ocean countries to provide a basic support system for shipping, so it has every
incentive to work with the Arctic Ocean countries rather than against them. Q. What about the Arctic's vast oil and
gas resources? China has a growing hunger for these resources and would be happy to tap into the Arctic fields. Is there potential for a conflict? A. I don't
think so. China is very much part of the international economy. They buy oil and gas on the global market and also invest in oil-
and gas-producing countries. You don't need sovereignty in order to access oil and gas -- you need money for foreign
investment and money to purchase oil and gas on the market. We're not in a 19th-century situation anymore. Q. But
military activities have increased in the region. And there are observers who fear a potential military conflict over resources in the Arctic. A. That's
unrealistic. If you look at the statements by government officials -- in most instances, the military buildup is directed at non-state
threats. When they talk about their Arctic rights they almost always talk about rights that are already within their
jurisdiction if they are an arctic ocean country like Russia. Or in the case of China, they are talking about rights in the internationalized areas that will remain
in the central Arctic Ocean. I understand that potential for conflict sells more newspapers but my sense is that countries like
Russia and China have enough problems elsewhere and therefore don't want to create problems in the
Arctic.
1NC China
China will interpret LOST in their favor
Doug Bandow, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, September 12, 2011, Washington’s Night of the
Living Dead: The Law of the Sea Treaty Stirs,
http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/washingtons-night-living-dead-law-sea-treaty-stirs,
accessed 5/5/14
Perhaps the area of greatest controversy is the South China Sea. China vehemently denounced U.S.
intelligence activities 75 miles off of China’s Hainan Island and harassed the naval vessel concerned.
Washington had the better legal argument, but Beijing’s LOST interpretation was not implausible. In this
case only U.S. naval power offered certain, unambiguous protection of navigational freedom. Beijing has
been similarly asserting ownership of islands and control of waters against its neighbors, treaty
members all. Nor have the Chinese worried about consistency, sending their survey ships into waters
claimed by Japan. Two years ago Director of National Intelligence Dennis C. Blair testified before the Senate
Armed Services Committee: “In the past several years, they have become more aggressive in asserting
claims for the [EEZ] which are excessive under almost any international code.”
Enforcement barriers makes LOST useless

Max Boot, a leading military historian and foreign-policy analyst. The Jeane J. Kirkpatrick Senior Fellow
in National Security Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York, 06/01/12, “China Tests Law
of the Sea Treaty”, http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2012/06/01/china-tests-law-of-the-sea-
treaty/, accessed 5/5/14
China seems bent on laying claim to those resources, no matter what the Law of the Sea Treaty says, which highlights
the chief problem with international law: the difficulty of actually enforcing it. That will require the U.S.
to take an increasingly assertive stance to back up, with naval and air power if need be, the rights of our
allies against China’s resources-grab. Sending a U.S. Navy cruiser or destroyer to Scarborough Shoal to
support our Philippine friends would have sent a far more powerful message of compliance with
international law than Senate ratification of the Law of the Sea Treaty.
1NC China
China won’t go to war over sea – threats are a diplomatic bargaining tool
Michael Kelly, Professor of Law and Associate Dean for International Programs @ Creighton School of
Law, December 7, 2013, “Why China Doesn't Really Want the Senkaku Islands”, JURIST - Forum,
http://jurist.org/forum/2013/12/michael-kelly-china-senkaku.php, Accessed 5/5/14
Whatever the origins of the revived Senkaku claim forty three years ago, Mr. Xi knows he can get much more fossil fuel to
feed his carbon-thirsty economy from the South China Sea deposits than he could from the comparatively meager East
China Sea. His strategy is to create the biggest fuss possible with brinksmanship tactics over the Senkaku
Islands in order to bring a frayed and twitchy Japan to the bargaining table, with the US nervously in the
background pushing hard for peace. And then, he will pitch his grand bargain. In exchange for
relinquishing China's claim to the Senkakus, Mr. Xi would want Japan to support China's claim to the
South China Sea. Politically, the Japanese government comes home with a huge victory that costs it
virtually nothing. But of course, what Japan gives China in this grand bargain is far more valuable to China than a handful of rocks near
Okinawa. With Japan backing its claim in the South China Sea and the US backing off, China will be in a
position to deal bilaterally with the claims of the smaller states. Unable to withstand the political,
economic and military might of their vastly larger neighbor, the claims of Vietnam, Malaysia and the
Philippines will eventually collapse through bribery, bullying and benevolence alternately applied. Long the
object of Euro-Japanese grand bargains that carved up its territory and subjugated its people, China now seeks a grand bargain of
its own. Mr. Xi understands that his country has the leverage to pull one off, and he is gambling that this
feint to the Senkakus will get him the support from the other Great Powers to do it.
2NC China—Can’t Solve Chinese Interpretation

China will coopt the treaty in their favor
Max Boot, a leading military historian and foreign-policy analyst. The Jeane J. Kirkpatrick Senior Fellow
in National Security Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York, 06/01/12, “China Tests Law
of the Sea Treaty”, http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2012/06/01/china-tests-law-of-the-sea-
treaty/, accessed 5/5/14
I confess I don’t understand the fervor of proponents and opponents of the Law of the Sea Treaty, which
is still awaiting Senate ratification and has been since 1982. The former seem to imagine that it will be a vast advance for American
interests; the latter that it will be a vast infringement on American sovereignty. Both views seem overblown to me. I have no problem with
ratifying the treaty, but at the same time I
have no great expectations for what ratification will achieve. Case in point:
the South China Sea, the subject of a long New York Times article today. China has actually signed the
Law of the Sea Treaty, but that is not preventing it from asserting a cockamamie “right” to do what it
wants within 200 miles of its coast–and within 200 miles of each group of tiny rocks and islands in the
South China Sea that Beijing implausibly claims as its national territory. If taken seriously, China’s claims
would give it access to the entire sea, even though those waters are also claimed by the Philippines,
Malaysia, Vietnam, Taiwan, and Brunei. The Law of the Sea Treaty, by contrast, recognizes freedom of
navigation for any nation only 12 miles beyond a country’s shoreline.
2NC China—No War

SCS war won’t happen or escalate – no Chinese incentive
Terry Wing, Voice of America, 9/4/12, “Will South China Sea Disputes Lead to War?”,
http://www.voanews.com/content/south-china-sea-war-unlikely/1501780.html, accessed 5/5/14
A South China Sea War is Unlikely But that doesn’t mean a war. Storey said an escalation into full-blown conflict is
unlikely. “It is in no country’s interests to spill blood or treasure over this issue – the costs far outweigh
the benefits,” Storey said. Other experts agree. James Holmes of the U.S. Naval War College says admires how China has
been able to get its way in spreading it claims of sovereignty without becoming a bully. “[China] gradually
consolidated the nation's maritime claims while staying well under the threshold for triggering outside -
most likely American -intervention,” said Holmes. “Is war about to break out over bare rocks? I don't think
so.” writes Robert D. Kaplan, Chief Political Strategist for the geopolitical analysis group Stratfor. Kaplan, however, doesn’t give much hope for
negotiations. “The issues involved are too complex, and the power imbalance between China and its individual neighbors is too great,” he said.
For that reason, Kaplan says China holds all the cards. Kaplan doesn’t look for Chinese
military aggression against other
claimants. That, he says, would be counterproductive for its goals in the region. “It would completely
undermine its carefully crafted ‘peaceful rise’ thesis and push Southeast Asian countries into closer
strategic alignment with the US,” said Kaplan. At the same time, he said Chinese leaders probably will be unable to compromise.
“The primordial quest for status still determines the international system, and these bare rocks in the South China Sea have become, in effect,
logos of nationhood,” Kaplan said. What is China Thinking? Trying to get inside the heads of China’s leader is a challenge, especially during a
time of political turnover. With the power transition now underway in China, some analysts are seeing signs of nationalistic tendencies. And
that, they say, could lead to a greater willingness to use force. “If the PRC continues on its current path, it would seem that it is willing to
militarize the whole South China Sea issue,” said Dean Cheng, a China military and foreign policy expert at the Heritage Foundation. Cheng
offers another possibility – Beijing’s current hardline policies might be DUE to the power shift. “Once Xi Jinping, Li Keqiang, et. al., have secured
their position in 2013-2014,” said Cheng, “they [could] focus on domestic issues and assume a LESS hardline
position.” In that case, Cheng said it is possible the Chinese will become more conciliatory. Defusing Asia’s biggest
flashpoint would be in everyone’s interest. “All countries have a strongly vested interest in the
maintenance of freedom of navigation in Southeast Asian waters,” said Ian Storey. “Ensuring the free flow of
maritime trade through the sea is especially important at a time of global economic downturn.” Secretary
Clinton’s discussions in Beijing could fall flat, or they could go a long way easing tensions. “As long as both sides take appropriate
precautionary measures, we should be okay,” said David Arase. “The rising tension could be productive if it
prompts an effort to find compromise.” “China and the United States both have a deep interest in dominating [the South China
Sea],” says Strator’s Kaplan. For that reason, experts agree the two superpowers look to have the most to say about the future of the
waterway.
2NC China—No Escalation

No impact to South China Sea conflict – no interventionism
Lyle Goldstein, associate professor in the China Maritime Studies Institute at the U.S. Naval War
College in Newport, R.I. He is co-editor of the recent volumes China, the United States and 21st-Century
Sea Power: Defining a Maritime Security Partnership and Chinese Aerospace Power: Evolving Maritime
Roles. 07/11/11, “The South China Sea's Georgia Scenario,”
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/07/11/the_south_china_seas_georgia_scenario, Accessed
5/5/14
The brutal truth, however, is that Southeast Asia matters not a whit in the global balance of power. Most of the
region comprises small, poor countries of no consequence whatsoever, but the medium powers in the region, such
as Vietnam, Indonesia, and Australia will all naturally and of their own accord stand up against a potentially more aggressive China. If China
and Vietnam go to war over some rocks in the ocean, they will inevitably both suffer a wide range of deleterious
consequences, but it will have only a marginal impact on U.S. national security. True, these sea lanes are
critical to the Japanese and South Korean economies, but both of these states are endowed with large
and capable fleets -- yet another check on Beijing's ambitions. China, moreover, is all too aware of what
happened to Georgia in 2008. In that unfortunate case, the United States showered a new ally with
high-level attention and military advisors. But when Russian tanks rolled in, effectively annexing a large
section of the country and utterly destroying Tbilisi's armed forces, Washington's response amounted to
a whimper: There was, in the end, no appetite for risking a wider conflict with Moscow over a country of marginal
strategic interest. The lessons for Southeast Asia should be clear. Washington must avoid the temptation -- despite local states cheering it on at
every opportunity -- to overplay its hand. The main principle guiding U.S. policy regarding the South China Sea has
been and should remain nonintervention. Resource disputes are inherently messy and will not likely be decided by grand
proclamations or multilateral summitry. Rather, progress will be a combination of backroom diplomacy backed by the
occasional show of force by one or more of the claimants. In fact, Beijing's record of conflict resolution over the last
30 years is rather encouraging: China has not resorted to a major use of force since 1979.
1NC Navy
Naval power inevitable and LOST not key
Doug Bandow, senior fellow at the Cato Institute, specializing in foreign policy and civil liberties,
05/11/12, “Law of the Sea Treaty: A Tool to Combat Iran, China, and Russia?,”
http://www.cato.org/blog/law-sea-treaty-tool-combat-iran-china-russia, accessed 5/5/14
On national security, the U.S. Navy does not need such a treaty to operate freely. Its power relative to all other
navies is the ultimate guarantee. Serious maritime challengers do not exist today. Russia’s navy is a
rusted relic; China has yet to develop capabilities that come close to matching ours. Moreover, it is doubtful
that the United States needs to defend countries such as the Philippines when flashpoints over islands in
the region affect no vital American interests. The average American knows very little about this treaty, and rightly so. It is
an unnecessarily complicated and entangling concoction that accomplishes little that the longstanding
body of customary international law on the high-seas or the dynamics of markets do not account for. My
conclusion in testimony before the Senate Committee on Armed Services in 2004 still holds true:
LOST doesn’t affect navigational rights or access

Doug Bandow, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, September 12, 2011, Washington’s Night of the
Living Dead: The Law of the Sea Treaty Stirs,
http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/washingtons-night-living-dead-law-sea-treaty-stirs,
accessed 5/5/14
An additional paper guarantee might be nice to have, but as Steven Groves of the Heritage Foundation noted in a recent study, “The
navigational rights and freedoms enjoyed by the United States and the Navy are guaranteed not by
membership in a treaty, but rather through a combination of long-standing legal principles and
persistent naval operations.” In any case that really affected U.S. security—think naval transit during a
period of crisis or in a war—LOST would not matter. A country contemplating halting U.S. vessels would
weigh its interest and capability, not the treaty’s provisions. Washington responding to foreign
interference with navigation would do the same. Over the last couple centuries powerful naval powers, particularly Great
Britain (Napoleonic Wars, War of 1812, World War I), Germany (World War I), and the U.S. (Civil War), routinely ignored the
protests of neutrals and tramped underfoot customary international law and treaty obligations which
restricted maritime operations during war.
2NC Navy—Naval Power Inevitable

US naval powers ensures access rights
Doug Bandow, senior fellow at the Cato Institute, specializing in foreign policy and civil liberties, April
8, 2004, “The Law of the Sea Treaty: Inconsistent With American Interests”,
http://www.cato.org/publications/congressional-testimony/law-sea-treaty-inconsistent-american-
interests, Accessed 5/5/14
As for military transit, with or without the LOST, America needs to concentrate on maintaining good
relations with the handful of strategically-placed countries. The prowess of the U.S. Navy, not the LOST,
will remain the ultimate guarantor of America’s ability to roam the seas. Of course, even with friendly
states Washington would prefer not “to have to use muscle to exercise our rights,” observed former LOST
negotiator Elliot Richardson. But the treaty is likely to matter only where countries have neither the incentive nor
the ability to interfere with U.S. shipping. Moreover, in a world in which the U.S.S.R. has disappeared,
the Red Navy is rusting in port, China has yet to develop a blue water navy, and Third World conflicts no
longer threaten America through their connection to the Cold War, Washington is rarely going to have
to send its fleet where it is not wanted.
2NC Navy—Navigational Access Inev

American allies will inevitably provide access
Moreover, American friends and allies, both in Asia and Europe, have an incentive to protect American
navigational freedom. So long as the U.S. maintains good relations with them — admittedly a more
difficult undertaking because of strains in the aftermath of the war in Iraq — it should be able to defend
its interests indirectly through surrogates. If the nations which most benefit from American navigational
freedom are unwilling to aid the U.S. while Washington is outside the LOST, they are unlikely to prove
any more steadfast if Washington is inside the LOST.
2NC Navy—AT Damaging Interpretations

Other countries will interpret LOST to minimize naval mobility
Further, treaty advocates contend that whatever the faults of LOST, only participation in the treaty can prevent future damaging
interpretations, amendments, and tribunal decisions. However, there
is no guarantee that interpretations under the LOST
would not impinge upon U.S. military activities. In his Senate testimony last fall, State Department legal adviser William H.
Taft IV noted the importance of conditioning acceptance “upon the understanding that each Party has
the exclusive right to determine which of its activities are ‘military activities’ and that such
determination is not subject to review.” Whether other members will respect that claim is not so certain.
Adm. Michael G. Mullen, the Vice Chief of Naval Operations, acknowledges the possibility that a LOST
tribunal could assert jurisdiction and rule adversely, impacting “operational planning and activities, and
our security.”
CPs
Statutory Enactment Counterplan

Text: The United States congress should enact a statute codifying the navigational
components of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. The United
States federal government should not ratify the United Nations Convention on the
Law of the Sea.
The counterplan solves the aff and avoids the net benefits – ratification is unnecessary
Jon Kyl, United States Senator, June 4, 2012, “The Perils of Global Governance”,
http://thehill.com/images/stories/blogs/globalaffairs/kyl_lost.pdf, accessed 4/12/14
As Jeane Kirkpatrick, former ambassador to the United Nations and a long-time fellow here at AEI, testified before the Senate Armed Service
Committee, “The Law of the Sea Treaty was, and I believe, is disadvantageous to American industry — especially in the participation in seabed
mining — and to American interests generally.” She explained the Reagan administration’s decision: “Viewed from the perspective of U.S.
interests and Reagan administration principles, it was a bad bargain.” I have long agreed with Ambassador Kirkpatrick’s analysis of the Law of
the Sea Treaty, and I
have opposed Senate ratification because it would harm our national security and
economic interests. Nevertheless, we are now told the Treaty (unamendable) could be considered by the Senate this year. A
Madisonian approach might give us a way out of the “bad bargain.” Congress could enact a statute that
makes the navigational parts of the treaty, which codify the historical practice of seafaring nations, the
law of the land. Then the Senate need not ratify the treaty, which still contains unacceptable provisions,
including issues related to the exploitation of the seabed. A statute in effect, can separate the wheat from
the chaff. And the United States will contribute to the clarification of customary international law, by
contributing its practices and legal opinions on the law of the sea.
The CP ensures all the benefits of LOST

Hope Hodge, June 5, 2012, “SEN. KYL: SEPARATE WHEAT FROM CHAFF ON LOST”,
http://www.humanevents.com/2012/06/05/sen-kyl-separate-wheat-from-chaff-on-lost/, accessed
5/5/14
Should the U.S. sign the UN Law of the Sea Treaty or reject it? According to Sen. John Kyl (R-Ariz.), there
could be a third way. Kyl told an audience at the American Enterprise Institute on Monday that he would like to take a
page from founding father James Madison and adopt the treaty with a caveat that allows Congress to
reject problem areas, such as submission to an international bureaucracy that would collect and redistribute royalties from economic
activities taking place on the continental shelf. Choosing a “Madisonian” rather than a “Westphalian” approach to
international law, Kyl argued, would allow the nation to benefit from navigational rights and agreements
outlined in LOST, which would be an operational boon to American businesses and the U.S. Navy. “My
point is if you split the Law of the Sea Treaty into two pieces, one is supported by the Navy,” Kyl said. “That ‘good’ part of the treaty,
about which there is little debate, could be codified by separating the wheat from the chaff.” It’s a
solution that might preserve American sovereignty as paramount while giving the nation the “seat at the
table” that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton advocated for in a hearing last month. “Such regulations (as
outlined in the treaty) should be adopted through democratic processes,” Kyl said. “Respecting constitutional
processes is crucial to protecting the substances of our God-given rights.”
Statutory Enactment Counterplan

The CP still ensures access rights
Jon Kyl, United States Senator, June 4, 2012, “The Perils of Global Governance”,
http://thehill.com/images/stories/blogs/globalaffairs/kyl_lost.pdf, accessed 4/12/14
I want to emphasize that this view does not arise out of any aversion on my part to international law as such. I believe America and the
world benefit from proper international legal order. America has an interest in promoting respect for
international law abroad and at home in a manner that strengthens rather than undermines our
constitutional system. Application of the Madisonian principles I described could help legitimate and
strengthen international law, consistent with our Constitution. Because it focuses on the democratic process, the
Madisonian approach may point the way toward the solution of other difficult foreign relations issues,
such as the Law of the Sea. Although the United States participated in the drafting of the U.N. Law of the Sea Convention, the Reagan
administration wisely declined to seek Senate advice and consent for the agreement. The Convention contains important
provisions that remain within our national interest: it recognizes the right of free passage through
territorial waters, among other navigation rights, which are critical to the operations of the U.S. Navy.
But, despite alterations, UNCLOS also contains provisions that harm our national interest and undermine
American sovereignty: for example, the treaty creates a new multinational bureaucracy — designated an
“Authority” — that claims exclusive authority to govern economic development of the resources of the
deep seabed and would require half of all royalties paid to the federal or state governments to be given
to the U.N. for redistribution to poor countries.
Arctic Submarines Counterplan

Text: The United States federal government should substantially increase funding for
the DARPA Assured Arctic Awareness program including the procurement of mobile
floating ice sensors to be used to supplement US submarines.
The CP ensures arctic stability—prevents accidents and war
Robert Beckhusen, writer at Wired, 09/19/12, “To See in the Arctic, Darpa Might Stick Sensors on
Icebergs”, http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/09/arctic-sensors/, accessed 5/5/14
Hyped-up fears of a coming Arctic war have, appropriately, cooled down recently. But Arctic ice is melting faster than ever,
which could mean more activity — military and commercial — in an environment notoriously unforgiving to sensors and other location tools.
Leave it to the Pentagon’s far-out researchers at Darpa to work on a solution: an all-seeing network of sensors to
track what’s going on in the Arctic all year round — including, it seems, sensors placed on icebergs. According to a Darpa
briefing, the agency wants to leverage “mobile floating-ice” for electromagnetic and acoustic sensors, and
to help track ships and submarines. In the briefing, floating icebergs are illustrated with networked sensors stuck on them (.pdf).
The electromagnetic sensors are seen stuck on top, with acoustic sensors attached to the icebergs’ undersides, which
could help with mapping the Arctic seafloor . The reason why is the icebergs drift up to six kilometers per
day — which has been speeding up with global warming — which can allow the military to “leverage ice movement.”
It’s all part of an umbrella program Darpa calls “Assured Arctic Awareness,” or AAA.
Submarines allow through the arctic

James Kraska is the Howard S. Levie Chair of Operational Law, member of the faculty of the
International Law Department, and Senior Associate in the Center for Irregular Warfare and Armed
Groups at the U.S. Naval War College in Newport, Rhode Island, May/June 2010, “Northern Exposures”,
http://www.the-american-interest.com/article-bd.cfm?piece=810, Accessed 5/5/14
Navigation: The Arctic Ocean is a difficult operating environment . Extreme wind chill, darkness and ice-
covered decks in pitching seas pose serious safety challenges for sailors. Surface warships face damage from
topside icing when operating at high latitudes. Rime ice (freezing fog) on the windward side and ice build-up coating the topside of
warships has to be removed with baseball bats in order to maintain a vessel’s reserve buoyancy . Floating
ice or pack ice endangers bow-mounted sonar domes and interferes with towed arrays. Propellers, rudders, fin
stabilizers and sea chests are all vulnerable in ice-infested waters.9 Extreme conditions affect more mundane systems as well,
weakening steel hulls, exceeding hydraulic temperature tolerances, and cracking or shedding protective coatings and insulators. One way
to escape or mitigate these conditions is to get out of the wind and go under the ice. Submarine
navigation is the safest, fastest and most efficient method of transiting the Arctic Ocean. A warmer climate,
however, will facilitate surface transit, increasing naval and shipping traffic. Strategic mobility throughout the Arctic Ocean has global
implications for the military, since the seas are interconnected and form a single world ocean. Surface transit through the Arctic promises to cut
days or weeks off heavy sealift logistics transit times, thereby facilitating force surge and sustainment to virtually any other corner of the globe.
Since the United States has the best logistics capabilities in the world, an ice-free Arctic works to relative U.S. advantage. Utilizing the Arctic
route could facilitate improved crisis response and accelerate time-phased force deployment schedules to move forces from one theater to
another.
2NC Arctic Submarines CP—Solves Arctic Drilling

CP allows us to monitor drilling safely
Steve Hargreaves is a staff writer for CNNMoney.com, where he focuses on the energy industry
06/08/12, “Greenpeace to monitor Shell Arctic drilling with submarines”,
http://money.cnn.com/2012/06/08/news/economy/greenpeace-subs/index.htm, accessed 5/5/14
NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Greenpeace plans on deploying two submarines to keep tabs on Royal Dutch Shell
when the oil company starts drilling in the Arctic, which could begin as soon as next month. The subs, a two-person and a
one-person craft, are currently on board the Greenpeace ship Esperanza, docked in Seattle. The Esperanza plans on tailing Shell's
drilling fleet, also docked in Seattle, when the fleet leaves for Arctic waters. Shell is waiting for the last batch of federal permits, expected
any day, before deploying its ships. Once the operation begins, Shell plans on drilling up to five exploratory wells
in Arctic waters -- three about 70 miles off the Alaskan coast in the Chukchi Sea, and two about 17 miles off Alaska's North Slope in the
Beaufort Sea. They will be some of the first wells drilled in U.S. Arctic waters, and have touched off a debate about whether the country should
be exploring for oil in the sensitive Arctic environment. Greenpeace plans on deploying the subs at the Chukchi site
and will monitor the Beaufort site by ship . "We want to be there so we can see if anything goes
wrong," said John Hocevar, oceans campaign director for Greenpeace, who will pilot one of the subs. Due to its penchant for disrupting
certain industrial operations, a federal judge has barred Greenpeace from getting within one mile of Shell's drill ships. But Hocevar said that
shouldn't be a problem -- any
oil leaks or other trouble should be able to be well documented from even a
mile away. He said the submarines will also take a look at the sea floor, taking inventory of the abundant
starfish, mollusks, and sponges that are thought to live in the region. It will be the first time this part of the ocean has
been explored by manned submersibles. On board the Esperanza, Greenpeace will monitor the impact the drilling is
having on the larger wildlife in the region, which include whales, polar bears and walruses.
The sonar capabilities allow us to do more targeted oil searches which prevents spills
The Economist, 12/01/12, , “Trouble beneath the ice”,
http://www.economist.com/news/technology-quarterly/21567196-energy-technology-oil-exploration-
moves-arctic-new-methods-are-being, accessed 5/5/14
The newest approach to detecting oil under ice approaches the problem from another angle:
underwater. It relies on a combination of two existing oceanographic technologies: robot submarines, known as autonomous
underwater vehicles (AUVs), and sonar. Unlike remotely operated underwater vehicles, which must be tethered to a control system on a
boat and are therefore limited to a range of several hundred metres, AUVs can be programmed to rove beneath the ice
over distances of several kilometres. Submarine dream In tests carried out earlier this year at the Cold Regions Research
Engineering Laboratory in New Hampshire, researchers from the Scottish Association for Marine Science equipped
AUVs with a suite of sensors, including multi-beam sonar. Once under the ice, the AUV fired pulses of sound
upwards. Ice and oil reflect the sound waves back again in different ways, allowing the presence of oil to
be mapped. The thickness of the oil layer could be measured to within millimetres , says Jeremy Wilkinson, who
led the project. Combining multiple detection systems, including cameras, sonar and lasers, could improve
accuracy and reliability. “It may not be the silver bullet, but at least we have a package that can work
in conditions where other technologies struggle,” he says.
Disadvantages
Politics DA
Strong opposition to LOST passing
Sean Lengell, Writer at the Washington Times, 07/16/12, “DeMint: Law of the Sea Treaty now dead”,
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jul/16/demint-says-law-sea-treaty-now-dead/?page=all,
accessed 5/5/14
The United Nations Law of the Sea Treaty now has 34 senators opposed to it and thus lacks the Senate votes needed
for U.S. ratification, a key opponent of the treaty announced Monday. But the treaty’s main Senate proponent denies the treaty is
sunk, saying plenty of time still exists to win support before a planned late-year vote. The Law of the Sea Treaty, which entered into force in
1994 and has been signed and ratified by 162 countries, establishes international laws governing the maritime rights of countries. The treaty
has been signed but not ratified by the U.S., which would require two-thirds approval of the Senate. Critics
of the treaty argue that
it would subject U.S. sovereignty to an international body, require American businesses to pay royalties
for resource exploitation and subject the U.S. to unwieldy environmental regulations as defined. The list
of treaty opponents has been growing, and on Monday, Sen. Jim DeMint, South Carolina Republican and a
leader of efforts to block it, announced that four more Republicans have said that they would vote
against ratification: Sens. Mike Johanns of Nebraka, Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire, Rob Portman of Ohio and Johnny Isakson of
Georgia. “With 34 senators against the misguided treaty, LOST will not be ratified by the Senate this year,” Mr. DeMint said in a
statement on his website. This head count of treaty opponents — if the number stands — would make it
impossible to reach the 67 votes needed to ratify the pact, which Sen. John F. Kerry, Massachusetts Democrat and Senate
Foreign Relations Committee chairman, plans to bring to a vote.
Republican senators continue to block

John Bellinger, Senior Fellow for International and National Security Law at Council on Foreign
Relations, Nov. 11, 2014, "Should the United States ratify the UN Law of the Sea?," Ask CFR Experts,
www.cfr.org/treaties-and-agreements/should-united-states-ratify-un-law-sea/p31828, accessed
4/15/2014
Unfortunately, some Republican Senators have blocked Senate approval of the Law of the Sea Convention
based on myths and misperceptions about the treaty, including concerns that president Reagan opposed
the treaty when it was originally drafted in 1982, and that it might now infringe on U.S. sovereignty. But
the flaws identified by president Reagan were fixed by amendments to the treaty in 1994 (which led all other major industrial countries to join
the treaty). And far from infringing on U.S. sovereignty, joining the Law of the Sea Convention would codify U.S. sovereignty over vast new oil
and gas resources in the Arctic. Other countries have benefited greatly by joining the Convention, and the United States is losing out by
remaining on the sidelines.
Sovereignty concerns overwhelm support

Michael J. Kelly, Professor of Law at Creighton, Fall 2012, “United States Ratification of the Law of the
Sea Convention: Securing Our Navigational Future While Managing China’s Blue Water Ambitions,” CASE
WESTERN RESERVE JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW, VOL. 45, Lexis-Nexis, accessed 5/5/14
For the past two decades, both Democratic and Republican presidents have urged the US Senate to
approve the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) without success. Despite near universal agreement that the benefits of
joining this multilateral treaty far exceed any drawbacks, US ratification has not been forthcoming. Latent, largely unfounded
sovereignty concerns appear to be holding back a sufficient minority of Senators from consenting. However,
China’s recently assertive moves in oceanic affairs, coupled with its new and quickly developing naval capability, make US ratification all the more urgent.
Economy DA
LOST causes economic collapse
Julie Borowski, Policy Analyst at FreedomWorks, May 31, 2012, “The U.N.’s Law of the Sea Treaty
Threatens Our National Sovereignty,”
http://townhall.com/columnists/julieborowski/2012/05/31/the_uns_law_of_the_sea_treaty_threatens
_our_national_sovereignty/page/full, accessed 4/28/14
The U.N. is openly hostile to our national sovereignty and republican form of government. The
ratification of LOST would open up a Pandora’s Box of problems. It would impose global taxes and
regulations that cripple collapse economic growth while exposing ourselves to high-stakes
environmental lawsuits. We need to sink LOST once and for all.
LOST ratification causes massive lawsuits that will severely damage the economy
Doug Bandow, Senior Fellow at CATO, March 19, 2012, “Dragging America into court Law of the Sea
and Global Litigation” http://www.forbes.com/sites/dougbandow/2012/03/19/dragging-america-into-
court-law-of-the-sea-and-global-litigation/, Accessed 4/21/14
Many environmentalists believe that LOST could be used against the U.S. in the same way. A few years ago an
environmental activist mistakenly sent me an email after our debate on the treaty. He acknowledged that it might be difficult to convince
Americans that the treaty would not similarly bind America when the World Wildlife Federation and Citizens for Global Solutions were
promoting LOST by claiming that the convention would stop Russia from polluting the Arctic. He worried that this inconsistency suggested that
the treaty was in fact “some kind of green Trojan Horse.” It is. Groves noted that “Some environmental activist
groups have already demonstrated a propensity for supporting, participating in, and in some cases
actually filing climate change lawsuits against U.S. targets, as well as taking other legal actions relating to
the marine environment in U.S. courts and international forums.” LOST also incorporates the so-called “no harm” rule,
which obligates countries to regulate activities in order to avoid negatively impacting neighboring states. The duty makes sense as a guiding
principle in designing domestic regulations and undertaking specific international obligations. But, warned Groves, approving LOST
would transform “a sensible principle to regulate conduct between two neighboring countries into a
seemingly unconstrained doctrine to impute global liability for alleged acts of atmospheric pollution.”
Unaccountable international legal forums then would enforce the rule. Worse, the debate over climate
change has opened up grand new litigation vistas. And treaty enthusiasts are anxious to take advantage.
William C.G. Burns of the Monterey Institute of International Studies exulted that LOST “may prove to be one of the primary
battlegrounds for climate change issues in the future.”He pointed to the Treaty’s expansive definition of marine pollution:
“the potential impacts of rising sea surface temperatures, rising sea levels, and changes in ocean pH as a consequence of rising levels of carbon
dioxide in sea water” all could “give rise to actions under the Convention’s marine pollution provisions.” Even
if the litigation did not
succeed, he suggested that “the specter of litigation may help to deepen the commitment of States” to
legislate on the issue.
Lawsuits are inevitable after UNCLOS ratification

EPA Abuse, Advocacy group, 2012, “Climate Change Lawsuits in America’s Future,”
http://epaabuse.com/5804/news/climate-change-lawsuits-in-americas-future/, Accessed 5/1/14
If the United States joins the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), it will likely end up
involved in numerous and costly lawsuits over climate change. That’s the theme of a recently posted Heritage
Foundation backgrounder, “Accession To U.N. Convention On The Law Of The Sea Would Expose The U.S. To Baseless Climate Change
Lawsuits.” America
is at the top of the list of targets from environmental lawyers, academics and activists
who hope to bring down our country.
Economy DA – Litigation Link

Ratification of UNCLOS exposes the US to costly lawsuits
Doug Bandow, Senior Fellow at CATO, March 19, 2012, “Dragging America into court Law of the Sea
and Global Litigation” http://www.forbes.com/sites/dougbandow/2012/03/19/dragging-america-into-
court-law-of-the-sea-and-global-litigation/, Accessed 4/21/14
However, as Groves warned, acceding to the treaty “would expose the U.S. to lawsuits on virtually any maritime
activity, such as alleged pollution of the marine environment from a land-based source or even through
the atmosphere. Regardless of the case’s merits, the U.S. would be forced to defend itself against every such
lawsuit at great expense.” Litigation could occur in several venues: the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, the International
Court of Justice, an arbitral tribunal, and a “special” arbitral tribunal. There would be no appeals and all suffer from political elements which
would interfere with the delivery of genuine “justice.” Indeed, noted Groves, the U.S. “has suffered adverse judgments in high-profile
international lawsuits in the past.” LOST
would reinforce the litigation danger by creating obligations directly
enforceable by U.S. courts. Annex III, Article 21(2) of the treaty states that tribunal decisions “shall be enforceable in the territory of
each State Party.” In a 2008 case Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens contrasted another treaty with LOST, which, he wrote, did
“incorporate international judgments into international law.” As a result, U.S. judges would become international enforcers.
The U.S. is avoiding a tidal wave of litigation now - LOST opens the floodgates
Stephen Groves, Fellow at the Heritage Foundation, January 10, 2013, “Don’t Open the Door to Law of
the Sea Litigation,” http://blog.heritage.org/2013/01/10/dont-open-the-door-to-law-of-the-sea-
litigation/, accessed 5/2/14
Doug Bandow of the Cato Institute warns of the dangers of litigation if the United States joins the U.N. Convention
on the Law of the Sea, more commonly known as the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST). Some of the litigation
“greatest hits” highlighted by Bandow include: The recent intrusion of the International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea—an international court
established by LOST—into a commercial dispute being litigated in Ghana. In that case, the tribunal disregarded the well-reasoned opinion of a
Ghanaian judge and ordered Ghana to release an Argentine naval vessel that was being held to satisfy a debt caused by Argentina’s massive
$80 billion bond default. The “MOX Plant” case, where Ireland sued the United Kingdom under LOST for having the temerity to build a nuclear
fuel reprocessing plant on its own territory. Threats made
by international environmental activists and lawyers to
use LOST as a vehicle to sue the United States for alleged climate change damages. Naturally, the proponents
of U.S. accession to LOST don’t include these nasty lawsuits in their talking points or Senate testimonies. That is by design. Major advocates of
LOST such as the University of Miami’s Bernard Oxman have warned their allies to stay away from such matters—at least until the U.S. has
joined the convention. As Bandow points out: Years ago, Bernard Oxman wrote in the European Journal of International Law urging treaty
proponents to keep quiet about issues which might concern ratifying governments, calling for “restraint in speculating on the meaning of the
convention or on possible differences between the Convention and customary law.” After all, he explained, “The Convention is an easy target.”
Thus, advocates should shut up: “it is essential to measure what we say in terms of its effect on the goal [i.e. universal ratification]. Experienced
international lawyers know where many of the sensitive nerve endings of governments are. Where possible, they should try to avoid irritating
them.” So, “mum’s the word” on international lawsuits until the U.S. is foolish enough to ratify. But exposure to
litigation is not the only serious flaw in the convention. If the U.S. joins LOST, it will be required to siphon off billions of dollars in hydrocarbon
royalties to the International Seabed Authority in Kingston, Jamaica, for redistribution to the “developing world.” Membership would also
require the U.S. and its mining companies to submit themselves to the complete regulation and control of the Authority in regard to deep
seabed mining. In private practice, attorneys regularly advise their clients on ways to avoid exposure to baseless and expensive litigation. The
U.S. can avoid costly and embarrassing international lawsuits by remaining a non-party to LOST, as it has
done for the past 30 years.
Economy DA – Sovereignty Link

Lost sovereignty over offshore areas would cost the economy trillions
Orrin Hatch, Utah Republican Senator, 5/23, 2012, “Law of the Sea Treaty will sink America’s
Economy,” http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/05/23/law-sea-treaty-will-sink-america-economy/
Accessed 4/24/14
The treaty that Reagan refused to sign in 1982 is reappearing once again in the Senate. The truth is, LOST contains numerous
provisions that hurt the U.S. economy at a time when we need more jobs – not fewer. Under the guise of
being for “the good of mankind, ” LOST would obligate the United States to share information and technology in
what amounts to global taxes and technology transfer requirements that are really nothing more than
an attempt to redistribute U.S. wealth to the Third World. At the center of these taxes and transfers is the International Seabed
Authority (ISA), a Kingston, Jamaica based supra-national governing body established by the treaty for the purpose of redistributing cash and
technology from the “developed world” to the “developing world.” Ceding authority to the ISA would mean that the
sovereignty currently held by the U.S. over the natural resources located on large parts of the
continental shelf would be lost. That loss would mean lost revenue for the US government in the form of
lost royalties that the U.S. government collects from the production of those resources. According to the U.S.
Extended Continental Shelf Task Force, which is currently mapping the continental shelf, the resources there “may be worth billions if
not trillions ” of dollars. In case proponents of LOST have not noticed, the US is over $15 trillion in debt, and we still have more than 20
million Americans who can’t find a job. The last thing we need to do redistribute funds from our country to our
economic and strategic competitors.
Causes a massive tax hike

Accessed 4/24/14
Americans despise taxes. After all, one of the key issues that paved the way for the American Revolution was the unfair taxation that
King George III levied against the Colonies. Now some in the US Senate want to say yes to an international tax. It would
be the first time in history that an international organization would possess taxing authority, and it would
amount to billions of American dollars being transferred out of the US Treasury. The U.N. Convention on the Law
of the Sea, or the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) is the vehicle through which such taxes would be imposed on U.S.-
based commercial enterprises.
Tech transfers stunt innovation and competitiveness

Accessed 4/24/14
In other words, US companies would be forced to give away the very types of innovation that historically
have made our nation a world leader while fueling our economic engine.
Under the best of US economic circumstances, the Senate should say no to such an egregious breach of
the trust Americans have placed in us. Our current economic struggles are all the more reason to say no
to a treaty that is all cost and no benefit.
Economy DA – Sovereignty Link

LOST undermines the US economy by forcing compliance with stringent rules
If the U.S. ratifies LOST, U.S. energy companies would be forced to pay a part of their royalties to the International Seabed Authority in
Kingston, Jamaica. This supra-national governing body would be tasked with the mission of distributing revenue to “developing states” such as
Somalia, Zimbabwe, and Burma. Like all forms of foreign “aid”, it’s likely that a big chunk of this money will end up
in the hands of corrupt dictators thus propping up authoritarian regimes. The U.N. would be granted the power to
regulate deep-sea exploration in U.S. waters. LOST would do irreparable harm to U.S. companies by forcing them to
comply with global environmental rules. The treaty would create a new international tribunal known as the International
Tribunal of LOST (ITLOS) to adjudicate a number of different issues. It wouldn’t just be used to resolve maritime issues like boats accidently
wrecking into each other. Radical environmentalists would likely use the ITLOS to file costly international climate change lawsuits against the
United States. Signing LOST is certainly not in the best economic interest of the United States. The text of the U.N.
treaty states that, “states shall adopt laws and regulations to prevent, reduce and control pollution of the marine environment from or through
the atmosphere.” The autonomy of the United States is threatened if we allow our domestic laws to be crafted by an international body that is
not accountable to the American people. LOST could even lead to a back door implementation of another U.N. treaty that the United States has
never ratified: the Kyoto Protocol on global warming. This U.N. treaty would require the United States to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 7
percent below 1990 levels. Patrick J. Michael of the Cato Institute finds that it would likely reduce the gross domestic product of the United
States by 2.3 percent per year while not having a noticeable effect on the global climate. According to the U.S. Department of Energy's Energy
Information Administration, the Kyoto Protocol would
increase the price of electricity by 86 percent, add $1,740 to
the average household’s energy bill, and permanently raise the price of gasoline by 66 cents per gallon.
It would inevitably raise the price for basic goods and cause millions of Americans to lose their jobs. The
scientific debate on anthroprogenic global warming continues to rage. We shouldn’t sacrifice our standard of living based on this unsettled
issue. Remember that some scientists were warning us about man-made global cooling in the 1970’s. TIME Magazine even ran a cover story on
“How to Survive the Coming Ice Age” in April 1977. Climate change fear-mongering has been going on for decades—let’s not fall for the
propaganda so easily
Constitution Disadvantage
Ratifying LOST violates the constitution
The latest threat to U.S. sovereignty is the United Nations’ Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) that is being pushed by the Obama administration.
LOST rises from the dead every few years. For more than thirty years, the United States has refused to become a party to LOST
for good reasons. But this could be the year that the United States surrenders its sovereignty over the seas to an international body if Obama
gets his way. Under this treaty, the U.N. would have control over 71 percent of the Earth’s surface. This would be
a huge step towards global governance. The Senate may vote to ratify the sea treaty as early as next week. President Ronald
Reagan rejected LOST back in 1982, stating it would grant the U.N. the power to tax U.S. companies and redistribute
wealth from developed to undeveloped nations. For the first time in history, the U.N. would have the authority
to collect taxes from U.S. citizens. The thought of global taxation should send goose bumps down the
spine of every American. Any form of global taxation would be a direct violation of the U.S. Constitution.
American citizens are already overtaxed and overregulated. The last thing we need is an unelected, unconstitutional
international body imposing even more harmful taxes and regulations on us. LOST could end up costing
trillions of dollars and the American people would have no say on how the money is spent.
Constitutional violation is a decision rule

Daryl Levinson, Professor of Law at Virginia, May 4, 2000, “Making Government Pay: Markets, Politics,
and the Allocation of Constitutional Costs,”
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=224708, accessed 5/1/14
Extending a majority rule analysis of optimal deterrence to constitutional torts requires some explanation, for we do not usually think of
violations of constitutional rights in terms of cost-benefit analysis and efficiency. Quite the opposite, constitutional
rights are most
commonly conceived as deontological side-constraints that trump even utility-maximizing government action.
Alternatively, constitutional rights might be understood as serving rule-utilitarian purposes. If the disutility to
victims of constitutional violations often exceeds the social benefits derived from the rights-violating activity, or if rights violations create long-
term costs that outweigh short-term social benefits, then constitutional rights can be justified as tending to maximize global
utility, even though this requires local utility-decreasing steps. Both the deontological and rule-utilitarian descriptions
imply that the optimal level of constitutional violations is zero; that is, society would be better off, by whatever
measure, if constitutional rights were never violated.
Topicality
Topicality - 1NC Exploration/Development

The US has all authority LOST could grant—it only decreases exploration
Steven Groves, Bernard and Barbara Lomas Senior Research Fellow, 8/24/11, “Accession to the U.N.
Convention on the Law of the Sea Is Unnecessary to Secure U.S. Navigational Rights and Freedoms”,
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2011/08/accession-to-un-convention-law-of-the-sea-is-
unnecessary-to-secure-us-navigational-rights-freedoms, accessed 5/5/14,
No legal barriers prohibit U.S. access, exploration, or exploitation of the resources of the deep seabed.
Deep seabed mining is a “high seas freedom” that all nations may engage in regardless of their
membership or non-membership in UNCLOS or any other treaty. Like other high seas freedoms, the right to engage in
deep seabed mining is inherent to all sovereign nations under customary international law. Rather, it is the convention that
attempts to restrict access to the deep seabed and infringe on the intrinsic rights of the United States
and other nations that have chosen to remain non-parties.
And, it decreases development

The LOST’s fundamental premise is that all unowned resources on the ocean’s floor belong to the
people of the world, meaning the United Nations. The U.N. would assert its control through an International
Seabed Authority, ruled by an Assembly, dominated by poorer nations, and a Council (originally on which the then-U.S.S.R. was granted
three seats), which would regulate deep seabed mining and redistribute income from the industrialized
West to developing countries. The Authority’s chief subsidiary would be the Enterprise, to mine the seabed, with the coerced
assistance of Western mining concerns, on behalf of the Authority. Any extensive international regulatory system would
likely inhibit development, depress productivity, increase costs, and discourage innovation, thereby wasting much of the benefit to be
gained from mining the oceans. But the byzantine regime created by the LOST is almost unique in its perversity. Unfortunately, the
amendments made in 1994, which I discuss below, do not change the essential character of the treaty
It creates barriers to exploration and development

Michaela Dodge, Fellow at the Heritage Foundation, July 12, 2011, “The Many Problems of Getting
LOST,” http://blog.heritage.org/2011/07/12/the-many-problems-of-getting-lost/, Accessed 4/20/14
Creates barriers to exploration . Third, LOST claims the deep seabed resources of the oceans as “the common
heritage of mankind” and forbids mining unless permission is first received by the ISA. This might
create an international obstacle for U.S. companies willing to invest their time and money in exploring and
developing vast deep seabed resources. It might take months to secure the ISA’s permission, which would likely discourage U.S.
companies from participating in such activities. Meanwhile, the magnitude of the mineral wealth on and beneath the U.S. extended continental
shelf remains to be determined.
.
China DA
The plan, through US action, serves as a provocative action towards China because
China views competition over ocean development with the United States as zero sum.
However, the Chinese don’t have that same framework of competition to interpret EU
action through, and thus the counterplan does not increase Chinese strategic threat
perceptions.
1NC – China Disad

A. The risk of maritime conflict is low now because the US isn’t challenging China’s rise
Brahma Chellaney, Professor of Strategic Studies at the New Delhi-based Centre for Policy Research
and former Fellow at the Norwegian Nobel Institute, which wards the Nobel Peace Prize, November 5,
2013, “Tackling new maritime challenges”, The Hindu, http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-
opinion/tackling-new-maritime-challenges/article5315556.ece, accessed 5/19/14
President Xi Jinping has championed efforts to build China into a global maritime power, saying his
government will do everything possible to safeguard China’s “maritime rights and interests” and
warning that “in no way will the country abandon its legitimate rights and interests.” China’s increasing
emphasis on the oceans was also evident from the November 2012 report to the 18th national congress of the
Chinese Communist Party that outlined the country’s maritime power strategy. It called for safeguarding China’s maritime rights and
interests, including building improved capacity for exploiting marine resources, and for asserting the country’s larger
rights. The risks of maritime conflict arising from mistake or miscalculation are higher between China and
its neighbours than between China and the U.S. There has been a course correction in the Obama
administration’s “pivot” toward Asia, lest it puts it on the path of taking on Beijing. Washington has bent
over backward to tamp down the military aspects of that policy. Even the term “pivot” has been abandoned in
favour of the softer new phrase of “rebalancing.” The U.S., moreover, has pointedly refused to take sides in sovereignty
disputes between China and its neighbours. It has sought the middle ground between seeking to restrain China and reassure allies
but, as former U.S. Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg has put it, “without getting ourselves into a shooting war.” China has also shied
away from directly challenging U.S. interests. It has been careful not to step on America’s toes. Its assertiveness has been largely directed at its
neighbours. After all, China is seeking to alter the territorial and maritime status quo in Asia little by little. This can be described as a “salami-
slice” strategy or, what a Chinese general, Zhang Zhaozhong, this year called, a “cabbage” strategy — surrounding a contested area with
multiple security layers to deny access to the rival nation.
B. China is pursing ocean development comparable to the aff- it’s competitive and
aims at maritime dominance
Takeda Jun’ichi, Visiting Research Fellow at the Ocean Policy Research Foundation, Apr 23, 2014,
“China’s Rise as a Maritime Power: Ocean Policy from Mao Zedong to Xi Jinping”,
http://islandstudies.oprf-info.org/research/a00011/, accessed 5/12/14
The first time the importance of the seas was officially raised at the National Congress of the CPC, which stands at the summit of China’s
political leadership, was at the fifteenth Congress, held in 1997, during the rule of Jiang Zemin. The general
secretary’s report to the
congress noted, “The seas are an important element of the national territory and resources that can be
developed on an ongoing basis.” The 16th Congress, held in 2002, after Hu Jintao took the helm, acknowledged “the need for a
strategic organ to implement maritime development.” In an extension of this recognition, the State Council, in the “Outline of the Plan
for National Marine Economic Development” it adopted the following year, declared that China would build itself into a maritime power in
stages. This was the first time that the Chinese government set forth the term “maritime power” in an official document. And it was noted at
the opening of the eighteenth Congress of the CPC in 2012 that building
China into a maritime power had become
established as a strategic objective. Facing increasingly serious shortages of food, energy, and water
resources, China is leaning more and more to the seas. The new trend is an omnidirectional maritime
strategy, including the development of new fields like renewable maritime energy sources and deep-
seabed mineral resources, prevention and mitigation of marine disasters, and expansion of Arctic and
Antarctic observation activities.
1NC – China Disad

C. US challenges to Chinese maritime power risks miscalculated conflict at sea
Dean Cheng, Senior Research Fellow, Asian Studies Center Heritage Foundation, July 11, 2011, “Sea
Power and the Chinese State: China’s Maritime Ambitions”, The Heritage Foundation Backgrounder
#2576, http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2011/07/sea-power-and-the-chinese-state-chinas-
maritime-ambitions, accessed 5/12/14
Although China’s maritime ambitions do not yet pose a dire threat to the United States, the situation does
demand a very specific response: careful, sober policymaking. Sino–American conflict at sea is not a
foregone conclusion, but conflicting claims and legal interpretations, lack of agreed terms of engagement, aggressive
behavior by China on behalf of its claims, and lack of official transparency regarding Chinese capabilities and aims all increase the
potential for miscalculation. It is essential to recognize that China will be a maritime power. Given the
importance of the world’s oceans to sustaining China’s economic development and its position as the
world’s second-largest economy, the Chinese leadership undoubtedly views the seas as essential both to
national survival and to their own hold on power. Opposing Chinese development in this regard would
be futile and antagonistic. Therefore, the United States should accept China as a major sea power with significant maritime interests. In
some cases, such as the anti-piracy efforts off Somalia or enforcement of fishing limits, those interests may even converge and offer
opportunities for Sino–American cooperation.
D. Those miscalculations escalate

Avery Goldstein, Professor of Global Politics and International Relations, Director of the Center for the
Study of Contemporary China, University of Pennsylvania, “China’s Real and Present Danger”, Foreign
Affairs, Sep/Oct 2013, http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/139651/avery-goldstein/chinas-real-and-
present-danger, accessed 5/12/14
Communicating through actions is also problematic, with many possibilities for distortion in sending
messages and for misinterpretation in receiving them. Chinese analysts seem to overestimate how easy
it is to send signals through military actions and underestimate the risks of escalation resulting from
miscommunication. For example, the analysts Andrew Erickson and David Yang have drawn attention to Chinese military writings that
propose using China’s antiship ballistic missile system, designed for targeting U.S. aircraft carriers, to convey Beijing’s resolve during a crisis.
Some Chinese military thinkers have suggested that China could send a signal by firing warning shots intended to land near a moving U.S.
aircraft carrier or even by carefully aiming strikes at the command tower of the U.S. carrier while sparing the rest of the vessel. But as the
political scientist Owen Coté has noted, even
a very accurate antiship ballistic missile system will inevitably have
some margin of error. Consequently, even the smallest salvo of this kind would entail a risk of inadvertent
serious damage and thus unintended escalation.
1NC – China Disad

E. Risks nuclear war and extinction
Lawrence S. Wittner, Emeritus Professor of History – State University of New York Albany and Former
Editor – Peace and Change Journal, November 28, 2011 “Is a Nuclear War With China Possible?”,
www.huntingtonnews.net/14446, accessed 5/12/14
While nuclear weapons exist, there remains a danger that they will be used. After all, for centuries national conflicts have
led to wars, with nations employing their deadliest weapons. The current deterioration of U.S. relations
with China might end up providing us with yet another example of this phenomenon. The gathering
tension between the United States and China is clear enough. Disturbed by China’s growing economic and military
strength, the U.S. government recently challenged China’s claims in the South China Sea, increased the U.S.
military presence in Australia, and deepened U.S. military ties with other nations in the Pacific region.
According to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the United States was “asserting our own position as a Pacific power.” But need this lead
to nuclear war? Not necessarily. And yet, there are signs that it could. After all, both the United States
and China possess large numbers of nuclear weapons. The U.S. government threatened to attack China with nuclear
weapons during the Korean War and, later, during the conflict over the future of China’s offshore islands, Quemoy and Matsu. In the midst of
the latter confrontation, President Dwight Eisenhower declared publicly, and chillingly, that U.S. nuclear weapons would “be used just exactly
as you would use a bullet or anything else.” Of course, China didn’t have nuclear weapons then. Now that it does, perhaps the behavior of
national leaders will be more temperate. But the loose nuclear threats of U.S. and Soviet government officials during the Cold War, when both
nations had vast nuclear arsenals, should convince us that, even as the military ante is raised, nuclear saber-rattling persists. Some
pundits
argue that nuclear weapons prevent wars between nuclear-armed nations; and, admittedly, there
haven’t been very many—at least not yet. But the Kargil War of 1999, between nuclear-armed India and
nuclear-armed Pakistan, should convince us that such wars can occur. Indeed, in that case, the conflict
almost slipped into a nuclear war. Pakistan’s foreign secretary threatened that, if the war escalated, his country felt free to use
“any weapon” in its arsenal. During the conflict, Pakistan did move nuclear weapons toward its border, while India, it is claimed, readied its own
nuclear missiles for an attack on Pakistan. At the least, though, don’t nuclear weapons deter a nuclear attack? Do they? Obviously, NATO
leaders didn’t feel deterred, for, throughout the Cold War, NATO’s strategy was to respond to a Soviet conventional military attack on Western
Europe by launching a Western nuclear attack on the nuclear-armed Soviet Union. Furthermore, if U.S. government officials really believed that
nuclear deterrence worked, they would not have resorted to championing “Star Wars” and its modern variant, national missile defense. Why
are these vastly expensive—and probably unworkable—military defense systems needed if other nuclear powers are deterred from attacking
by U.S. nuclear might? Of course, the bottom line for those Americans convinced that nuclear weapons safeguard them from a Chinese nuclear
attack might be that the U.S. nuclear arsenal is far greater than its Chinese counterpart. Today, it is estimated that the U.S. government
possesses over five thousand nuclear warheads, while the Chinese government has a total inventory of roughly three hundred. Moreover, only
about forty of these Chinese nuclear weapons can reach the United States. Surely the United States would “win” any nuclear war with China.
But what would that “victory” entail? A
nuclear attack by China would immediately slaughter at least 10 million
Americans in a great storm of blast and fire, while leaving many more dying horribly of sickness and
radiation poisoning. The Chinese death toll in a nuclear war would be far higher. Both nations would be
reduced to smoldering, radioactive wastelands. Also, radioactive debris sent aloft by the nuclear
explosions would blot out the sun and bring on a “nuclear winter” around the globe—destroying
agriculture, creating worldwide famine, and generating chaos and destruction.
Uniqueness/Brink
The risk of naval conflict is high but the US isn’t being provocative now
Benjamin Carlson, senior China correspondent, The Global Post, “China is playing chicken with the US
military in the South China Sea”, 1/30/14, http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/asia-
pacific/china/140127/china-US-military-confrontation-south-china-sea-chicken, accessed 5/11/14
Unfortunately, vessels from the US military and from other countries increasingly find themselves in such high-
stakes confrontations on the East Asian seas, where China has adopted a strategy of making rivals flinch
or risk collision. Just this week, Chinese sailors parked three ships on a disputed reef 50 miles from the Malaysian coast and performed a
ceremony in which they swore an oath “to safeguard [China’s] sovereignty and territorial interests.” Malaysia also claims the reef, and is
building a naval base nearby to protect it against China’s claim. That’s just the latest in an escalating series of incidents. In
November, China declared its right to patrol and regulate a large swath of airspace, including a zone controlled by Japan and areas regularly
used by the US military. Since then, China
says it has repeatedly dispatched surveillance planes to tail, monitor,
and identify foreign fighters. In December, a Chinese ship halted in the path of the USS Cowpens, in
international waters, forcing it to change course or risk a crash. The American cruiser complied.
Communication solving status quo conflict

As the largest developing nation and the largest developed nation with different histories, cultures, traditions and social systems, it
is
inevitable that China and the US have differences and even frictions, according to Cui."But both sides have
been working hard to find convergence of shared interest and effective ways to manage the
differences," he said. "Various mechanisms to facilitate communications and dialogue have been set up."
Cui dismissed the hype over China's announcement in November of the East China Sea Air Defense
Identification Zone as being an issue of major difference between the two nations. China only added itself to a
long list of ADIZs announced a long time ago by countries including the US. "The two sides have open lines of
communication," he said.¶ For Cui, reviewing the past 35 years of China-US relations provides very beneficial lessons on how to push the
relationship forward in the future.
Maritime tensions are high but controlled now

Bill Gertz, National Security Studies Program at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced
International Studies and Syracuse University Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs, February
12, 2014, “Inside the Ring: U.S., China in war of words over South China Sea air zone,” Washington
Times, http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/feb/12/inside-the-ring-obama-pushback-against-
china-is-pr/, accessed 4/15/14
In an apparent attempt to remedy the problem, senior military leaders and White House and State Department
officials in recent days issued relatively tough warnings to Beijing not to impose an air defense
identification zone (ADIZ) over the contested South China Sea. China heightened tensions in the region late last
year by imposing an ADIZ over the East China Sea, including waters off Japan’s Senkaku islands that China claims as its
territory. Japan, South Korea and the United States said they will ignore China’s claims over the sea.
Links- Generic
China perceives oceanic control as competitive with the west and crucial to its
national power
Geoff Dyer, covers US foreign policy and is a former Beijing bureau chief for the FT, February 20, 2014,
“US v China: is this the new cold war?”, Financial Times, http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/78920b2e-99ba-
11e3-91cd-00144feab7de.html#axzz32mK6gWdR, accessed 5/13/14
China’s turn to the seas is rooted in history and geography in a manner that transcends its current
political system. It was from the sea that China was harassed during its “century of ‐humiliation” at the
hands of the west. China was one of the most prominent victims of 19th-century gunboat diplomacy, when Britain, France and
other colonial powers used their naval supremacy to exercise control over Shanghai and a dozen other ports
around the country. The instinct to control the surrounding seas is partly rooted in the widespread desire
never to leave China so vulnerable again. “Ignoring the oceans is a historical error we committed,” says
Yang Yong, a Chinese historian. “And now even in the future we will pay a price for this error.”
Access to ocean resources is inherently competitive

Henry E. Eccles, Rear Admiral U.S. Navy, “This work is the culmination of 29 years' experience at the
Naval War College”, 1979, Military Power in a Free Society, http://archive.org/stream/military
powerinf00eccl/militarypowerinf00eccl_djvu.txt, accessed 5/13/14
On the one hand, as the competition for scarce resources grows, it becomes clear that this world includes
most of the areas and many of the important causes of human conflict. There is economic competition
for oceanic trade, transportation, and for minerals on the ocean bed. There is the question of fishing
rights as they are related to national sovereignty, the area and zonal control of waters, and, in particular, to
the worldwide need for more food. There is the concept of "Freedom of the Seas" as it relates to zonal and
territorial waters and the right of "Innocent Free Passage" for warships. There is the urgent need to protect the world
oceans from pollution by atomic waste, oil spills, industrial wastes, and sewage. The measures of control, however, conflict with the
economic development aspirations of various "Third World" nations.
Oceans development is a zero-sum game between powers

Jianhai Xiang, editor, 2010, “Marine Science & Technology in China: A Roadmap to 2050”, A Research
Group on Marine of the Chinese Academy of Sciences Publication, P. 5-6
The sea covers 71% of the surface of the earth, containing a vast reservoir of energy and resources significant in political, military and
economic strategy. It is the place of competition in world’s off shore nations for ocean development and
utilization. In the 21st century, focusing on the development of marine resources, marine environment,
and marine rights and interests security, a new round of competition in the ocean has been taken
internationally. Power-building strategy in marine realm is put again on the agenda of every waterfront
nation. As the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea is about to come into effect at the
international level, countries around the world ocean development are re-taking actions for marine
resources, marine rights and interests, and the division of marine territory.
Link- Oceans Key

Maritime policy key to China’s great power status
Adam P. MacDonald, Winter 2013, “China’s Maritime Strategy: A Prolonged Period of Formulation”,
Canadian Naval Review, Volume 8 Number 4, http://www.navalreview.ca/wp-content/uploads/
public/vol8num4/vol8num4art3.pdf, accessed 5/12/14
Shifting Focus: Beijing’s Turn to the Maritime Domain Over the last three decades the maritime domain has changed from an
area of peripheral interest to one of vital importance for Chinese leaders. The most influential facilitators of this shift
have been the end of the Cold War and the transformation of the international system to an interconnected globalized world dependent on
seaborne trade. For years China had been fixated internally and towards the continent. This was because of tense relations with its land
neighbours, the Soviet Union and India, and economics related to China’s command-style system. The disappearance of the Soviet Union, the
explosion of export-driven economic growth initiated by the Open Door reforms of the 1980s, and the growth of population centres along the
coastline motivated China’s leaders to look to the seas. With improving relations with land neighbours and a reconfiguration of economic
development, Beijing has increasingly tied its success to the world economic system of seaborne trade.
Approximately 85% of all Chinese trade moves via the sea. As well, in 2010 China briefly became the world’s
largest shipbuilder (but has now slipped behind South Korea), creating an industry of massive companies with revenues in the billions,
employing hundreds of thousands of people.1 The problem for China is that economic development is reliant on foreign
markets and energy imports. This causes concern in Beijing over the potential vulnerability of China’s
extensive sea lines of communications (SLOCs) worldwide. In addition to securing China’s economic lifelines, the new focus on
the maritime domain also incorporates territorial and maritime claims in adjacent waters including Taiwan, and the Paracel and Spratly
Islands. Tied to the importance of these disputes is a growing sense of nationalism which promotes the enhancement
of Chinese military power at sea not simply in support of economic interests but as a fundamental step towards
becoming a great power. For Beijing these dynamics – the products of government reforms, emerging domestic forces and changing
international circumstances – have come to be the motivating factors of China’s expanded involvement in the maritime domain.
China views ocean resources as key to their national power

Roy Kamphausen, David Lai, Andrew Scobell, Editors, June 2010 THE PLA AT HOME AND ABROAD,
//www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pubs/display.cfm?pubID=995, accessed 5/12/14
China’s leadership has identified the security of China’s seaborne imports and exports as critical to the
nation’s overall development, and hence a vital and growing mission for the PLAN. The last two of the four “new historic missions”
with which President Hu Jintao charged the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) in 2004 reflect new emphases, and the fourth is unprecedented; all
but the first may be furthered by naval development,4 provided that the operation is UN-led, multilateral, and targeted at nontraditional
threats.5 Hu has also stated specifically: “As we strengthen our ability to fight and win limited wars under informatized conditions, we have to
pay even more attention to improving non-combat mili tary operations capabilities.”6 In an attempt to transform Hu’s general guidance into
more specific policy, articles in state and military news media have argued that to
safeguard China’s economic growth, the
PLA must go beyond its previous mission of safeguarding national “survival interests” to protecting national
“development interests”.7 High level PLAN officers are now conducting sophisticated analysis of the “nonwar military operations”
needed to promote these interests.8 This guidance and policy implementation is informed by clear economic realities—themselves of
particular importance for a leadership that has staked its political legitimacy on maintaining roughly 8
percent growth of an economy that remains reliant on extremely high levels of resource imports and
manufactured goods exports. China depends on maritime transportation for 90 percent of its imports
and exports. By some metrics, China has more seafarers, deep sea fleets, and ocean fishing vessels than any other
nation.9 As of 2006, maritime industries accounted for $270 billion in economic output (nearly 10 percent of gross
domestic product [GDP]).10 Already at least tied with South Korea for status as the world’s largest shipbuilder,
China aims to become the largest by 2015.11 Chinese oil demand, growing rapidly, has reached 8.5 million barrels per day
(mbtd) even amid the global recession.12 China became a net oil importer in 1993, and will likely become a net gasoline importer by the end of
2009. While still a very significant oil producer, China now imports half of its crude oil, with 4.6 mbpd in imports as of July 2009. Seaborne
imports, which even ambitious overland pipeline projects lack the capacity to reduce, constitute more than 80 percent of this total.13 At
present, therefore, 40 percent of China’s oil comes by sea.
Link Boosters
International relations are highly scrutinized by the Chinese media- ensures plan is
perceived
Susan Shirk, served as deputy assistant secretary for China at the U.S. State Department from 1997 to
2000., 2007, CHINA: FRAGILE SUPERPOWER, p. 84
The media, competing with one another, naturally try to appeal to the tastes of their targeted
audiences. Editors make choices about which stories to cover based on their judgments about what will
sell commercially. That means a lot of reports about Japan, Taiwan, and the United States, the
international relationships that are the objects of intense interest and emotion. The publicity given to
these topics makes them domestic political issues and constrains the way China's leaders and diplomats
deal with them.
Nothing is too small, foreign policy issues are politically sensitive

Susan Shirk, served as deputy assistant secretary for China at the U.S. State Department from 1997 to
2000., 2007, CHINA: FRAGILE SUPERPOWER, p. 85
News media, competing for audiences but "guided" by the propaganda authorities, reinforce nationalist myths."
Chinese journalists have a saying, "There are no small matters in foreign affairs." Foreign affairs topics
are considered politically sensitive and potentially dangerous territory for journalists. Journalists also have to satisfy
two masters: their audiences and the Propaganda Department. A nationalist slant on news events works for both of them. Nationalism
has become the politically correct point of view, enforced by the marketplace as well as the censors, as
the public reaction to the Freezing Point article on history textbooks illustrates. But encouraging
nationalism can backfire, as Chinese leaders learned from the anti-American demonstrations that
followed the Belgrade embassy bombing in 1999. After that crisis, Chinese leaders ordered the Propaganda Department to
moderate the media message about the United States to calm public opinion and protect the relationship with Washington.
Links- Fisheries
China sees control of global fish stocks as critical to their national power
Tabitha Grace Mallory, Ph.D. Candidate, China Studies Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International
Studies, January 26, 2012, “China as a Distant Water Fishing Nation”, Testimony before the U.S.-China
Economic and Security Review Commission, http://origin.www.uscc.gov/sites/default/files/
transcripts/1.26.12HearingTranscript.pdf, accessed 5/25/14
In September 2010, a task force composed of twelve people affiliated with the State Council, Chinese DWF
companies, industry associations, and universities published a report advocating supporting and strengthening
China’s DWF industry. In advocating for expansion of distant water fishing for food security reasons,
the report argues that “marine biological resources are seen as the largest store of protein, therefore
owning and mastering the ocean means owning and mastering the future” The report sees expanding
DWF as a way to guard China’s ocean interests and seek international space for development because,
it says, the more international space China has, the more resources and benefits it can obtain. The report
argues that while the ocean ecosystem should be managed under a framework of sustainable development, at the same time those
countries that have had a longer history of using the ocean have achieved more say in how ocean
resources are distributed and thus receive a larger share of those resources; in other words, the authors say, the
international fisheries management system is one of “if you occupy and possess, then you have rights
and interests.”
Access to fish stocks is zero sum- conflict over access is inevitable

Simon Dalby, Spring 1998, Review of “Conflict and the Environment”, Environmental Change and
Security Project Report, Issue 4, http://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/report4c.pdf, accessed
5/25/14
The third section has two chapters on fisheries, one by Jennifer Bailey on the question of high seas fisheries stocks and the
extension of state sovereignty. She argues, contrary to the usual assumptions that UN agreements and
international management will promote peaceful cooperation, that the complexity of the issues and the
demands of numerous groups may in many cases precipitate conflict as fish extraction increasingly
becomes a zero sum competition between many actors. Marvin Somos’ analysis of the 1995 Turbot war between
Spain and Canada over fish caught just outside the 200 nautical mile limit off Canada’s coast suggests
that such conflicts are perhaps inevitable, but can, as happened in this case, spur on the further development of international
agreements and the better management of endangered stocks.
Fish competition can cause interstate conflict

Tabitha Grace Mallory, Ph.D. Candidate, China Studies Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International
Studies, January 26, 2012, “China as a Distant Water Fishing Nation”, Testimony before the U.S.-China
Economic and Security Review Commission, http://origin.www.uscc.gov/sites/default/files/
transcripts/1.26.12HearingTranscript.pdf, accessed 5/25/14
My testimony addresses China’s international fishing operations, particularly distant water fishing
operations, as well as China’s compliance with international ocean governance institutions related to
fisheries. In one sense China’s expanding fisheries activities might seem to be a narrow topic with
limited security and global implications. However, beyond its importance to the global economy, the
findings of this paper have significant implications along the lines of the following issues: l) Can the Chinese government
control the behavior of its companies and agents in the world system as it goes global? 2) Is China abiding by the agreements it has signed and
will China be a responsible actor in the global system? 3) To what degree is competition for ocean resources going to be a
source of interstate conflict? 4) And finally, will sustainable development be a relevant concept to the Chinese system as it develops
nationally and internationally
Links- Ocean Science

China perceives ocean science as strategically important- key to maintain sea lane
control
Jianhai Xiang, editor, 2010, “Marine Science & Technology in China: A Roadmap to 2050”, A Research
Group on Marine of the Chinese Academy of Sciences Publication, P. 20-21
Understanding and forecasting the dynamic changes of the marine environment are essential to national
security to protect the marine environment. At present, more than 70% of the total Chinese oil imports are through the
Straits of Malacca, and nearly 60% of the vessels are Chinese ones through the strait every day. The lifeline
of Chinese ocean shipping includes the Taiwan Strait, the South China Sea, Strait of Malacca, the Indian Ocean, and the Arabian Sea. Therefore,
the protection on the sea passageways is clearly the need of national strategic interests expansion, and
has risen to an issue of national socio-economic development, social security, and national security, as an overall strategic focus.
In the access to information of marine environment, the gap between China and the United States is
huge. The United States has conducted the ocean exploration and monitoring for more than 30 years, the acquired information of marine
environment is far more than we have, in the global coastal waters, including China off shore. As a result, of national and historical reasons,
China has rarely conducted survey in the Pacific to the Indian Ocean, and almost be nil in the Atlantic Ocean. In particular, in the areas of the
normal access to the controversial area of the western Pacific and the key sea channel and other military-sensitive areas where Chinese naval
vessels can hardly enter, the data of these regions are almost blank in China. To
access and use the environment data of
critical area and main sea-lanes, to enhance the protection to the marine environment, to safeguard the
national security, and to improve the sustainable and stable development of the country, are of great
strategic significance.
Links- Sea Bed Mining

China is competing for control of resource access through sea bed mining- plan raises
tensions
2013, “Tackling new maritime challenges”, The Hindu, http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-
opinion/tackling-new-maritime-challenges/article5315556.ece, accessed 5/19/14
The new international maritime challenges, however, go beyond China’s jurisdictional “creep.” The oceans
and seas not only have become pivotal to any power’s security and engagement with the outside world but they also constitute the
strategic hub of the global geopolitical competition. The growing importance of maritime resources and
of sea-lane safety, as well as the concentration of economic boom zones along the coasts, has made
maritime security more critical than ever. The maritime challenges extend to non-traditional threats such as climate security,
transnational terrorism, illicit fishing, human trafficking, and environmental degradation. The overexploitation of marine
resources has underscored the need for conservation and prudent management of the biological
diversity of the seabed. Deep seabed mining has emerged as a major new strategic issue. From seeking to tap
sulphide deposits — containing valuable metals such as silver, gold, copper, manganese, cobalt and zinc — to phosphorus nodule mining for
phosphor-based fertilizers used in food production, the inter-state competition over seabed-mineral wealth underscores
the imperative for creating a regulatory regime, developing safe and effective ocean-development technologies, finding ways to share benefits
of the common heritage, and ensuring environmental protection. Inter-state competition over seabed minerals is sharpening in the Indian
Ocean, for example. Even China, an extra-regional power, has secured an international deep-seabed block in
southwestern Indian Ocean from the International Seabed Authority to explore for polymetallic sulphides. More broadly, some of
the outstanding boundary, sovereignty and jurisdiction issues — extending from the Arctic to the Indian
Ocean — carry serious conflict potential. The recrudescence of territorial and maritime disputes, largely
tied to competition over natural resources, will increasingly have a bearing on maritime peace and
security. Bangladesh and Myanmar have set an example by peacefully resolving a dispute over the delimitation of their maritime boundaries
in the Bay of Bengal. They took their dispute to the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea for adjudication. The Tribunal’s verdict,
delivered in 2012, ended a potentially dangerous dispute that was fuelled in 2008 when, following the discovery of gas deposits in the Bay of
Bengal, Myanmar authorised exploration in a contested area, prompting Bangladesh to dispatch warships to the area. However, some
important maritime powers, including the U.S., are still not party to the 1982 U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). Iran recently
seized an Indian oil tanker, holding it for about a month, but India could not file a complaint with the International Tribunal for the Law of the
Sea because Tehran has not ratified UNCLOS. The seizure of the tanker, carrying Iraqi oil, appeared to be an act of reprisal against India’s sharp
reduction of Iranian oil purchases under U.S. pressure. The threats to navigation and maritime freedoms, including in critical straits and
exclusive economic zones (EEZs), can be countered only through adherence to international rules by all parties as well as through monitoring,
regulation and enforcement. Great-power rivalries, however, continue to complicate international maritime security. The rivalries are mirrored
in foreign-aided port-building projects; attempts to assert control over energy supplies and transport routes as part of a 21st-century-version of
the Great Game; and the establishment of listening posts and special naval-access arrangements along the great trade arteries. The evolving
architecture of global governance will determine how the world handles the pressing maritime challenges it confronts. The
assertive
pursuit of national interest for relative gain in an increasingly interdependent world is hardly a recipe for
harmonious maritime relations. Another concern is the narrow, compartmentalised approach in which each maritime issue is
sought to be dealt with separately, instead of addressing the challenges in an integrated framework.
Link- Soft Power

U.S. and Chinese soft power are zero-sum- plan threatens it
Singapore News, June 27, 2005, “China a growing soft power,”
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore, accessed 5/12/14
"Today, China is an economic giant reshaping the landscape of world trade. China's growing soft power
makes it increasingly difficult for the United States to maintain a hard line against Chinese initiatives and
interests." Dr Tan said this was evident in the cross-Atlantic dispute over European countries lifting an arms embargo against China. And
Beijing is currently embarking on its most important public relations project - the 2008 Olympics - as a means to show the world what China can
"The question can be asked
do. So Dr Tan's conclusion is that softer forms of power are becoming increasingly important. He said:
whether the US has lost its monopoly on hard and soft power. "Between a status quo super power like
the US and a rising power like China, there will inevitably be tension and competition. "While most military,
technological and economic power remains concentrated in American hands, we can say that the relative soft power positions of China and the
US in Asia and in the world have undergone changes."
Chinese soft power’s vulnerable- plan saps their overall relevance

Jacques deLisle director of the Asia Program at FPRI, Professor of Law and professor of political science,
University of Pennsylvania, Fall 2010, “Soft Power in a Hard Place: China, Taiwan, Cross-Strait Relations
and U.S. Policy,” http://www.fpri.org/orbis/5404/delisle.chinataiwan.pdf, accessed 5/12/14
Third, key types of Chinese soft power resources remain thin. As many analysts at home and abroad have noted, China’s
political institutions and official values do not enjoy broad appeal, nor does China’s record on social
equity, the environment, international human rights and other matters.66 The international relevance,
content and even existence of a China Model for development are as much foci of debate as they are
rich sources of soft power that can alter foreigners’ attitudes and preferences in ways that serve Chinese interests. China’s soft
power remains heavily statist, lacking the popular culture, commercial and civil society dimensions that
provide much of the might of American soft power.67 A slowing of China’s growth rate or rise in its
perceived collateral costs is far from unimaginable and would dim the luster of the China Model. Even
continued success could sap soft power as a more prosperous China would become, like Taiwan,
seemingly less relevant to the developing world.
US/China soft power is zero sum

Singapore News, June 27, 2005, “China a growing soft power,”
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore, accessed 5/12/14
China is a growing soft power, says Singapore's Deputy Prime Minister Tony Tan, referring to China's
economic and cultural influence. Dr Tan noted that both soft and hard power, which refers to military
capability, had been regarded a monopoly of the United States. But analysts now argue that the soft
power of the US may already have peaked as other players are learning to play the game, particularly
China.
Internal Link – Asian Institutions

Water policy determines if Asian security will be cooperative or competitive- China is
key
2013, Water: Asia's New Battleground, P. 247
Yet, despite such dependency on cross—border flows, intercountry water resources increasingly are being seen
from the national security prism by policy-makers in Asia. Indeed, with water becoming a prized resource, a number
of Asian nations already are jockeying to control upstream basin resources, prompting lower-riparian states to demand a say
in the building of large water projects on international rivers. Competition over water resources is becoming a source of
political tensions, heightening the risks of inter-riparian conflicts in the years ahead. Those risks are most
apparent when, as this chapter does, the water disputes of China, Israel, and India with their multiple neighbors are examined. The analysis
reveals that water
has emerged as a key issue capable of shaping the direction of tomorrows Asia—an Asia
on the path of building mutual security and prosperity through harmonious, ruled-based cooperation, or
an Asia driven by fierce resource competition and self-injurious power politics. Probably no country is
likely to influence that direction more than China because of its unique status.
China and water determine success of Asian institutions

2013, Water: Asia's New Battleground, P. 15-16
Water indeed has emerged as a key issue that could determine whether Asia is beaded toward greater
cooperation or deleterious competition. No country would influence this direction more than China, which
controls the Tibetan Plateau, the source of most major rivers of Asia. Tibet’s vast glaciers and high altitude have endowed it with the world’s
greatest river systems. The future of the Tibetan Plateau’s water reserves is tied to ecological conservation and protection. But as China’s
hunger for primary commodities has grown, so too has its exploitation of Tibet’s rich water and mineral resources. Large hydropower projects
and a reckless exploitation of mineral resources already threaten Tibet’s fragile ecosystems, where ore tailings from mining operations are
beginning to contaminate water sources. The big issue in Asia, apart from climate change, is whether China will exploit its control of the Tibetan
Plateau to increasingly siphon off for its own use the waters of the international rivers that are the lileblood of the countries located in a
continuous arc from Vietnam to Afghanistan. China is not only building megadams on the international rivers running out of the Tibetan Plateau
but is also clamming the transboundary streams in its north and west that flow to Russia and Kazakhstan. Rudyard Kipling’s
“Great
Game,” played out over the middle to late nineteenth century, has been revived in the twenty-first century with new
competitors.44 Instead of Tsarist Russia taking on Imperial Britain in Central Asia, rising China—hungry for water, energy,
land, and raw materials—is shaping the new Great Game across much of Asia. Today, China is involved in
water disputes with most of its riparian neighbors—from the countries on the Indochina Peninsula and India to Kazakhstan and
Russia. Although China seems intent to aggressively pursue upstream projects on transnational rivers, the forestalling of water wars demands a
cooperative Asian framework among river basin states so that they can work toward a common ownership of shared resources and thereby
securely share the benefits. Broadly, water shortages threaten to intensify intrastate and interstate tensions in
Asia, besides spurring food insecurity, hindering rapid economic growth, promoting unemployment, and triggering large-scale migrations
within and across international borders. According to the FAOSTAT data maintained by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations, the
water stress in Asia holds a direct bearing on Economic and human development as well as
environmental protection there. A 2009 report from the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific
(UNESCAP) captured the Asian crisis through an Index of Water Available for Development—a measure of per capita water availability for
human, economic, and ecological uses per year on the basis of each country s internal renewable water resources minus total water used. This
index for selected countries, employing 1980 as the benchmark, reveals that there have been steep declines in water availability for
development since that year in several Asian nations, including the two giants that make up nearly two—fifths of the global population China
and India. The water situation in India appears the most ominous because of a dramatic decline in water availability for development during the
past three decades. The UNESCAP report gave the following warning about the regional water situation: “Water shortfalls on this scale heighten
competition for a precious resource and frequently lead to conflicts, which are emerging as new threats to social stability.’’
Internal Link – Asian Institutions

Asia lies at a crossroads between ruthless competition and new forms of cooperation-
water issues are the test case- key to growth and stability
2013, Water: Asia's New Battleground, P. 300-301
This raises the question of whether, far from being liberal or rules—based, the new international order will be
influenced by authoritarian powers and be centered on the classical balance-of-power strategies of its major players. And this, in
turn, begs another question: Is Asia going to crimp its ability to shape the new global order by remaining an arena of old—style geopolitics? Or
will the prospects of shared prosperity and stability propel Asian states to pursue growing institutionalized cooperation on the basis of shared
interests? In past history, the competition for a balance of power centered on Europe. Even the Cold War was not really an East\West rivalry
but a competition between two blocs over Europe. For the first time, with the world at a defining moment in its
history, developing a stable and durable balance of power in Asia has become critical to international
peace and security. The global power equilibrium, in fact, will be greatly influenced by developments in
Asia, whose significance in international relations, in some respects, is beginning to rival that of Europe in the
eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Yet the geopolitical risks of greater tensions, brinkmanship, and
strained relationships are increasing in Asia. Present trends suggest that Asia’s power dynamics are likely to remain fluid, as
new or shifting alliances, strengthened military capabilities, and sharpening resource competition continue to challenge
strategic stability. This has only reinforced the need to find new ways to stabilize important interstate relationships and promote
cooperative Asian approaches to help tackle festering security, resource, territorial, and history issues. If Asian nations choose
collaborative approaches, Asia certainly will be able to preserve ie, stability, and continued rapid
economic growth, besides helping to reform global institutions in such a way that it gains a much greater say in
international political, financial, and security matters. ASIA’S TEST ON THE FRESHWATER FRONT Against this background, water
has emerged as a test case of Asia’s ability to build cooperation, not competition, over a critical
resource. The mounting water stress indeed is a key security challenge for Asia, where the combination of the worlds
fastest economic growth and the largest concentration of population is fueling spiraling demand for
water and energy. Asia’s economic renaissance has only whetted intercountry rivalries on matters ranging from resource acquisition to
geopolitical influence. Environmentally unsustainable national development policies, coupled with the pursuit of narrow geopolitical objectives,
have intensified interstate competition over shared basin resources. Such policies and practices represent a danger to regional and
environmental security and to long—term hydrological stability. The exacerbation of resource competition due to economic and social
pressures at home, interstate territorial and maritime disputes, and sharpening geopolitics threatens to engender conflict and
stall Asia’s continued rapid growth.
Impact– Asian Instability

Asian instability risks extinction
Paul Kennedy, Profess of IR at Yale, Jan. 10, 2000, Daily Yomiuri, “21st Century--Dialogues on the
Future/ Globalization's sway in evolution of states put in focus,” http://the-japan-
news.com/news/article/0001306566, accessed 5/25/14
Kennedy: Over the past two or three decades, many Asian nations have increased their defense budgets, while European
countries have done otherwise. During this time, there have been many flash points in Asia, such North Korea, Taiwan
and Kashmir. Some Asian countries have developed nuclear weapons, as contrasted with few Europeans who even
want nuclear power stations today. We have good reason to feel worried that Asia could become a tinderbox should there be
any conflict in disputed territories like the Spratly Islands and an autistic North Korean regime that does
not bother to understand the outside world. Taiwan is often rash to provoke Beijing, while the Kashmir
conflict could grow into an India-Pakistan war. There is great concern about how we should ensure that bitter rivalries in
the Asian part of the globe will not bring down a system that is emerging in the world now. We do not
want a repeat of 1914. I am concerned that an armed conflict might arise in South or East Asia in 2008,
for example, and bring down the credit, financial flow and capital in the region. Irie: I share Prof. Kennedy's sense
of pessimism about some serious problems facing the world today. There are many more sovereign nations today, and the majority of them are
newly independent states. Therefore, they are even more nationalistic. Nationalism has often served as the only symbol of national unity for
some African, Asian and Middle Eastern countries that have been grated in their regions without national traditions comparable to those of
European countries. This has made matters even worse. Nationalism is all that can keep a country together. It is essential to ensure
that local conflicts will be kept from blowing up the entire world.
Asia is key to the global economy

Ralph Cossa, President of Pacific Forum CSIS, February 2009, “The United States and the Asia-Pacific
Region: Security Strategy for the Obama Administration,” www.cna.org/documents/CampbellPatel
Ford_US_Asia-Pacific_February2009.pdf, accessed 5/15/14
Asia is reemerging as a central political and economic player and an engine of the global economy.
The countries in East and Southeast Asia house almost one-third of the world’s population, generate
about a quarter of global output, and produce about a quarter of global exports. Asian manufacturers
have captured a large share of global production chains. Asian governments and government- controlled
institutions hold about two-thirds of the world’s $6 trillion-plus foreign exchange reserves. Until the recent
financial crisis, growth rates in many parts of Asia in the last decade approached or exceeded double digits,
lifting tens of millions of people out of absolute poverty. Asia’s market-oriented policies and successful
engagement with the global economy set a good example for other regions. By almost any measure,
Asia is highly globalized. Growing wealth and technological sophistication mean that Asian
governments and private actors have greater capacity than ever before to help stabilize the global
economy and contribute to the solution of global problems. By the same token, threats from Asia, such as crime and disease, can also
spread quickly, exacerbating these problems. Asia’s growing demand for energy and other resources has created tensions among nations
and environmental problems that yield new security threats and challenges. For example, Chinese and Indian demand for energy and other
commodities was a major factor in the run-up of energy and commodity prices in 2006 and 2007, and will continue to influence global
markets in the decades to come. A decade ago, Asia was an important economic region; today it is critical for U.S. prosperity.
Two-way merchandise trade between the United States and Asia is almost $1 trillion a year, amounting to 27 percent of total U.S.
merchandise trade with the world versus 19 percent with the European Union. (Europe leads in investment ties, however, and Canada and
Mexico are the top two U.S. trading partners.) Asia straddles vital sea lines of com-munication for the United States and its allies, partners,
and friends. The world’s six largest ports, both container and cargo, are in Asia.
Impact- Asian Institutions- Terror & Disease

Strengthening East Asian regional security efforts is key to solve terrorism, territorial
disputes, disease, environmental degradation, and maritime security
Dick Nanto, Specialist in Industry and Trade Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division for
Congressional Research Services, January 4, 2008, “East Asian Regional Architecture: New Economic
and Security Arrangements and U.S. Policy,” www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL33653.pdf, accessed 5/25/14
A stronger regional security organization in East Asia could play a role in quelling terrorism by violent
extremists. Since terrorism is a transnational problem, the United States relies on international
cooperation to counter it. Without close multilateral cooperation, there are simply too many nooks and
crannies for violent extremists to exploit. Currently, most of that cooperation is bilateral or between the
United States and its traditional allies. While the ASEAN Regional Forum and ASEAN + 3, for example, have addressed the issue of terrorism,
neither has conducted joint counter-terrorism exercises as has the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. Neither organization as a group,
moreover, has joined U.S. initiatives aimed at North Korean nuclear weapons (e.g., the Proliferation Security Initiative). Meanwhile, tensions
continue across the Taiwan Strait, and disputes over territory and drilling rights have flared up between China and Japan and between Japan
and South Korea. (For the United States, there is a growing possibility of nationalist territorial conflicts between two or more U.S. allies.102)
The North Korean nuclear issue remains unresolved; North Korea has conducted tests of ballistic missiles and a nuclear weapon; and the
oppressive military rule in Burma/Myanmar continues. Added
to these concerns are several regional issues: diseases
(such as avian flu, SARS, and AIDS), environmental degradation, disaster mitigation and prevention, high seas piracy, and
weapons proliferation.
Terrorism triggers global nuke war

Speice, Associate at Gibson, Dunn, and Crutcher, 2006, 47 Wm and Mary L. Rev. 1427, accessed
5/20/14
Accordingly,
there is a significant and ever-present risk that terrorists could acquire a nuclear device or
fissile material from Russia as a result of the confluence of Russian economic decline and the end of
stringent Soviet-era nuclear security measures. Terrorist groups could acquire a nuclear weapon by a number of
methods, including “steal[ing] one intact from the stockpile of a country possessing such weapons, or …[being] sold or given one by such a
country, or [buying or stealing] one from another subnational group that had obtained it in one of these ways.” Equally threatening,
however, is the risk that terrorists will steal or purchase fissile material and construct a nuclear device on their own. Very little material is
necessary to construct a highly destructive nuclear weapon. Although nuclear devices are extraordinarily complex, the technical barriers to
constructing a workable weapon are not significantMoreover, the end of the Cold War eliminated the rationale for maintaing a large
military-industrial complex in Russia, and the nuclear cities were closed. This resulted in at least 35,000 former scientists who are
unemployed or underpaid and who are too young to retire, raising the chilling prospect that these scientists will be tempted to sell their
nuclear knowledge, or steal nuclear material to sell, to states or terrorist organization with nuclear ambitions. The potential consequences
of the unchecked spread of nuclear knowledge and material to terrorist groups that seek to cause mass destruction in the United States are
truly horrifying. A
terrorist attack with a nuclear weapon would be devastating in terms of human and
economic losses. Moreover, there would be immense political pressure in the United States to
discover the perpetrators and retaliate with nuclear weapons, massively increasing the number of
casualties and potentially triggering a full-scale nuclear conflict.
Drug resistant diseases threaten human extinction

Corey Powell, Staff Writer, October 2000, “Twenty Ways the World Could End,” Discover Magazine,
http://discovermagazine.com/2000/oct/featworld, accessed 5-2-2013
If Earth doesn't do us in, our fellow organisms might be up to the task. Germs and people have always
coexisted, but occasionally the balance gets out of whack. The Black Plague killed one European in four during the 14th
century; influenza took at least 20 million lives between 1918 and 1919; the AIDS epidemic has produced a similar death toll and is still going
strong. From1980 to 1992, reports the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, mortality from
infectious disease in the United States rose 58 percent. Old diseases such as cholera and measles have
developed new resistance to antibiotics. Intensive agriculture and land development is bringing humans
closer to animal pathogens. International travel means diseases can spread faster than ever.
Impact- Asian Institutions- Economy

An enhanced Asian regional security regime covering maritime security is key to
prevent a collapse of the global economy and international trade
JD Davis, Lieutenant Commander US Navy, 2006, “Maritime Security and the Strait of Malacca: A
Strategic Analysis, www.dtic.mil/get-tr-doc/pdf?AD=ADA479400, accessed 5/12/14
The Strait of Malacca is one of the world’s most important waterways. The global importance of this
waterway is such that its closure, or even restriction, would severely impact world economies. The strait
stretches from Singapore to the Aceh region of Indonesia (see figure 1) and handles over 25 percent of the world’s
commerce and over one half of the world’s oil shipping.1 It is second only to the Strait of Hormuz in the amount of oil
alone that passes through its waters, 11.7 million barrels per day in 2004.2 Other raw materials, such as ore and textile materials destined for
goods from those factories, are moved constantly through the strait, impacting
factories, as well as the finished
the United States’ and other Pacific nations’ economies. The Lloyds Market Association, advisors to the
Lloyds of London insurance underwriters, has recently declared the Strait a “war risk zone” based on
piracy and terrorism concerns.3 This declaration may be a bellwether of conditions in the strait and the
countries that surround it. 1There are over 200 straits and canals throughout the world. Only a few are considered strategic
chokepoints for the movement of raw and finished goods. Fewer still are controlled by multiple nations. The confined waters of a
strait make the ships that transit them vulnerable to piracy and terrorism. The ability to secure these
straits while allowing for innocent passage is exceedingly more difficult in areas where straits are
controlled by multiple nations. Straits controlled by a single nation, such as the Bosporous Strait
controlled by Turkey, do not require bilateral or multilateral agreements in order to delineate security
procedures or security responsibilities.4 Straits controlled by multiple nations present sovereignty and
enforcement issues making security agreements that establish security and enforcement procedures
imperative.
Impact- Containment
Chinese perception of containment emboldens nationalist aggression- causes great
power war from miscalculation
Ramesh Thakur, Director of the Center for Nuclear Nonproliferation and Disarmament, Crawford
School of Public Policy, Australian National University, Feb 7, 2013, “Turning China into an enemy,”
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2013/02/07/, accessed 5/15/14
Fourth, for China, matters of status and identity trump calculations of economic gain and pain. We may believe
that the growing integration and interdependence of China with the global economy makes armed conflict too costly, and that the Pacific
military balance is weighted so heavily toward the United States that Beijing would not be foolish enough to challenge Washington.
What if
China believes that the costs to Washington would be so high that the U.S. would back down? Along
many such misperceptions and miscalculations do the bloody rivers of human history flow into the
ocean of oblivion for once-great powers. It would be foolish to underestimate the power of raw politics
to inflame nationalist passions to the point of a destructive conflagration. During this critical transition,
conflict will turn to war if China’s legitimate aspirations are thwarted and its interests attacked, particularly
in the context of two centuries of slights, injustices and humiliations inflicted on it by the West and Japan. But equally, the stage will be set for
conflict down the line if the opposite posture of appeasement is adopted. The rise in tensions over disputed claims to islands and rocky
outcrops in the South China Sea has the potential to impact adversely on Australia’s interests. As argued by professor Michael Wesley, more
than half of Australia’s trade passes through these seas; any outbreak of armed conflict to Australia’s north would destabilize its strategic
region; and any restrictions on the U.S. naval presence and movements would degrade the Pacific strategic balance to Australia’s net
disadvantage. How should Australia respond? According to former ambassador to China Geoff Raby, Australia’s 2009 defense white paper “was
read and understood by media in both Australia and China as being about the ‘China threat’. ” Some believe that in Chinese eyes, Canberra has
joined the U.S. in a de facto containment strategy as indicated by public statements in both capitals, the U.S. pivot to Asia, the decision to
station a new contingent of U.S. marines in Darwin, and the buildup of military links with India by both. Others counter that China’s rapid
military modernization and assertive behavior pose a direct challenge to the U.S. and allies that requires a robust response. A third group is
skeptical of the quality of China’s military and believes that the U.S. and allies will retain a significant edge well into the foreseeable future. It is
premature to accommodate to the realities of China’s power, although it would be dangerously provocative to develop an indigenous military
capability to challenge China around Australia’s approaches. A policy of containment could become self-fulfilling by
provoking China’s hostility. Former Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser has voiced concern that under the rhetorical rubric of a strategic
pivot to Asia, with Australian complicity-cum-collusion, the U.S. risks turning China into an enemy that Australia does not
need and China does not want to be.
Impact- Chinese Soft Power
Leadership in ocean development is key to Chinese national prestige

Takeda Jun’ichi, Visiting Research Fellow at the Ocean Policy Research Foundation, Apr 23, 2014,
“China’s Rise as a Maritime Power: Ocean Policy from Mao Zedong to Xi Jinping”,
http://islandstudies.oprf-info.org/research/a00011/, accessed 5/14/14
Ocean-related economic activity accounts for almost 10% of China’s gross domestic product, and the share is said to be above 16% in coastal
regions. This activity is the source of some 33.5 million jobs. Meanwhile, the growth rate of the Chinese economy was 7.8% in 2012, falling
below 8% for the first time in 13 years. In the context of this slowdown, local authorities particularly in coastal regions are
looking at
the seas as a new engine of growth to replace the urban development activities that have leveled off,
and they have been coming out one after another with plans for marine economic development. One
now often hears comments from key officials declaring that China’s future is as a maritime power and
that the marine economy is the engine for achieving this. In 2010 China overtook Japan in terms of
nominal GDP, becoming the world’s second-largest economy. And it has a huge pool of scientific researchers. But it produces few
scientific or technological innovations on its own, and it has a low ratio of domestically developed key core technologies. And
it has been noted that the level of transfer of research results to industry is still not high. Even so, under its system of one-party rule, China is
able to carry out basic and cutting-edge research under state auspices in areas that are not commercially profitable, along with large-
scale projects in fields like space development and military technology; these activities double
as boosters of national prestige. In
the field of maritime research, in 2012 the Jiaolong, a domestically built submersible, carried its crew to a maximum depth of 7,062
meters in the Mariana Trench in the Pacific Ocean, an accomplishment that suggests the potential for exploitation of
deep-sea resources. And in 2011 China successfully launched the Haiyang 2 (HY-2), an observation satellite capable of real-time
monitoring of dynamic conditions in the ocean environment. The keywords for China’s new oceanic frontiers are “deep-
sea,” “polar,” and “space.”
Chinese international influence is an existential impact

Wei Wei Zhang, Prof of Diplomacy and IR at the Geneva School of Diplomacy. 9/4/2012“The Rise of
China’s Political Softpower” http://www.china.org.cn/opinion/2012-09/04/content_ 26421330.htm,
accessed 5/25/14
As China plays an increasingly significant role in the world, its soft power must be attractive both
domestically as well as internationally. The world faces many difficulties, including widespread poverty,
international conflict, the clash of civilizations and environmental protection. Thus far, the Western
model has not been able to decisively address these issues; the China model therefore brings hope that
we can make progress in conquering these dilemmas.
China Alternative Energy DA
Explanation
This disadvantage argues that an expansion of US alternative energy produced from the oceans trades
off with Chinese alternative energy. The impact to this tradeoff is that Chinese growth becomes
unsustainable if it lacks a vibrant alternative energy sector. A decline in their economic potential causes
the Chinese Communist Party to lose control over the population which causes a variety of terrible
things to happen. Contained within this file are links to two major affirmative; OTEC and offshore wind.
This file also contains a large number of affirmative answers to this position. You should be ready to
answer this DA if your affirmative expands the use of alternative energies that draw their power from
the oceans.
1NC China Alternative Energy DA

China is winning in ocean renewable energy and renewable energy overall
Steve Hargreaves, senior writer, 9-23-2010, “China winning renewable energy race,” CNN Money,
http://money.cnn.com/2010/09/21/news/international/china_renewables/ Accessed 5-5-2014
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Five miles off the coast of Shanghai, the Chinese recently completed the
country's first offshore wind farm.¶ The project was completed before construction on the first American
offshore wind farm has even begun.¶ 204¶ Email¶ Print¶ Comment¶ The Shanghai project is not just
another wind farm. It's the next generation in wind power technology and the latest example of how
China is jumping ahead of the United States.¶ Earlier this month, the accounting firm Ernst & Young
named China the most attractive place to invest in renewables, knocking the United States out of the
top position.¶ The study ranked countries on such things as regulatory risk, access to finance, grid
connection and tax climate. It cited the lack of a clear policy promoting demand for renewables in the
United States -- a product of Congress' failure to pass an energy bill -- as one of the main factors for the
dethroning.¶ China has already surpassed the United States in the amount of wind turbines and solar
panels that it makes. China is also gaining on the United States when it comes to how much of their
energy comes from renewable energy sources.¶ The country that leads in the renewable energy industry,
is opening the door to more home-grown jobs.¶
Expanding US alternative energy trades off with Chinese energy –

David Roberts, a staff writer for Grist, 2-11-2011, “Are we in a ‘clean energy race’ with China?” Grist,
http://grist.org/energy-policy/2011-02-10-are-we-in-a-clean-energy-race-with-china/ Accessed 5-5-2014
Fears of China lead quickly to calls for protectionism, through steep barriers to clean energy imports
or to Chinese investment in U.S. clean energy projects and firms; investment and imports are currently
relatively small, but have great potential to grow. Such moves hurt support for Washington’s efforts to
open up foreign markets (including Chinese ones) to U.S. firms. They slow the flow of clean energy
technology across borders, stifling innovation and delaying much-needed cuts in the cost of green
technology. They starve capital-hungry U.S. firms of investment, while depriving U.S. consumers of
access to cheaper sources of pollution-free power. At the same time, the Sputnik rhetoric is bound to
sap lawmakers’ enthusiasm for the sort of clean energy cooperation with China that President Barack
Obama will push for during Hu’s visit. This will hobble the development of cheaper sources of clean
energy, delaying the much-needed expansion of clean energy markets and increasing costs for U.S.
consumers.
1NC China Alternative Energy DA

Chinese energy expansion key to Chinese economic growth
Liu Yuanyuan, Director of Operations and Co-Founder of Nanjing Shanglong Communications, 2-1-
2012, “China Set to Vigorously Develop Green Economy ,” Renewable Energy World,
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2012/02/china-set-to-vigorously-develop-
green-economy Accessed 5-5-2014
BEIJING -- Due to growing urbanization and resulting environmental threats, China has invested nearly
US$50 billion annually into its renewable energy sector since 2009. China's five-year investment in
environmental protection is on track to reach 3.1 trillion yuan (US$454 billion). By 2015, its
environmental protection industry is expected to top 2 trillion yuan (US$317 billion).¶ China will
introduce favorable tax and financial policies to support the development of its green economy,
according to its 12th five-year plan, which started last year. A strong “green” policy is essential if China is
to maintain its rapid and sustainable growth. "China will build a good fund raising environment for
companies to develop green technologies by establishing green technology investment and related
equity funds," said Wang Yuqing, deputy director of the Committee of Population, Resources and
Environment of the CPPCC National Committee. ¶ The transition to a global green economy may
generate a large market exceeding US$1 trillion. During the 12th five-year plan period, the Chinese
government will invest US$468 billion in green sectors compared to US$211 billion over the previous
five-year period, with a focus on three sectors: waste recycling and re-utilization; clean technologies;
and renewable energy. With this amount of public investment, China's environmental protection
industry is expected to continue growing at an average of 15 to 20 percent per year, and its industrial
output is expected to reach US$743 billion, up from US$166 billion in 2010. The multiplier effect of this
emerging sector is estimated to be 8 to 10 times larger than other industry sectors.
Nuclear war results from Chinese economic collapse

Herbert Yee, Professor of Politics and International Relations at the Hong Kong Baptist University, and
Ian Storey, Lecturer in Defence Studies at Deakin University, 2002, “The China Threat: Perceptions,
Myths and Reality,” RoutledgeCurzon, 5. Accessed 5-5-2014
The forth factor contributing to the perception of a China threat is the fear of political and economic
collapse in the PRC, resulting in territorial fragmentation, civil war and waves of refugees pouring into
neighbouring countries. Naturally, any or all of these scenarios would have a profoundly negative impact
on regional stability. Today the Chinese leadership faces a raft of internal problems, including the
increasing political demands of its citizens, a growing population, a shortage of natural resources and a
deterioration in the natural environment caused by rapid industrialization and pollution. These
problems are putting a strain on the central government’s ability to govern effectively. Political
disintegration or a Chinese civil war might result in millions of Chinese refugees seeking asylum in
neighbouring countries. Such an unprecedented exodus of refugees from a collapsed PRC would no
doubt put a severe strain on the limited resources of China’s neighbours. A fragmented China could also
result in another nightmare scenario—nuclear weapons falling into the hands of irresponsible local
provincial leaders or warlords. From this perspective a disintegrating China would also pose a threat to
its neighbours and the world.
Yes Chinese Ocean Energy

China is winning the ocean energy race
Simon Hall, energy analyst, 4-2-2014, “China at the helm in global race to harness power of the sea,”
The Australian, http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/wall-street-journal/china-at-the-helm-in-
global-race-to-harness-power-of-the-sea/story-fnay3ubk-1226871337724# Accessed 5-5-2014
A RACE is under way to unlock one of the world’s biggest untapped sources of clean energy — the ocean
— with China emerging as an important testing ground.¶ That could heighten competition with Western
companies down the line, especially if Chinese businesses begin using technologies developed with
joint-venture partners.¶ The EU so far has led efforts to harness the sea to make electricity, for which
there are three principal techniques: underwater turbines that draw power from the ebb and flow of
tides, surface-based floats that rely on wave motion, and systems that exploit differences in water
temperature.¶ The world’s first commercial, grid-connected tidal-flow generator was installed in
Northern Ireland in 2008. Germany’s Siemens, a big investor in wave and tidal power, predicts that tidal
currents alone could power 250 million households worldwide. France’s Alstom also is developing the
technology.¶ But with 17,000km of coastline rich with energy potential and pollution that is getting
worse, China is seen by many as an ideal location to pioneer and commercialise ocean-energy
technologies.¶ China is increasing spending in the sector, and foreign companies, including Lockheed
Martin of the US are testing equipment and entering joint ventures in the country.
Yes Chinese Alternative Energy

China is winning the race
Ariel Schwartz, senior editor, 5-1-2013, “China Is Still Winning The Clean Energy Race,” Fast Coexist,
http://www.fastcoexist.com/1681871/china-is-still-winning-the-clean-energy-race Accessed 5-5-2014
The U.S. simply can’t match China’s ability to deploy solar panels and wind turbines--and other countries
are starting to catch up.¶ The clean energy sector--especially the solar industry--has looked a little
depressing in the past few years, especially in the bankruptcy-ridden U.S. and China. And yet, the annual
Pew clean energy report implores us to stay optimistic. Because while clean energy investments
dropped 11% in 2012 compared to the previous year’s levels, the solar industry added 88 GW of
generating capacity--a new record.¶ Pew’s Who’s Winning the Clean Energy Race? report tells us that, as
in previous years, China is still winning, with $65.1 billion in investments in 2012 (up 20% from 2011)
and 25% of all solar investments worldwide. The country also attracted 37% of wind investments and
47% of renewable investments lumped into the "other" category, which includes biomass, geothermal,
and hydro power. All that in spite of the fact that nearly 200 Chinese solar companies merged or went
out of business in 2012.
China is winning the clean energy race

Meg Handley, political analyst, 4-17-2013, “China Leads the Renewable Energy World,” US News,
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/04/17/china-leads-the-renewable-energy-world Accessed
5-5-2014
In the global clean energy race, China reclaimed the top spot from the United States in terms of
attracting investment to its clean energy sector, "advancing its position as the epicenter of clean energy"
according to a new report released by the Pew Charitable Trusts Wednesday.¶ Investors shoveled more
than $65 billion into China's wind, solar, and other renewable energy projects in 2012, 20 percent more
than in 2011 and 30 percent of total clean energy investment in G-20 countries.¶ [POLL: Americans
Overwhelmingly Support Alternative Energy]¶ The investment ramping up in China underscores a more
fundamental shift in the global clean energy sector, Asia (and Oceania) are emerging as the leaders in
renewable energy initiatives and installations. Investment in the region grew 16 percent, to more than
$100 billion in 2012, accounting for about 42 percent of total global investment in the clean energy
sector.
Non-US and non-Chinese countries can’t keep up

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/04/17/china-leads-the-renewable-energy-world
Meanwhile, investment in the Middle East, Africa, and even Europe declined 22 percent. Experts blame
the lack of policy certainty for the pullback in clean energy progress in traditional leading markets such
as Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom, and Spain, where the government has curtailed state-sponsored
incentive programs in light of recent budget woes.

China is beating the US in the clean tech race
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/04/17/china-leads-the-renewable-energy-world Accessed
5-5-2014
Likewise in the United States, the on-again-off-again nature of clean energy programs such as the wind
production tax credit have made investors more hesitant to make large financial commitments in the
sector.¶ [REPORT: Solar Scores Big Gains in Electricity Generation]¶ "This is largely due to policy
uncertainty," says Phyllis Cuttino, director of Pew's clean energy program. "We have no clean energy
standard and while there are tax incentives on the books for oil and gas, there are none for clean
energy. That makes investors a little nervous."¶ The decline is a double-whammy for the United States
according to Cuttino, because it's the U.S. that has pushed clean energy technology the furthest.¶ "This is
a sector of the global economy that we've traditionally led," Cuttino adds. "We have invented many of
the clean energy technologies, so to see China come along and the United States fall back is very
troubling."
Investments prove China is winning the clean energy race

Cash is pouring in: From an investment point of view, the trend is clear.¶ In 2009, nearly $35 billion in
private money flowed into Chinese renewable energy projects, including factories that make wind
turbines and solar panels, according to the research firm Bloomberg New Energy Finance. The United
States attracted under $19 billion.¶ "Within the past 18 months, China has become the undisputed global
leader in attracting new investment dollars," Ethan Zindler, head of policy analysis at New Energy
Finance, recently told a congressional committee.¶ Zindler said the money came from not only the
Chinese government and banks, but also Western private equity funds and individual investors buying
publicly-traded Chinese stocks.
Job expansion proves China is winning the renewable energy race

Jobs growth, for China: The result of all this investment money is jobs.¶ In wind power, China-based
companies are on track to make 39% of the turbines sold worldwide in 2010, according to New Energy
Finance. U.S.-based companies will make just 12%.¶ In solar, China-based firms will make 43% of the
panels. U.S. firms will make 9%.¶ "Countries that make the most investments will create the most jobs,"
said Chris Lafakis, an economist at Moody's Analytics, an economic consultancy.¶ Lafakis, citing a Pew
Charitable Trusts study, noted that the overall "green" economy is still pretty small - in the U.S. it
employees 770,000 people. But It's growing rapidly - three times as fast as the overall economy.¶ "It's
important to invest in this sector because the jobs of tomorrow will be created here," he said.

Chinese renewable technology is growing and is key to Chinese stability
Thomas Friedman, writer for the NYT, 9-18-2010, “Aren’t we clever?” NYT,
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/19/opinion/19friedman.html Accessed 5-5-2014
“There is really no debate about climate change in China,” said Peggy Liu, chairwoman of the Joint U.S.-China Collaboration
on Clean Energy, a nonprofit group working to accelerate the greening of China. “China’s leaders are mostly engineers and scientists, so they
don’t waste time questioning scientific data.” The push for green in China, she added, “is a practical discussion on health and
wealth. There is no need to emphasize future consequences when people already see, eat and breathe pollution every day.” And because
runaway pollution in China means wasted lives, air, water, ecosystems and money — and wasted money means fewer
jobs and
more political instability — China’s leaders would never go a year (like we will) without energy legislation
mandating new ways to do more with less. It’s a three-for-one shot for them. By becoming more energy efficient per unit of G.D.P., China saves
money, takes the lead in the next great global industry and earns credit with the world for mitigating climate change. So while America’s
Republicans turned “climate change” into a four-letter word — J-O-K-E — China’s Communists also turned it into a four-letter word — J-O-B-S.
“China is changing from the factory of the world to the clean-tech laboratory of the world,” said Liu. “It has
the unique ability to pit low-cost capital with large-scale experiments to find models that work.” China has
designated and invested in pilot cities for electric vehicles, smart grids, LED lighting, rural biomass and low-carbon communities. “They’re able
to quickly throw spaghetti on the wall to see what clean-tech models stick, and then have the political will to scale them quickly across the
country,” Liu added. “This allows China to create jobs and learn quickly.”
Yes Chinese OTEC

China is winning the OTEC race
Seeking Alpha, 4-1-2014, “China leads in ocean energy technology, with help from Lockheed
Martin,” http://seekingalpha.com/news/1655083-china-leads-in-ocean-energy-technology-with-help-
from-lockheed-martin Accessed 5-5-2014
WSJ explores the race underway to unlock one of the world's biggest untapped sources of clean energy -
the ocean - and China, with 11K miles of coastline rich in energy potential and pollution that is getting
worse, is at the cutting edge in sea-energy technology development.¶ Underwater turbines (like wind
farms, but out of sight), dynamic tidal power walls and ocean thermal energy converters are among
young technologies that may come to harness marine power.¶ China is stepping up spending in the
sector, often working with foreign companies such as Lockheed Martin (LMT) testing equipment and
entering joint ventures in the country.
China is leading in the OTEC race

Simon Hall, reporter, 3-31-2014, “China's New Wager: Pulling Energy From the Ocean,” WSJ,
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303287804579446904069462752 Accessed 5-
5-2014
HONG KONG—A race is under way to unlock one of the world's biggest untapped sources of clean
energy—the ocean—with China emerging as an important testing ground.¶ That could heighten
competition with Western companies, especially if Chinese businesses begin using technologies
developed with joint-venture partners to expand rapidly.¶ The European Union so far has led efforts to
harness the sea to make electricity, for which there are three principal techniques: underwater turbines
that draw power from the ebb and flow of tides, surface-based floats that rely on wave motion and
systems that exploit differences in water temperature.¶ The world's first commercial, grid-connected
tidal-flow generator was installed in Northern Ireland in 2008. Germany's Siemens AG SIE.XE +0.60% , a
big investor in wave and tidal power, predicts that tidal currents alone could someday power 250 million
households world-wide. France's Alstom SA ALO.FR -0.93% also is developing the technology.¶ Related¶
Global Warming Impacts Widespread, U.N. Panel Says¶ But with 11,000 miles of coastline rich with
energy potential and pollution that is getting worse, China is seen by many experts as an ideal location
to pioneer and commercialize ocean-energy technologies.¶ China is stepping up spending in the sector,
and foreign companies including U.S.-based Lockheed Martin Corp. LMT -0.36% are testing equipment
and entering joint ventures in the country.
Link – OTEC
China is winning the OTEC race – expanding US production causes patent fights which
destroy the industry
Ben Winkley, reporter, 4-1-2014, “Energy Journal: China Dips a Toe in the Ocean,” WSJ,
http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2014/04/01/energy-journal-china-dips-a-toe-in-the-ocean/ Accessed
5-5-2014
Underwater turbines (like wind farms, but out of sight), dynamic tidal-power walls and ocean thermal-
energy converters are the nascent technologies chosen to harness this power and Europe is leading the
efforts to do this.¶ Now, though, China is stepping up to the plate. The Wall Street Journal’s Simon Hall
explains how, with 11,000 miles of coastline rich in energy potential, and pollution that is getting worse,
China is seen as the ideal testing ground for some of this technology.¶ Many alternative-energy
executives are hopeful that China’s involvement will bring the day closer when marine power becomes a
significant part of world energy supply.¶ Others fear an intensification of competition between the
Peoples’ Republic and the West, resulting in a repeat of what happened in other “green” sectors where
disputes about patents have stymied growth and sector development.
Chinese and US OTEC are in competition – expanding US OTEC causes patent battles
5-2014
Some experts predict cooperation between Western and Chinese marine-energy pioneers could turn
into heated competition as the market develops, repeating what happened in the wind and solar
sectors. A European Commission strategy paper in January warned of future competition from foreign
businesses for a market potentially valued at hundreds of billions of dollars and urged bloc governments
to back domestic projects.¶ "Without a doubt, we will see a rise in the number of disputes between
Chinese and foreign companies over renewables technology patents, including marine energy," says
Xiang Wang, a Beijing-based lawyer with Orrick, Herrington and Sutcliffe. The rapid growth in Chinese
companies' share of wind and solar equipment manufacturing prompted U.S. and EU antidumping and
antisubsidy measures in the past two years and has fueled patent disputes.
Link – Offshore Wind

China is winning the offshore wind race but it can change
Tom Carlson, energy analyst, 2-6-2014, “STATE: Though Hardly an Olympic Event, Race for Offshore
Wind Heats Up,” Advanced Energy Economy, http://blog.aee.net/state-though-hardly-an-olympic-
event-race-for-offshore-wind-heats-up Accessed 5-5-2014
Last month, AEE and more than 60 companies and partner organizations delivered a letter to Congress
calling for the extension of critical tax credits, including the production tax credit (PTC) and the ITC as an
alternative to the PTC for utility-scale wind power (typically seen as more valuable for offshore wind
than for on-shore), which expired at the close of 2013. As noted in the letter, federal tax credits have
played a key role in priming the pump for innovative energy technologies, dating back to the 1926
percentage depletion allowance for oil and gas extraction. The PTC/ITC credits remain critical to the U.S.
getting into the offshore wind game, which is well developed in Europe and getting ramped up in China
as well.¶ According to DOE, U.S. offshore wind resources are four times the nation’s current total
generation capacity. Despite this potential, if offshore wind development was an international olympic
event, the United States would be nowhere near the medal stand. Collectively, European nations have
built out over 6,500 MW, while China, Japan, and South Korea also have offshore wind turbines
installed. Besides Maine, many states are looking to change this dynamic.
Chinese Alternative Energy Good

Chinese development spills over to long run global development
5-2014
Many alternative-energy executives are hopeful, however, that China's involvement will bring the day
closer when marine power becomes a significant part of world energy supply.¶ "Sea-wave technology is a
rising star in the renewable-energy sector," says S.D.E. Chief Executive Shmuel Ovadia. What is
happening in China "might inspire other countries and other entities to support wave-energy
technologies."
China is crucial for the expansion of renewable energy

Jason Bellini, wsj, and Robin Young, npr, 4-1-2014, “China Bets On Harnessing The Ocean For Clean
Energy,” http://kvpr.org/post/china-bets-harnessing-ocean-clean-energy Accessed 4-22-2014
China's rapid industrialization and its dependence on coal have created heavy smog and climate change-
producing emissions, so much so that the country's premier, Li Keqiang, declared war on pollution in a
major speech last month. Part of the battle: speeding up development of solar and wind energy and
spending a lot of money tapping into ocean power.¶ And that's picked the interest of Jason Bellini of the
Wall Street Journal. Jason, the EU and South Korea have been harnessing the sea for years. So what's
China trying to do here?¶ JASON BELLINI: What's China trying to do here? Well, you really hit the nail in
the head with the pollution factor here, because really, coal is still the cheapest way to produce
electricity for them, and they have plenty of it. But China is emerging as an important testing ground for
some of these new ocean technologies for producing energy. And if some of these experiments work
out, they could produce electricity more cheaply than offshore wind farms, which would be a really big
deal.
Chinese alternative energies spillover to the global economy

Jason Bellini, wsj, and Robin Young, npr, 4-1-2014, “China Bets On Harnessing The Ocean For Clean
Energy,” http://kvpr.org/post/china-bets-harnessing-ocean-clean-energy Accessed 4-22-2014
BELLINI: Well, really, the biggest downside of it all is that it's so speculative, and it hasn't been brought
to scale. And so it's hard enough that any of this is really going to work, and whether it will be affordable
long term. But China's got the money to give this stuff a try. You know, one of the projects they've got
under study right now, again, is that tidal power wall. And one of the disadvantages is that it could hurt
the wildlife.¶ You know, you're really - you know, the 20-mile wall, you can really tamper with things.
They're trying to, you know, mitigate that by creating blades that would allow fish and eels and other
sea life to go through. But there could be unintended consequences when you're building something so
large through nature. But the upside of that is that if it works, it could produce as much electricity as 2
1/2 large nuclear reactors. Expensive, but that would be pretty exciting.¶ YOUNG: Well, and one would
think that that would ripple through the global economy.
Energy Key to China Econ

Chinese investment in clean energy is key to their growth
NIB, Nordic Investment Bank, 2009, “China stimulates the economy through green investments,”
http://www.nib.int/news_publications/cases_and_feature_stories/188/china_stimulates_the_economy
_through_green_investments Accessed 5-5-2014
China stimulates the economy through green investments¶ China is the biggest single loan client for the
Nordic Investment Bank outside the member countries. In an interview with NIB Newsletter, Ms Sun
Xiaoxia, Director General of the Ministry of Finance in China, explains how sustainable development has
become a common goal for her country and how NIB loans can contribute to this development.¶ Ms. Sun
Xiaoxia, Director General of the Ministry of Finance in China¶ Photo: MoF of China ¶ Sun Xiaoxia¶ China
has experienced rapid economic growth during recent years. What is the national strategy to make this
growth sustainable from an environmental point of view?¶ In fact, as early as in 1983, the Chinese
government made environmental protection an important national policy. It is a common understanding
among government officials and people that only environment-friendly development can stay
sustainable. This is why China was among the first group of countries who developed Agenda 21 after
the 1992 UN Environment and Development Conference. Economic growth, social development and
environmental protection remain the three pillars of Chinese sustainable development.¶ Against the
backdrop of the international financial crisis, the Chinese government is taking environmental
protection and promoting green development as an opportunity to transform business-as-usual ways of
economic development. In the 4 trillion Chinese yuan stimulus package, 2.1 trillion yuan has been
invested in energy efficiency, ecological conservation and environmental protection. Environmental
protection has been a positive driver for economic growth and employment. Green development has
thus become a common goal in China.
Chinese Growth Good – US Economy

China’s key to the US economy
US News & World Report, 6-12-2005, citing Richard Stanley, CEO of Citigroup China, “The Rise of a
New Power,” http://www.usnews.com/usnews/biztech/articles/050620/20china_3.htm, Accessed 5-5-
2014
The lopsided U.S. trade deficit with China and the "offshoring" of manufacturing work there have
focused attention on lost jobs and the fading fortunes of industries such as textiles, decimated by cheap
Chinese imports. But America's interdependence with China has benefits, too. Cheap goods keep U.S.
inflation and interest rates low. And the growth of China's service sector--likely to be heavily fueled by
American companies--will bring a well-heeled new consumer to the global market, with less threat to
American jobs. "China will be a second driver of economic growth in the world after the United States,"
says Richard Stanley, CEO of Citigroup China. Stanley claims the 2001-2002 U.S. recession would have
been worse if not for Chinese demand for goods from America and elsewhere.
Chinese Growth Good – War

Chinese economic collapse causes global economic decline and global war
Walter Russell Mead, Henry A. Kissinger Senior Fellow in U.S. Foreign Policy at the Council on Foreign
Relations, 2-4-2009, “Only Makes You Stronger: Why the recession bolstered America,”
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:f4weFT4x5L8J:www.freerepublic.com/focus/
news/2169866/posts+http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2169866/posts&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk
&gl=us&client=firefox-a Accessed 5-5-2014
The greatest danger both to U.S.-China relations and to American power itself is probably not that China will rise too far, too fast; it is
that the current crisis might end China's growth miracle. In the worst-case scenario, the turmoil in the international economy
will plunge China into a major economic downturn. The Chinese financial system will implode as loans to both state and private
enterprises go bad. Millions or even tens of millions of Chinese will be unemployed in a country without an effective social safety net.
The collapse of asset bubbles in the stock and property markets will wipe out the savings of a generation of the Chinese middle class. The
political consequences could include dangerous unrest--and a bitter climate of anti-foreign feeling that
blames others for China's woes. (Think of Weimar Germany, when both Nazi and communist politicians
blamed the West for Germany's economic travails.) Worse, instability could lead to a vicious cycle, as nervous investors
moved their money out of the country, further slowing growth and, in turn, fomenting ever-greater bitterness.
Economic collapse causes authoritarian transition

Relations, 2-4-2009, “Only Makes You Stronger: Why the recession bolstered America,”
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:f4weFT4x5L8J:www.freerepublic.com/focus/
news/2169866/posts+http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2169866/posts&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk
&gl=us&client=firefox-a Accessed 5-5-2014
Bad economic times can breed wars. Europe was a pretty peaceful place in 1928, but the Depression poisoned German
public opinion and helped bring Adolf Hitler to power. If the current crisis turns into a depression, what rough beasts
might start slouching toward Moscow, Karachi, Beijing, or New Delhi to be born?
Growth is key to limit Chinese social unrest which causes CCP lashout against the US
Susan Shirk, director of the University of California system-wide Institute on Global Conflict, 2007,
“China: Fragile Superpower,” 69. Accessed 5-5-2014
As China’s leaders well know, the greatest political risk lying ahead of them is the possibility of an
economic crash that throws millions of workers out of their jobs or sends millions of depositors to
withdraw their savings from the shaky banking system. A massive environmental or public health
disaster could also trigger regime collapse, especially if people’s lives are endangered by a media cover-
up imposed by Party authorities. Nationwide rebellion becomes a real possibility when large numbers of
people are upset about the same issue at the same time. Another dangerous scenario is a domestic or
international crisis in which the CCP leaders feel compelled to lash out against Japan, Taiwan, or the
United States because from their point of view not lashing out might endanger Party rule.”

Chinese economic collapses causes nuclear war
Tom Plate, Comm Prof @ UCLA, 6-30-2003, “Why Not Invade China?” Asia Pacific Media Network,
http://www.asiamedia.ucla.edu/TomPlate2003/06302003.htm Accessed 5-5-2014
But imagine a China disintegrating -- on its own, without neo-con or CIA prompting, much less outright
military invasion -- because the economy (against all predictions) suddenly collapses. That would knock
Asia into chaos. Refugees by the gazillions would head for Indonesia and other poorly border-patrolled
places, which don't want them and can't handle them; some in Japan might lick their chops for World
War II Redux and look to annex a slice of China. That would send small but successful Singapore and
Malaysia -- once Japanese colonies -- into absolute nervous breakdowns. India might make a grab for
Tibet, and while it does, Pakistan for Kashmir. Say hello to World War III Asia-style! That's why wise
policy encourages Chinese stability, security and economic growth -- the very direction the White House
now seems to prefer.
Social unrest has pushed China to the brink and eroded economic resiliency –
economic decline would give way to conflict and anarchic takeover
Gerald Warner, economic collapse could be the downfall of china’s rulers, 12-28-2008,
http://scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com/12700/Gerald-Warner-Economic-collapse-could.4825834.jp
Accessed 5-5-2014
Recent figures show Chinese industrial firms' profits standing at 2.41 trillion yuan, a 4.9% increase on the year, but this compares with a 36.7%
rise over the same period in 2007. TheChinese economy is slowing down inexorably and no matter how many hundreds of
billions of dollars it holds in US bonds, that will
not prevent massive unemployment and social unrest. The complacent
orthodoxy a year ago was that China could ride out a recession even over two years because of the size
of its internal market. That, however, confuses demographics with markets. Entire provinces are dirt-poor:
their populations do not have the disposable income to compensate for the loss of exports. The
extremes of wealth are extravagant. This is a communist country in which wealth is concentrated in the
hands of a small minority, while the poor remain not only impoverished but, increasingly, uprooted. The
flow of hundreds of millions into cities from the countryside, often evicted by corrupt property
developers in concert with party officials, is a ticking time-bomb. Even over the past decade, regarded as a
time of plenty, China was in a state of undeclared anarchy. In 1994 there were 8,700 "mass incidents" (ie riots
involving thousands of people); by 2005 there were 87,000 riots, since when the government has stopped publishing the data. In
2003 alone, three million people were involved in riots. This in a one-party state that prides itself – or formerly did – on enforcing strict Leninist
social control. The grievances have ranged from the compulsory birth control policy to unemployment, from rural evictions to official
corruption. Communist Party headquarters and police stations have been burned down at will. Theregime has lost control of the
rural areas. Any serious economic setback could bring down the entire house of cards, with urban riots
as well as rural. In default of a multi-party system, people riot as the only form of protest available to
them: in China, rioting is a substitute for elections. The regime no longer has the authority to repress its
people, but it refuses to surrender its monopoly of power. That is a fatal situation. Thanks to modern technology,
the people of China know what has happened to communist parties elsewhere in the world. If the economy falters seriously, the
party will be overthrown and the absence of an alternative government will convulse this massive nation
in enduring anarchy.

Chinese economic collapse causes ethnic tensions, democratic backsliding, and a
cross-strait war
Dan Lewis, Research Director of the Economic Research Council, 4-19-2007, “The nightmare of a
Chinese economic collapse,” World Finance, http://www.economicpolicycentre.com/wp-
content/uploads/2010/10/The-nightmare-of-a-Chinese-economic-collapse.pdf, Accessed 5-5-2014
A reduction in demand for imported Chinese goods would quickly entail a decline in China’s economic
growth rate. That is alarming. It has been calculated that to keep China’s society stable – ie to manage
the transition from a rural to an urban society without devastating unemployment - the minimum
growth rate is 7.2 percent. Anything less than that and unemployment will rise and the massive shift in
population from the country to the cities becomes unsustainable. This is when real discontent with
communist party rule becomes vocal and hard to ignore. It doesn’t end there. That will at best bring a
global recession. The crucial point is that communist authoritarian states have at least had some success
in keeping a lid on ethnic tensions – so far. But when multi-ethnic communist countries fall apart from
economic stress and the implosion of central power, history suggests that they don’t become successful
democracies overnight. Far from it. There’s a very real chance that China might go the way of Yugoslavia
or the Soviet Union – chaos, civil unrest and internecine war. In the very worst case scenario, a Chinese
government might seek to maintain national cohesion by going to war with Taiwan – whom America is
pledged to defend.
Chinese Growth Good – Taiwan

CCP will use nationalism to placate masses leads to Taiwan strike
Malou Innocent, Foreign Policy Analyst at the Cato Institute specializing in U.S. foreign policy toward
Pakistan and China, 2.27.2009,
http://www.realclearworld.com/articles/2009/02/china_peace_partner_or_warmong.html Accessed 5-
5-2014
For more than 30 years, free and open markets have propelled China's labor-driven growth and lifted
more than 200 million of its citizens out of rural poverty. But America's recent economic downturn has
hit China hard. Exports from its booming trade sector dropped 17.5 percent in January from a year ago.
In the past several months, an estimated 20 million rural Chinese migrant workers have lost their jobs.
China's rising unemployment could lead to increased social unrest, and challenge the authority of the
ruling Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Throughout 30 years of liberal reform, the CCP has justified its
authoritarian grip through the promise of economic advancement. If it can't maintain the steady growth
it's promised, experts fear the country's leaders might bolster their legitimacy by other means, such as
exploiting Chinese nationalism and directing popular discontent toward outside targets. Given the
severity of the financial crisis, China will be entering a stressful and possibly turbulent period. America
must be careful not to adopt policies that risk making the history of great power conflict come to
fruition.
Taiwan conflict causes nuclear war. –text modified

Chalmers Johnson, author of Blowback: The Costs and Consequences of American Empire, 5/14/2001,
The
Nation, Pg. 20 Accessed 5-5-2014
China is another matter. No sane figure in the Pentagon wants a war with China, and all serious US
militarists know that China’s minuscule nuclear capacity is not offensive but a deterrent against the
overwhelming US power arrayed against it (twenty archaic Chinese warheads versus more than 7,000
US warheads). Taiwan, whose status constitutes the still incomplete last act of the Chinese civil war,
remains the most dangerous place on earth. Much as the 1914 assassination of the Austrian crown
prince in Sarajevo led to a war that no wanted, a misstep in Taiwan by any side could bring the United
States and China into a conflict that neither wants. Such a war would bankrupt the United States, deeply
divide Japan and probably end in a Chinese victory, given that China is the world’s most populous
country and would be defending itself against a foreign aggressor. More seriously, it could easily
escalate into a nuclear [war]holocaust. However, given the nationalistic challenge to China’s sovereignty
of any Taiwanese attempt to declare its independence formally, forward-deployed US forces on China’s
borders have virtually no deterrent effect.
Chinese Growth Good – Sino-Russian War

Successful Chinese growth key to check Russian border war – escalates to nuclear
winter
Alexander Sharavin, 10-3-2001, Defense and Security Accessed 5-5-2014
Chinese propaganda has constantly been showing us skyscrapers in free trade zones in southeastern
China. It should not be forgotten, however, that some 250 to 300 million people live there, i.e. at most a
quarter of China’s population. A billion Chinese people are still living in misery. For them, even the
living standards of a backwater Russian town remain inaccessibly high. They have absolutely nothing to
lose. There is every prerequisite for “the final throw to the north.” The strength of the Chinese People’s
Liberation Army (CPLA) has been growing quicker than the Chinese economy. A decade ago the CPLA
was equipped with inferior copies of Russian arms from later 1950s to the early 1960s. However,
through its own efforts Russia has nearly managed to liquidate its most significant technological
advantage. Thanks to our zeal, from antique MiG-21 fighters of the earliest modifications and S-75 air
defense missile systems the Chinese antiaircraft defense forces have adopted Su-27 fighters and S-300
air defense missile systems. China’s air defense forces have received Tor systems instead of anti-aircraft
guns which could have been used during World War II. The shock air force of our “eastern brethren”
will in the near future replace antique Tu-16 and Il-28 airplanes with Su-30 fighters, which are not yet
available to the Russian Armed Forces! Russia may face the “wonderful” prospect of combating the
Chinese army, which, if full mobilization is called, is comparable in size with Russia’s entire population,
which also has nuclear weapons (even tactical weapons become strategic if states have common
borders) and would be absolutely insensitive to losses (even a loss of a few million of the servicemen
would be acceptable to China). Such a war would be more horrible than the World War II. It would
require from our state maximal tension, universal mobilization and complete accumulation of the army
military hardware, up to the last tank or a plane, in a single direction (we would have to forget such
“trifles” like Talebs and Basaev, but this does not guarantee success either). Massive nuclear strikes on
basic military forces and cities of China would finally be the only way out, what would exhaust Russia’s
armament completely. We have not got another set of intercontinental ballistic missiles and submarine-
based missiles, whereas the general forces would be extremely exhausted in the border combats. In the
long run, even if the aggression would be stopped after the majority of the Chinese are killed, our
country would be absolutely unprotected against the “Chechen” and the “Balkan” variants both, and
even against the first frost of a possible nuclear winter.
Chinese Growth Good – Sino-Indian War

Chinese recession sparks first strike against India
OneIndia News, 7-13-09, “China will strike India by 2012: Defence Expert”.
http://news.oneindia.in/2009/07/13/indo-china-war-by-2012-indian-defence-expert.html Accessed 5-5-
2014
A very interesting theory developed by a defense expert states that China will attack India by 2012. And that this will be an
attempt to divert the country's citizens' attention from the 'unprecedented' internal turmoil and
financial issues that is growing into a threatening situation for the Communists. "China will launch an
attack on India before 2012. There are multiple reasons for a desperate Beijing to teach India the final
lesson, thereby ensuring Chinese supremacy in Asia in this century," claims Bharat Verma, Editor of the Indian Defence
Review. Apart from the financial troubles such as unemployment, flight of capital worth billions of dollars,
depletion of its foreign exchange reserves and growing internal dissent brought in by recession; the
increasing 'irrelevance of Pakistan' that operates against India has the Communists nervous. "Above all, it is
worried over the growing alliance of India with the US and the West, because the alliance has the potential to create a technologically superior
counterpoise," Verma says. And according to him, China will choose to wage a war against 'pacifist India to achieve
multiple strategic objectives' by 2012.
Chinese economic slowdown causes global economic collapse

Michael Thorneman is a Bain & Co partner in Shanghai. Johnson Chng is a partner in Beijing. Andrew
Schwedel is a partner in New York, 2010, “Uncertain times for business in China and world,” Shanghai
Daily, http://www.shanghaidaily.com/article/?id=447053&type=Opinion#ixzz0xb9BTuPY Accessed 5-5-
2014
AS we finally emerge from the depths of the Great Recession, a lot of attention naturally focuses on
trying to handicap the speed and strength of the coming rebound. Some forecast a quick snap-back
driven by years of pent-up demand. Others see a slower, more grudging recovery defined by deep
unemployment and persistent credit issues. For anyone running a business, however, the more
important point is that no matter how fast the turnaround comes, success is unlikely to get easier. The
plates have shifted beneath the global economy in ways that will increase competitive pressure and
squeeze even the most recession-hardened business models. The winners coming out of this seismic
event will likely be those agile enough to spot the fault lines quickly and adjust their strategies
accordingly. China is a prime example. Businesses everywhere should closely track signs that the
country's strong growth may be cooling. Weak growth in Europe, coupled with the continent's debt
problems, uncertainty in the US, and the diminishing competitiveness of Chinese exports all are taking
their toll. Any slowing of the Chinese economy would have worldwide implications.
AT: China is Resilient

China is no longer resilient – economic stagnation is sufficient to cause regime
collapse.
Minxin Pei, adjunct senior associate in the Asia Program at the Carnegie Endowment, “Will the Chinese
Communist Party Survive the Crisis?” Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Foreign Affair, 3-12-
2009, http://www.carnegieendowment.org/publications/?fa=view&id=22847 Accessed 5-5-2014
Until recently, most leading China watchers thought the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) had become remarkably resilient.
Through learning and adaptation, it seemed, the world's largest and most powerful one-party regime had become politically nimble and skillful
enough to overcome difficulties that would have overwhelmed lesser autocratic rulers. For two decades, the party has compiled an impressive
list of achievements: at home it has kept the economy growing at a gravity-defying double-digit rate, while abroad it has pursued a pragmatic
foreign policy, avoiding confrontation with the United States and methodically gaining prestige and influence. Because of the global
economic crisis, however, Beijing is in trouble. The problems are numerous: China's exports are plummeting, tens of millions of
migrant laborers have lost their jobs, millions of college graduates cannot find employment, industrial overcapacity is threatening deflation, and
the once red-hot real estate sector has nose-dived. The country's faltering growth is posing the hardest test yet to the
CCP's resilience. To be sure, the Chinese economy has fared less badly than many others. The country's insulated banking sector remains
largely unscathed. Indeed, the government's fiscal balance sheet is strong enough to fund a $580 billion stimulus package (although only about
a quarter represents genuinely new fiscal spending). China's colossal $1.9 trillion in foreign exchange reserves provide a comfortable insurance
policy against global financial turmoil, and the country should be able to avoid an outright recession. But a
reduced annual growth
rate -- now down to about seven percent from over 11 percent a couple of years ago -- will bring enough trouble. Every year, the
Chinese labor market grows by more than ten million workers, the bulk of whom are leaving the countryside for urban areas in search of
employment. Each percentage point of GDP growth translates into roughly one million new jobs a year, which means that China needs GDP to
rise at least ten percent every year in order to absorb the influx of laborers. With no end to the global crisis in sight, many are wondering how
long China's economic doldrums will last and what the political impact of stagnation will be. The conventional wisdom is that low growth will
erode the party's political legitimacy and fuel social unrest as jobless migrants and college graduates vent their frustrations through riots and
protests. Although this forecast is not necessarily wrong, it is incomplete. Strong
economic performance has been the single
most important source of legitimacy for the CCP, so prolonged economic stagnation carries the danger of
disenchanting a growing middle class that was lulled into political apathy by the prosperity of the post-Tiananmen years.
Chinese S&T Good – Warming

Chinese alternative energy is key to solve warming
Stephen Merrill et al, phd in political science from Yale and Executive Director of the National
Academies’ Board on Science, Technology, and Economic Policy, 2010 “The Dragon and the elephant”,
Chapter 5 research and commercialization infrastructure, National Research Council, Committee on the
Research on the Competitiveness and Workforce Needs of U.S. Industry,” 40-42. Accessed 5-5-2014
Reducing energy intensity by this amount in China and India will require a variety of innovations but is feasible, Ahuja
said. Over the psat several decades, for instance, the average energy intensity of all countries around the world has been declining by 1.25
percent per year. In India, energy intensity has declined by about half over the past 30 years. Trevor Houser, a director at China Strategic
Advisory, discussed Chinese energy use and Chinese energy R&D (Figure 11). He noted that in 1980 the entire Chinese energy sector was
controlled by the government: without any profit motive at work, investment was based purely on government plans. Since then much of the
energy sector has been turned over to private corporations, resulting in large gains in efficiency. China’s energy intensity today is only one-third
of what it was in 1978. On the other hand, the private operators of energy companies have no incentives to limit emissions. The demand for
energy in China is increasing at a phenomenal rate, Houser noted. Currently China has about 680 gigawatts of installed generating capacity,
much of it added very recently. About 100 gigawatts was brought on line two years ago and another 100 gigawatts last year. It is projected that
by 2020, China will have installed another 1000 to 1300 gigawatts of capacity. To put that in perspective, the total current generating capacity
of the United States is now about 900 gigawatts. “When you have the power demand growing that fast, it creates
challenges for innovation because you are trying to throw whatever you have on the grid as quickly as
possible,” Houser observed. Large-scale blackouts in 2004 and 2005 pushed China to add power as quickly as possible, with very little
investment in R&D and reliance instead on the technology most familiar to Chinese energy companies—pulverized coal. The Chinese power
industry has become very adept at building coal-fired power plants in a period of shortage, taking about six months from state to finish. Last
year, coal accounted for 90 of the 100 gigawatts added by Chinese power producers, with hydro and wind accounting for the remainder. The
future will look very similar, Houser said, although Chinese companies are trying to diversify their power generating capacity somewhat. For
example, China will add about 40 gigawatts of nuclear power over the next 15 to 20 years, making the country the largest nuclear power
market in the world; but nuclear power will account for only 3 to 4 percent of the total installed capacity in 2020. Initially, the nuclear
technology will be supplied by Westinghouse, which will build several nuclear plants and then transfer the technology to local companies that
will build the next thirty plants. Hydroelectric power is the major hope for meeting China’s goal of supplying 15 percent of its energy demand
with renewable sources by 2020, Houser said. The plan is to have 240 gigagwatts of hydro power by then, but that is the equivalent of building
a new Three Gorges Dam every two years, which may not be politically feasible. Natural gas will be used to a certain extent in power
generation, but it is needed for other purposes, such as feedstock in chemical plants and for household uses. Thus coal will continue to be
the source of a large majority of the country’s power for the foreseeable future. Because China will account for so
much of the world’s new power generation capacity over the next couple of decades, according to Houser, the innovation choices
made in China will be crucial not just for that country but also for the rest of the world. He suggested that it is
crucially important to get the incentives for cleaner technologies right in China because the country’s huge
market and position as a global manufacturing base for energy technology. If china builds a large amount of capacity
with wind power, for example, world prices for that technology will drop significantly. But the same is true of dirtier technologies such as
pulverized coal. Costs will go down, encouraging increased worldwide use.
Extinction. [Gender Paraphrased]

Bill Henderson, Environmental Scientist. 8-16-2006. Counter Currents, “Runaway Global Warming
Denial.” http://www.countercurrents.org/cc-henderson190806.htm Accessed 5-5-2014
The scientific debate about human induced global warming is over but policy makers - let alone the
happily shopping general public - still seem to not understand the scope of the impending tragedy.
Global warming isn't just warmer temperatures, heat waves, melting ice and threatened polar bears.
Scientific understanding increasingly points to runaway global warming leading to human extinction. If
impossibly Draconian security measures are not immediately put in place to keep further emissions of
greenhouse gases out of the atmosphere we are looking at the death of billions, the end of civilization as
we know it and in all probability the end of [hu]man's several million year old existence, along with the
extinction of most flora and fauna beloved to man in the world we share.
Yes China Growth + Innovation

Chinese innovation and growth is high – returnees ensure
Stephen Merrill et al, phd in political science from Yale and Executive Director of the National
Academies’ Board on Science, Technology, and Economic Policy, 2010 “The Dragon and the elephant”,
Chapter 5 research and commercialization infrastructure, National Research Council, Committee on the
Research on the Competitiveness and Workforce Needs of U.S. Industry,” 40-42. Accessed 5-5-2014
Besides capital, Ratchford added, successful innovation also requires highly skilled technologists and
managers. In this regard, both China and India are increasingly well-endowed with hundreds of
thousands of well-trained people employed in R&D. China may lead India to some degree in R&D human
capital, but both countries unquestionably have access to scientists and engineers trained at some of
the best universities in the world and thus have resources for productive, internationally competitive
research and development.
Chinese economic growth stable now

People’s Daily 10-14-2010, “China's GDP to grow 9.9% in 2010: CASS,”
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90778/90862/7165928.html Accessed 5-5-2014
The Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS), a leading Chinese government think-tank, released a
report Tuesday on the country's economic situation and forecast the country's 2010 GDP would expand
by 9.9 percent year-on-year. The report also revealed consumption in 2010 is on growing trend, but
fixed-assets investments and export volume have declined. The growth setback for fixed-assets
investments predicted by CASS at 19.5 percent (13.8 percent lower than 2009) is to blame on a series of
macroeconomic policies since April targeted at the soaring housing prices, which posed significant
pressure on the property development sector. As to the decline in exports, factors like a financial crisis-
struck US economy, due to it being a large China-made importer and the yuan's appreciation were the
lead-ups to China's exports' deficit in the fourth quarter. The report also predicted that under a stable
macroeconomic policy, economic growth in 2011 is expected to reach about 11 percent.
Aging crisis won't collapse the Chinese economy.

Richard Jackson, senior fellow and director of the Global Aging Initiative, 4-20-2010, “The Aging of
China,” http://csis.org/publication/aging-china-0 Accessed 5-5-2014
Q4: Will the aging of its population halt China’s economic rise? A4: The aging of China’s population is a
dangerous speed bump, but it need not result in a crash. In any case, the period of peak danger lies over
the horizon in the 2020s. By then, China will already have overtaken the United States as the world’s
largest economy. In fact, our latest projections show that the transition will happen in 2017—much
earlier than previously expected due to the differential impact of the economic crisis on GDP growth in
China and the United States.
No China War
China’s rise is peaceful
Barry Desker, Staff writer for the Straits Times, 6-25-2008, “Why war is unlikely in Asia,”
http://www.asiaone.com/News/the%2BStraits%2BTimes/Story/A1Story20080625-72716.html Accessed
5-5-2014
But the rise of China does not automatically mean that conflict is likely. First, a more assertive China does not mean a more
aggressive China. Beijing appears content to press its claims peacefully (if forcefully) through existing avenues
and institutions. Second, when we examine the Chinese military buildup, we find that there may be less there than some might have us
believe. The Chinese war machine is not quite as threatening - although still worrisome - as some fear. Instead of Washington's
perspectives shaping Asia-Pacific affairs coercively, the rise of China is likely to see a new paradigm in international affairs. The nascent 'Beijing
Consensus', for want of a better term, would consist of the following attributes: The leadership role of the authoritarian state, a technocratic
approach to governance, an emphasis on social rights and obligations over individual rights, a reassertion of the principles of national
sovereignty and non-interference, support for freer markets and stronger regional and international institutions. The argument that there is an
emerging 'Beijing Consensus' is not premised on the rise of the 'East' and decline of the 'West', as sometimes seemed to be the sub-text of the
earlier 1990s 'Asian values' debate. But like the previous debate, this new debate will reflect alternative philosophical traditions. At issue is the
appropriate balance between the rights of the individual and those of the state. This debate will highlight the values China and other states in
the region share. By contrast, one conventional American view is that Sino-American competition will result in 'intense security competition
with considerable potential for war' in which most of China's neighbours 'will join with the United States to contain China's power'. Asia's
shared values are likely to reduce the risk of such conflict and result in regional pressure for an
accommodation of and engagement with China, rather than a confrontation with it. In its interactions with the region, China
itself is beginning to be interested in issues of proper governance, the development of domestic institutions and the
strengthening of regional institutions. Nor is Chinese policy unchanging, even on the issue of sovereignty. For example, there has
been an evolution in Chinese thinking on the question of freedom of passage through the straits of Malacca and Singapore. China supported
the claims of the littoral states to sovereign control over the straits when the Law of the Sea Convention was concluded in 1982. But its
increasing dependence on imported oil shipped through the straits has led to a shift in favour of burden-sharing, the recognition of the rights of
user states and the need for cooperation between littoral states and user states. China has also revised its earlier advocacy of strict non-
intervention and non-interference. Its support for global initiatives such as peacekeeping and nuclear non-proliferation - as well as its
restrained use of its veto in the UN Security Council and its active role in the World Trade Organisation - indicates it is aware that responsible
participation in global institutions can shape perceptions of a rising China. Beijing has also greatly lowered the
tone and rhetoric
of its strategic competition with the US. This is significant as most South-east Asian states prefer not to have to choose between
the US and China, and have adopted 'hedging' strategies in their relationships with the two powers. The People's Liberation Army (PLA) is
certainly in the midst of the most ambitious upgrading of its combat capabilities since the early 1960s. Its current defence doctrine is centred
on the ability to fight 'Limited Local Wars'. The emphasis is on pre-emption, surprise and shock value, given that the earliest stages of conflict
may be crucial to the outcome of a war. Thus the PLA has pursued the acquisition of weapons for asymmetric warfare. It mimics the US military
in terms of the ambition and scope of its transformational efforts - and therefore challenges the US military at its own game. Nevertheless,
China is still at least two decades behind the US in terms of its defence capabilities. It is certainly acquiring new and better equipment, but its
current military buildup is indicative of an evolutionary, steady-state and sustaining - rather than disruptive or revolutionary
- innovation and change.
Fishing Industry DA
THESIS: The commercial fishing industry is keeping afloat now and working to meet sustainability
reforms. They know there will be a short-term hit in profits with new regulations, so revenue in the
interim is essential to meet reforms. The alternative forces overfishing and undermines an essential
component of the U.S. Economy.
1NC Fishing Industry Shell 1/2
A. The fishing industry is beginning to recover with new revenues

Kyle Stucker, Staff Writer, May 04, 2014, “U.S. fisheries are in recovery,” Seacoast Online,
http://www.seacoastonline.com/articles/ 20140504-NEWS-405040352, Accessed 5/4/2014
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration released two reports this week that show
positive signs for the national fishing industry, although local fishermen say New Hampshire should reel
in its optimism about the findings. The reports, "Status of U.S. Fisheries 2013" and "Fisheries Economics
of the United States 2012," indicate two fish stocks were rebuilt to target levels last year and that
national commercial and recreational saltwater fishing generated more than $199 billion in sales in
2012, a gain of 7 percent over the previous year.
B. Revenues are key. Current regulations mean short-term losses are inevitable
David Brodwin, cofounder and board member of American Sustainable Business Council, March 21,
2014, “Buying Into Sustainability, Hook, Line and Sinker,” U.S. News,
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/economic-intelligence/2014/03/21/how-to-make-fishing-sustainable,
Accessed 5/19/2014
But enforcement is not the only problem, and perhaps not even the biggest. The real problem is
financing. In order for fishers to switch from destructive fishing to sustainable fishing they need to run
losses for a few years to allow stocks to recover. Worse, while accepting harsh catch limits they must
invest in new equipment to catch mostly the right kind and size of fish. Borrowing can be challenging
because many fishers are heavily leveraged, and they present poor credit risks.
C. The fishing industry is key to the economy on multiple levels

Eileen Sobeck, Assistant Administrator for NOAA Fisheries, 2014, Status of Stocks 2013: Annual
Report to Congress on the Status of U.S. Fisheries, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/fisheries_eco/status_of_fisheries/archive/
2013/status_of_stocks_2013_web.pdf, Accessed 5/7/2014
Sustainable management of our fish stocks is critically important to the nation’s economy. Commercial
fishing supports fishermen and fishing communities and provides Americans with a local source of
healthy food. Recreational fishing is an important social activity for individuals and families, and is a
critical economic contributor to local communities and regional economies. Combined, U.S. commercial
and recreational saltwater fishing generated more than $199 billion in sales and supported 1.7 million
jobs in 2012. Subsistence fishing provides an essential, culturally significant food source for many
people.
1NC Fishing Industry Shell 2/2

D. Major economic downturn leads to war
Relations, February 4, 2009, “Only Makes You Stronger: Why the recession bolstered America,” The
New Republic, http://www.cfr.org/world/only-makes-you-stronger-why-recession-bolstered-
america/p18340, Accessed 5/20/2014
None of which means that we can just sit back and enjoy the recession. History may suggest that
financial crises actually help capitalist great powers maintain their leads--but it has other, less reassuring
messages as well. If financial crises have been a normal part of life during the 300-year rise of the liberal
capitalist system under the Anglophone powers, so has war. The wars of the League of Augsburg and the
Spanish Succession; the Seven Years War; the American Revolution; the Napoleonic Wars; the two
World Wars; the cold war: The list of wars is almost as long as the list of financial crises. Bad economic times
can breed wars. Europe was a pretty peaceful place in 1928, but the Depression poisoned German public opinion
and helped bring Adolf Hitler to power. If the current crisis turns into a depression, what rough beasts might start
slouching toward Moscow, Karachi, Beijing, or New Delhi to be born? The U nited States may not, yet, decline,
but, if we can't get the world economy back on track, we may still have to fight .
Uniqueness
Commercial Fisheries Are Rebounding

The commercial fishing industry is rebounding now
ScienceDaily, Staff Writer, April 29, 2014, "Strong economic gains from fishing, continued
improvement in fish stocks, report shows," Science Daily,
U.S. commercial and recreational saltwater fishing generated more than $199 billion in sales in 2012, a
gain of seven percent over the previous year, with the economic impact of fishing jobs increasing three
percent from 2011 to 2012, according to a new NOAA Fisheries economics report. Further, two more
fish stocks were rebuilt to target levels in 2013, bringing the number of rebuilt U.S. marine fish stocks to
34 since 2000, according to another NOAA Fisheries report also released today. Taken together, the two
reports, Fisheries Economics of the United States 2012 and the Status of U.S. Fisheries 2013, show
positive trends in the steady rebuilding of the country's federally managed fisheries off our coasts, and
the important role fisheries contribute to the United State economy.
Fisheries are rebounding and this is already helping the fishing industry
Brad Plumer, Senior Editor, May 8, 2014, “How the US stopped its fisheries from collapsing,” Vox,
http://www.vox.com/2014/5/8/ 5669120/how-the-us-stopped-its-fisheries-from-collapsing, Accessed
5/20/2014
This rebound has been a boon to the fishing industry: US commercial fishermen caught 9.6 billion
pounds of seafood in 2012, the second highest total in more than a decade (2011 was the highest year).
The rebound in US fisheries was also noted last year in a separate study by the Natural Resources
Defense Council, which studied 44 key fish stocks that had been seriously depleted and found that about
64 percent showed significant signs of recovery.
The fishing industry is booming with millions of new jobs and billions of growth
ScienceDaily, Staff Writer, April 29, 2014, "Strong economic gains from fishing, continued
improvement in fish stocks, report shows," Science Daily,
According to the economics report, commercial and recreational fishing supported approximately 1.7
million jobs in 2012, the most recent year for which data are available, a gain over 2011's 1.6 million.
The commercial fishing industry -- harvesters, processors and dealers, and wholesalers and retailers --
generated $141 billion in sales, $39 billion in income, and supported 1.3 million jobs in 2012 in fishing
and across the broader economy. Recreational fishing generated $58 billion in sales, $19 billion in
income, and supported 381,000 jobs in 2012 in fishing and across the broader economy. The annual
economics report also breaks down the sales, income and job figures for each coastal state. The five
states that generated the most commercial fishing jobs in 2012 were California, Massachusetts, Florida,
Washington and Alaska. The five states that generated the most recreational fishing jobs were Florida,
North Carolina, Louisiana, Texas and New Jersey.
Commercial Fisheries Are Rebounding

The fishing industry is gaining strength now
(NOAA) National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, April 29, 2014, “Two new NOAA reports
show strong economic gains from fishing, continued improvement in fish stocks,”
http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2014/20140429_statusofstocks.html, Accessed 5/19/2014
According to the economics report, commercial and recreational fishing supported approximately 1.7
million jobs in 2012, the most recent year for which data are available, a gain over 2011’s 1.6 million.
The commercial fishing industry — harvesters, processors and dealers, and wholesalers and retailers —
generated $141 billion in sales, $39 billion in income, and supported 1.3 million jobs in 2012 in fishing
and across the broader economy.
Economic Growth Increasing Now

The current slump is weather related and short term. We are set for a solid rebound
CBS News, Staff Writer, May 16, 2014, “U.S. economy firms, but investors remain wary,”
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/u-s-economy-firms-but-investors-remain-wary/, Accessed 5/26/2014
Many economists suspect the U.S. economy shrank in the first three months of the year, but attribute
that to harsh winter weather. They are confident of a big expansion in the current quarter. Forecasting
firm Macroeconomic Advisers expects GDP of 3.8 percent for the period. A raft of recent reports
suggests they might be right. Employers added 288,000 jobs in April, the most in 2 ½ years. Americans
have stepped up their spending. Forecasters think the strong labor market and a recent uptick in wages
will bolster consumer sentiment in the months to come. "Consumer spending will increase at a
moderate pace, thanks to increasing confidence, modest income growth, pent-up demand, better
access to credit, and greater household wealth from rising stock prices and home values," economists
with PNC Financial Services Group predicted in a note to clients.
The economy is improving on multiple levels

David Frank, Research Analyst for Seeking Alpha, May 26, 2014, “Why The U.S. Economy Is
Recovering,” http://seekingalpha.com/article/2237623-why-the-u-s-economy-is-recovering, Accessed
5/264/2014
The U.S. economy is improving despite a brief stall from a harsh winter which saw sub artic
temperatures and storms paralyze much of the country. We are seeing modestly higher inflation and an
improving job market which is helping sentiment. However, this improvement could be bad for the rest
of the world. Data, last week, showed that consumer prices in the U.S. for April recorded their biggest
increase in nearly 10 months. We are noticing something different in the rest of the world - Japan, which
has been falling, and low prices as well in the Eurozone. The U.S. stock markets also continue to
outperform their global peers as growth climbs back up.
Labor market and consumer spending will strengthen the economy

Alain Sherter, Staff Writer, May 19, 2014, “Why the long face? It's the economy, stupid,” Money
Watch, http://www.cbsnews.com/news/why-the-long-face-its-the-economy-stupid/, Accessed
5/264/2014
Prospects in the U.S. look brighter. Although millions of Americans remain jobless, with the long-term
unemployed in particular continuing to struggle, the labor market has started to expand in earnest.
Consumer spending is expected to grow over the rest of the year, with demand for things like cars and
health care services especially strong, according to analysts at Goldman Sachs (GS).
Economic Growth Increasing Now

U.S. economic growth trades off with China
David Frank, Research Analyst for Seeking Alpha, May 26, 2014, “Why The U.S. Economy Is
Recovering,” http://seekingalpha.com/article/2237623-why-the-u-s-economy-is-recovering, Accessed
5/264/2014
The U.S. economy should only begin to accelerate further as we head into the summer months. While
this is good news for the Federal Reserve and the U.S. economy in general, it could also pose some risks
to the rest of the world. As the world's largest economy improves, it will become less of a factor behind
global growth. Consumer spending is not likely to be robust and demand is likely to be for domestic
goods rather than imports. This will hurt exporting nations, like China and Japan. These economies,
particularly the emerging market economies, are reliant on the U.S. and will make them vulnerable
going forward.
Links
Links – Aquaculture
Aquaculture won’t solve overfishing and displaces commercial fishers
Slow Food, Staff Writer, 2013, “Aquaculture,”
http://www.slowfood.com/slowfish/pagine/eng/pagina.lasso?-id_pg=44, Accessed 5/20/2014
Aquaculture is fastest-growing area of food production in the world. Often suggested as the future of
the fish industry, in its current state it is NOT a solution to overfishing. While in certain places some
forms of aquaculture can provide an important food source, they must be developed in a responsible
way. The rapid growth of intensive aquaculture for species with high commercial value intended for
export, such as salmon and shrimp, has already caused dreadful environmental damage and the
displacement of many local farmers and fishers whose livelihoods have been destroyed.
Increasing aquaculture production undermines biodiversity and hurts local fishers

The World Wildlife Federation, Staff Writer, 2014, “Marine Problems: Aquaculture,”
http://wwf.panda.org/ about_our_earth/blue_planet/problems/aquaculture/, Accessed 5/19/2014
Aquaculture is a huge industry, and the world's fastest growing food sector. It's worth a massive US$56
billion globally and provides one-third of the fish people consume. When done properly, some forms of
aquaculture can indeed help take pressure off wild fisheries and provide needed income to coastal
communities. However, as production rises, so too can aquaculture's impacts on the environment and
wild marine species, through: competition for space; pollution; escaped farmed fish; parasites and
disease, the use of wild-caught fish for fish feed, the use of wild-caught fish for farming, conflict with
predators, such as seabirds, seals, and starfish. The severity of these impacts depends upon the species
being farmed. Oyster and clam farms, for example, have fewer impacts than shrimp and salmon farms,
which in turn have fewer impacts than tuna farms. However, the detrimental impacts can be huge, and
have even proven disastrous in some parts of the world. Impacts on local marine biodiversity can in turn
cause problems for local communities that rely on marine resources for their livelihoods.
Aquaculture uses more commercial fish for food that they produce
Slow Food, Staff Writer, 2013, “Aquaculture,”
http://www.slowfood.com/slowfish/pagine/eng/pagina.lasso?-id_pg=44, Accessed 5/20/2014
In many fish farms, enormous quantities of forage fish, fishmeal and fish oil are used to feed the farmed
fish. Aquaculture often involves fattening up carnivorous fish such as many species of salmon and tuna.
Clearly the operation makes sense from a commercial point of view, as the farmed fish command much
higher prices than the fish used to feed them, even when these forage fish (sardines, mackerel and
herring, for example) can also be eaten by humans. But in the end the quantity of fish used for feed is
greater than the quantity produced, and the pressure on wild fish stocks remains high. Given these
issues, aquaculture cannot be seen as an alternative to fishing, particularly in developing countries,
where very few people can afford products such as smoked salmon.
Links – Marine Reserves / Marine Protected Areas (MPAs)

Marine reserves hurt the fishing industry, even if the plan increases fish stocks
Ragnar Arnason, Department of Economics, University of Iceland, 2001, "Marine Reserves: Is There
An Economic Justification?," Economics of Marine Protected Areas, Fisheries Centre Research Reports,
University of British Columbia, p. 27
Independent of the fisheries management system in place, marine reserves increase biomass and,
depending on their size, may or may not increase harvest and fishing effort. The introduction of marine
reserves in the competitive fishery is more likely to reduce rather than increase the flow of net benefits
from the fishery. Taking into account the inevitable costs of implementing and enforcing marine reserve
restrictions, this probability is further increased. Thus, in spite of a certain increase in stock biomass and
a possible increase in harvest volume and employment (increased fishing effort), introducing marine
reserves in the competitive fishery seems rather unattractive as a general proposition.
Marine protected areas significantly undermine commercial fishing yields

Science Daily, Staff Writer, July 24, 2012, “Marine protected areas: what is their impact on fishing?,”
Institut de Recherche pour le Développement (IRD),
In contrast, outside the perimeter, in the zones open to fishermen, the fish biomass is increasing slightly.
The researchers' models have demonstrated a migratory phenomenon that represents 20% of the
biomass in marine reserves. In Bamboung, this effect can be observed up to 2.5km from the edge of the
protected area, and is seen in the growing numbers of catfish and rays caught. The influence of the
reserve is even more noticeable in Banc d'Arguin, where it is estimated that commercial fishing catches
are 25% higher on the edges of the protected perimeter. The improvement thus becomes even more
significant as the size of the protected zone increases. However, it falls in relation to distance from the
protected area perimeter. From an economic point of view, marine protected areas thus have a
significant impact in terms of fishing activities and yields. But the study has also shown that for
fishermen, the gains experienced outside the area only compensates in volume for the loss of activity
within, although with a higher market value due to the increase in the number of rarer species.
Marine protected areas fail to boost adjacent commercial fisheries

Katie Valentine, Staff Writer, February 7, 2014, “Most Marine Protected Areas Don’t Successfully
Protect Marine Life, Study Says,” Think Progress,
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/02/07/3260781/marine-protected-areas-working/, Accessed
5/20/2014
Most marine protected areas aren’t doing their jobs to project fish and other aquatic life, according to
new research from the University of Tasmania. The study, published this week in Nature, found that 59
percent of the marine protected areas (MPAs) looked at by researchers were “not ecologically
distinguishable from fished sites.” MPAs are set up to protect marine life and habitat but operate under
vastly different rules and regulations from region to region — some even allow seabed mining, and most
allow some level of fishing. The study looked at five markers that determine the success of an MPA: how
much fishing is allowed in the MPA, how well enforced that fishing rule is, the age and size of the MPA,
and whether the MPA is an isolated environment or surrounded by habitat that was desirable to aquatic
life but isn’t in the protected zone.
Links – Marine Spatial Planning (MSP)

MSP doesn’t maintain the fishing industry. It allows “no-take” and “no development”
zones that prevent fishing
Jay Walmsley, Senior Environmental Analyst, Golder Associated Ltd Wednesday, June 26, 2013,
“Marine spatial planning draws attention,” Offshore Engineer,
http://www.oedigital.com/component/k2/item/3338-marine-spatial-planning-draws-attention,
Accessed 5/23/2014
A first step in marine spatial planning is identifying the area of ocean that will be managed and mapping
existing ocean uses, such as marine conservation areas, shipping, oil and gas, renewable energy,
tourism, and fishing. Following that, goals and objectives need to be developed for the area, based on
input from ocean users and other stakeholders, including conservation authorities. This provides the
foundation for developing future-use plans. Often these are based on priorities such as conservation of
sensitive or representative marine ecosystems, or maintenance of shipping lanes, or development of
renewable energy resources, while maintaining the fishing industry. A final step may or may not include
zoning the ocean for particular uses in particular areas. A good example of this is establishing regulated
marine protected areas with “no-take zones” for fishing or “no development zones” for other industries.
A step-by-step approach to marine spatial planning can be found in the guidebook developed by Fanny
Douvere and Charles Ehler of UNESCO, Marine Spatial Planning: A Step-By-Step Approach Toward
Ecosystem-Based Management.
Links – Offshore Wind

Wind farms drive up costs for fishers and denies prime fishing ground
Prior to area closures fishers will have made decisions on spatial locations of operation on the basis of
past catch rates. Therefore it can be assumed that in the case of a wind farm development, boats
successfully utilising that ground at particular seasons will be forced to search for new less familiar
grounds, potentially incorporating greater fuel costs and less predictable catches during that period if
MRE farms are located within prime fishing areas. Hiddink et al modelled the effect of redistribution of
beam trawl effort on benthic communities following assumed area closures in the North Sea using this
assumption that fishers select grounds based on their knowledge of past catches.
Commercial fishers are trying to meet sustainability goals but wind farms would
seriously undermine the industry
Christopher Walsh, Staff Writer, May 15, 2014 “Fishermen Want Say on Wind Farm,” East Hampton
Star, http://easthamptonstar.com/ Government/2014515/Fishermen-Want-Say-Wind-Farm, Accessed
5/20/2014
Bonnie Brady, executive director of the Long Island Commercial Fishing Association, believes that
construction methodologies, and offshore wind farms themselves, pose a significant threat to fish
habitats, spawning, and migratory patterns. Citing studies by the United States Interior Department’s
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management and the experiences of the commercial fishing industry in Europe,
where more than 2,000 wind turbines are in operation, she is urging a greater role for fishing interests in
the decision-making process. “We’re trying to sustainably grow the fishing economy,” said Ms. Brady,
who lives in Montauk. “You don’t destroy something in the name of green energy. To destroy a
sustainable industry in the name of sustainability is insane.”
Even if wind farms boost fish stocks, fishers still suffer

Offshore wind farm development is currently centred in Europe where a number and variety of fishing
fleets exist. While wind farms presence as de facto marine protected areas may enhance local fish
stocks, the loss of available ground has been identified as a significant impact on inshore and offshore
fishing fleets. Loss of fishing ground will unavoidably lead some redistribution of fishing effort.
Consideration of effort displacement, and the knock on effects on area closures, is increasingly being
called for when considering the overall ecological impacts of area closures on a wider region.
Links – Offshore Wind

Offshore wind projects significantly interfere with commercial fishing in multiple ways
Ted Griset, Staff Writer, July 1, 2012, “Can offshore wind and commercial fishing co-exist,” Earth
Techling, http://earthtechling.com/ 2012/07/can-offshore-wind-energy-and-fishing-coexist/, Accessed
5/20/2014
Others worry that offshore wind projects will harm fish populations and the human dependent on
them. Whether and how each wind tower is mounted on the sea bed may impact groundfish; the noise
and acoustic pressure created by pile-driving can affect fish and marine mammals. Even deepwater
floating offshore wind platforms will likely be moored to the sea floor in some manner. Sea bed habitat
may also be impacted by the installation of the submarine cables needed to connect each generator to
electrical substations, as well as by the cables needed to transmit that power ashore. These cables may
limit fishermen’s ability to trawl the bottom in the affected area, and their electromagnetic fields could
affect marine species. An offshore wind project may also impact fisheries through increased marine
traffic, from heavy construction vessels to ships needed to service the project. At the same time,
fishermen may be excluded from the areas within or near a project; depending on their design and
applicable regulations, offshore wind projects may require setback areas or safety zones. Tall towers
may also limit the usefulness of radar, critical to safe navigation in foggy waters. These concerns have
led some fishermen and trade associations to oppose offshore wind development. Some may be
resolved through science, whether by documenting projects’ effects on fish populations or by designing
project elements to minimize those impacts. Others fall more squarely in the realm of policy.
Offshore wind takes money out of the pockets of fishers

Mark Harrington, Staff Writer, April 8, 2014, “Fishing, energy interests spar over possible LI wind farm
lease,” Newsday, http://www.newsday.com/long-island/fishing-energy-interests-spar-over-possible-
long-island-wind-farm-lease-1.7644239, Accessed 5/20/2014
Tensions between ocean fishing interests and offshore-wind-energy planners were evident at a meeting
in Montauk Tuesday as federal regulators set the stage for leasing hundreds of miles of the Atlantic for
wind farms. Regulators at the U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management got an occasional earful from
local fishermen and -women who worry the plans could damage or close off large swaths of fishing
grounds. "Any adverse impacts these windmills have are going to come out of fishermen's pockets," said
Dan Farnham, a Montauk tile fisherman, adding that potential effects are largely unknown.
Widespread wind development undermines the fishing industry

Michele Hallowell, Guest columnist for Commercial Fisheries News, May 2013, “Ocean wind farms:
Challenges on horizon,” http://www.seakeeper.org/?page_id=1298, Accessed 5/20/2014
The intersection of ocean wind energy development and commercial fishing is about to become very
real for US fishermen. In federal waters alone, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) has
created 11 wind energy areas (WEAs) along the East Coast to date and more are anticipated. BOEM will
issue leases for the outer continental shelf in these WEAs to ocean wind energy developers for up to 23
different wind farm projects. These are in addition to the five active leases BOEM already issued
between 2005 and 2012, as well as other areas developers are eyeing. These numbers also do not
account for wind energy development occurring in state waters. The sheer expansiveness of ocean wind
development means it will affect almost all commercial fishermen. For perspective, the Massachusetts
WEA and Rhode Island/Massachusetts WEA, which neighbor one another and form a contiguous area,
cover 1,591 square miles of the ocean. The entire state of Rhode Island covers only 1,214 square miles.
Links - Regulations
Regulations are too stringent now
Brad Plumer, Senior Editor, May 8, 2014, “How the US stopped its fisheries from collapsing,” Vox,
http://www.vox.com/2014/5/8/ 5669120/how-the-us-stopped-its-fisheries-from-collapsing, Accessed
5/20/2014
Indeed, the current system is far from perfect — and there's a lot of debate about how to improve it.
For instance, Atkinson says, there's not always great scientific information about many of the fish
species in the Southeast and Gulf of Mexico. That makes setting catch limits more difficult. What's more,
this area is dominated by recreational fishing, which is a lot harder to regulate than areas like the Pacific
where fishing is dominated by a smaller number of commercial ships. On the flip side, some fishing
groups have argued that the rules are too stringent — particularly the requirement that overfished
stocks be rebuilt in just 10 years. A National Academy of Sciences report last fall agreed that this limit
was somewhat arbitrary — although it concluded that the regulations overall had helped rebuild US
fisheries.
The costs of failed regulations and management outweigh revenues

Carl Safina, founding president of the Blue Ocean Institute, Summer 2009, “A Future for U.S.
Fisheries,” Issues in Science & Technology, http://issues.org/25-4/safina-4/, Accessed 5/19/2014
For the fishing industry in the United States, and for the fishery resources on which the industry
depends, there is good news and bad news. Bad news still predominates, as many commercial fishers
and their communities have suffered severe financial distress and many fish stocks have declined
considerably in numbers. Poor management by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), which
regulates the fishing industry, and some poor choices by many fishers have contributed to the problems.
But there are some bright spots, small and scattered, that suggest that improvements are possible.
Starting with the bad news, the federal government’s fisheries management remains primitive,
simplistic, and, in important cases, ineffectual, despite a fund of knowledge and conceptual tools that
could be applied. In many regions—New England and the Pacific Northwest, among others—failed
management costs more than the receipts from fisheries. This does not suggest that management
should be given up as a lost cause, leaving the industry in a free-for-all, although this strategy might, in
fact, be cheaper and not much less effective.
Regulations defy common sense and hurt fisheries

Jonathan Elias, News anchor and award-winning journalist, November 25, 2013, “Fishing Industry At
Risk Of Disappearing In New England,” WBZ-TV News, http://boston.cbslocal.com/2013/11/25/fishing-
industry-at-risk-of-disappearing-in-new-england/, Accessed 5/19/2014
The industry that built New England is at risk of disappearing. Fishing has always been a mainstay, but
things have drastically changed. Environmentalists say global warming has depleted fish stocks.
Fishermen argue there are fish, and regulations that defy common sense. “It’s killing me,” says Joe
Orlando. “I come down to the dock every day and look at my boat rusting away.” Joe Orlando has fished
off Gloucester his whole life. A couple years ago WBZ-TV was at sea with him and his son. At that time
he said federal regulators were hurting business. Now he says they’re ending it. All because federal
scientists say there is no cod left in these waters. “It’s not about fish, we just want to know why they are
doing this to us,” Orlando says. “We have no trouble catching fish. Something is wrong some place.” One
fisherman told WBZ-TV that everybody has their boat up for sale. Another said, “A lot of the regulation I
see serves no purpose other than to put me and my fellow fishermen out of business.”
Links - Regulations
Fisheries management is a failure
IPSO, International Programme on the State of The Ocean, October 3, 2013, “Greater, Faster, Closer,
Latest review of science reveals ocean in critical state from cumulative impacts,”
http://www.stateoftheocean.org/pdfs/IPSO-PR-2013-FINAL.pdf, Accessed 5/1/2014
Continued overfishing is serving to further undermine the resilience of ocean systems, and contrary to
some claims, despite some improvements largely in developed regions, fisheries management is still
failing to halt the decline of key species and damage to the ecosystems on which marine life depends. In
2012 the UN FAO determined that 70% of world fish populations are unsustainably exploited, of which
30% have biomass collapsed to less than 10% of unfished levels. A recent global assessment of
compliance with Article 7 (fishery management) of the 1995 FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible
Fisheries, awarded 60% of countries a “fail” grade, and saw no country identified as being overall
“good”.
Links – Tidal / Wave Energy

Tidal energy closes off areas to fishing
Nausherwan Ahmed Aamir, Staff Writer, February 16, 2014, “In search of energy solutions,” The
Nation, http://www.nation.com.pk/ business/16-Feb-2014/in-search-of-energy-solutions, Accessed
5/3/2014
Tidal energy is also non-polluting and does not contribute to global warming. It is beneficial because
unlike most of the other sources of energy, tides are reliable. Also, since the turbines used for power
generation are submerged underwater, it does not cause visual pollution. However, it can only be used
in certain areas with the favorable conditions. Ironically, the turbines can be damaged by very strong
tides. Marine life is also disturbed. Altogether, the usage of the sea for other economic activities is
limited due to the installation of turbines.
Wave energy is unproven and trades off with commercial fishing

Alan Walker, Ph.D. and Policy Advisor at The Royal Academy of Engineering, September 2011, “The
Future of Marine Renewables,” Engineering the Future,
https://www.raeng.org.uk/societygov/policy/responses/pdf/EtF_ECC_marine_renweables_response.pdf
, Accessed 4/28/2014
Wave energy is at an early stage of development. There are challenging technical and logistical problems
to be solved and, at this stage of development, it is not clear that these can be overcome at an
acceptable price. Wave energy converters are, by necessity, massive structures at the sea surface where
they would impact commercial and recreational use of the sea and would be subject to the full force of
storms.
New wave energy projects will displace commercial fishers

The Daily Astorian, Staff Writer, November 19, 2007, “Wave energy projects crash into ocean
fishing turf,” http://www.dailyastorian.com/news/wave-energy-projects-crash-into-ocean-fishing-
turf/article_bf264c44-6d49-5007-b229-f6b078f17b78.html?mode=story, Accessed 5/20/2014
Nine different wave energy studies are targeting space in the state's territorial waters, many of them on
sandy ocean bottoms that overlap with productive fishing grounds. Even though most of the proposals
are aimed at the central and southern Oregon coast, North Coast fishermen say they're not too thrilled
about the new players rolling in with the waves - especially when coupled with the state's plans to rope
off ocean waters for marine reserves. North Coast commercial fishers often travel down the coast to
find their catch. They say the wave parks would not only cost them money in lost grounds, but it would
also block central transit routes and crowd North Coast waters with displaced fishermen.
Links – UNCLOS (Law of the Sea Treaty)

LOST subjects U.S. fishers to international regulation
Thomas W. Jacobson, Visiting Fellow for the Center for Sovereignty & Security, a Division of Freedom
Alliance, and President of the International Diplomacy & Public Policy Center, LLC., October 17, 2011,
“Ratifying UN Law of the Sea Treaty Would Harm U.S. Sovereignty, Part
II,”http://www.idppcenter.com/UNLOSTreaty-RatifyingHarmsUSA-Sovereignty-Part2.pdf, Accessed
5/20/2014
LOST subjects fishing rights within a nation’s “exclusive economic zone” to the oversight of “competent
international organizations, whether subregional, regional or global” [Part V, Art. 61]. Also, if nationals
(commercial fishermen) do “not have the capacity to harvest the entire allowable catch,” the nation
must give foreigners “access to the surplus of the allowable catch” [Art. 62]. Regarding fishing in
international waters, the treaty requires Party Nations to (a) create a multi-national management
system to monitor and conserve the “living resources” (fish and marine mammals) therein, (b)
determine “the allowable catch,” and (c) share “catch and fishing effort statistics” with international
organizations [Part VII, Arts. 116-120].
UNCLOS undermines sustainable fishing outside EEZs

Crow White, Department of Biological Sciences, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
and Christopher Costello, Bren School of Environmental Science and Management, University of
California, Santa Barbara, March 25, 2014, “Close the High Seas to Fishing? PLoS Biol 12(3): e1001826,
http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.1001826, Accessed
5/23/2014
The past 60 years have been a tumultuous period for the world's marine fisheries. In the early 1950s few
stocks had been exploited heavily; but without explicit governance, large industrial fisheries took hold
and systematically overexploited many stocks. In 1994 the United Nations Convention on the Law of the
Sea (UNCLOS) implemented Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) adjacent to all coastal nations (Figure 1).
These property rights extend 200 nm (~42% of the ocean) and allow countries to exclude foreign fleets
and exclusively manage fisheries within their jurisdictions. Indeed, for countries with science-based
fisheries management policies, many local stocks and fisheries contained in their EEZs are rebuilding.
But for many pelagic, migratory stocks such as tuna, billfish, and shark, the size of the EEZs has been
insufficient to incentivize sustainable fishing behavior. Fish that traverse multiple EEZs and the high seas
([HS], ~58% of ocean) are overexploited relative to those contained in a single EEZ.
Links – UNCLOS (Law of the Sea Treaty)

Rejecting LOST is essential to maintain commercial fishing revenues
Thomas W. Jacobson, Visiting Fellow for the Center for Sovereignty & Security, a Division of Freedom
Alliance, and President of the International Diplomacy & Public Policy Center, LLC., October 17, 2011,
“Ratifying UN Law of the Sea Treaty Would Harm U.S. Sovereignty, Part
II,”http://www.idppcenter.com/UNLOSTreaty-RatifyingHarmsUSA-Sovereignty-Part2.pdf, Accessed
5/20/2014
If the USA does not ratify LOST, Americans will continue to enjoy unhindered use of our continental shelf
and the high seas for exploration, research, fishing, drilling, and mining. National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) ships can keep traversing and conducting research on international
waters. American fishermen can continue fishing in territorial, continental shelf, and the high seas
without international restrictions or oversight, or having to reveal where they catch fish. American oil
and mining companies will be free to drill and extract resources, subject only to USA royalty taxes.
American mining companies may exploit resources of the deep seabed through the Deep Seabed Hard
Mineral Resources Act.
Internal Link Extension
Displacement Hurts Fishers and Income

Displacing commercial fishers brings significant economic costs and increases
overfishing
Robert Brock, MD., Marine Biologist at the National MPA Center, 2011, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
MPA Science Brief: What Does the Science Say?, “Do ‘No-Take’ Marine Reserves Benefit Adjacent
Fisheries?,”
http://marineprotectedareas.noaa.gov/pdf/helpful-
resources/do_no_take_reserves_benefit_adjacent_fisheries.pdf, Accessed 5/20/2014
Eliminating fishing from an area often causes fishermen to move to different areas, thus potentially
concentrating fishing in smaller areas and adding to the stressors at those sites. Could this lead to
unintended ecological consequences such as overfishing and habitat destruction in the adjacent fished
area? The displacement of fishermen may also produce social anxiety, such as removing people from
their “favorite fishing holes.” Having to go to another area to fish may come with considerable economic
costs as well, such as having to travel to fishing grounds that are further away (e.g., cost of fuel and
time) and perhaps having to fish in areas that are less productive. Coastal communities located next to
the no fishing area may be negatively impacted, socially and economically, as well.
Fishers are willing to conform to sustainable fishing, but cutting revenues prevents
Shaye Weaver, Staff Writer, November 26, 2013, “Center For Sustainable Fisheries Is Pushing For
Reform,” The East Hampton Press, http://www.27east.com/news/article.cfm/General-Interest-
EH/43458/Center-For-Sustainable-Fisheries-Is-Pushing-For-Reform, Accessed 5/21/2014
Mr. Lang noted that most fishermen would be willing to utilize tracking devices to monitor their catches
in order to provide information of what’s going on in the ocean. “Fishermen are really the
conservationists of the sea,” Mr. Lang said. “They really are interested in the environment and perceive
changes far sooner than any entity that you could have.” Bonnie Brady, the executive director of the
Long Island Commercial Fishing Association and a member on the Center for Sustainable Fisheries Board
of Directors, said the Magnuson-Stevens Act has to be fair or fisheries will continue to fish less and hurt
more financially. “We’ve been given the brunt of these regulations, to carry it all on our backs,” she said.
“The center’s goal to work on the science and rewrite the Magnuson-Stevens Act is going to actually be
effective.”
Displacement Hurts Fishers and Income

Fishers want to fish sustainably. That’s key to food security
Andreas Merkl, President and CEO of Ocean Conservancy, May 22, 2013, “The Fish We Need to Feed 9
Billion People,” Blue Ocean Conservancy, http://blog.oceanconservancy.org/2013/05/22/the-fish-we-
need-to-feed-9-billion-people/, Accessed 5/22/2014
Sustainable fishing means keeping enough fish in the water to reproduce and ensure a bountiful catch in
the future. It’s a balancing act, but sustainable fisheries are in everyone’s best interest – from fishermen
to distributors to gear manufacturers to retailers to consumers. If you’re a fisherman and you want to
pass on your traditions to the next generation, or you want to be able to make good money 10 years
from now, the most profitable way to fish is sustainably. Unfortunately, overfishing due to poor fisheries
management remains a global problem that threatens ecosystem health and human survival. For
example, without enough forage fish—small fish like anchovies, sardines, and squid—the larger
predators, like tuna, that feed on them will start to disappear as well. That matters because we are
facing a future with 9 billion people on the planet, and with that future comes huge concerns for food
security.
Impacts
Fishing is Key to the Economy

Rebuilding fisheries is essential to the economy
Eileen Sobeck, Assistant Administrator for NOAA Fisheries, 2014, Status of Stocks 2013: Annual
Report to Congress on the Status of U.S. Fisheries, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/fisheries_eco/status_of_fisheries/archive/
2013/status_of_stocks_2013_web.pdf, Accessed 5/7/2014
U.S. fisheries play an enormous role in the nation’s economy. When stocks are rebuilt, they provide
more economic opportunities for commercial, recreational, and subsistence fishing. Rebuilt stocks also
contribute to a healthy ecosystem. To continue our progress in ending overfishing and rebuilding stocks,
we must ensure solid, science-based determinations of stock status and better linkages to biological,
socioeconomic, and ecosystem conditions. It is also increasingly important that we better understand
ecosystem and habitat factors, as resilient ecosystems and habitat form the foundation for robust
fisheries and fishing jobs. NOAA is investing in efforts to better understand the effects of climate change
on fisheries, reduce bycatch, and focus habitat conservation resources where they can have the greatest
impact.
A strong fishing industry is essential to the lives of billions

Chris Gibson, Director of the UOW Global Challenges Program, Et al, March 10, 2014, “Why our
precious oceans are under threat,” Global Challenges,
http://uowblogs.com/globalchallenges/2014/03/10/the-threats-facing-our-precious-oceans/, Accessed
5/1/2014
The oceans are critical to the global environment and human survival in numerous ways – they are vital
to the global nutrient cycling, represent a key repository and supporter of biological diversity on a world
scale and play a fundamental role in driving the global atmospheric system. Coastal and marine
environments support and sustain key habitats and living resources, notably fisheries and aquaculture.
These resources continue to provide a critical source of food for hundreds of millions of people. The
fishing industry supports the livelihoods of an estimated 540 million people worldwide and fisheries
supply more than 15 percent of the animal protein consumed by 4.2 billion people globally. Moreover,
the oceans are an increasing source of energy resources and underpin the global economy through sea
borne trade.
Economic Decline is Disastrous

Economic collapse causes global nuclear war
Cesare Merlini, nonresident senior fellow at the Center on the United States and Europe and The
Brookings Institute, April 2011, “A Post-Secular World?,” Survival, Volume 53, Issue 2, pp. 117 – 130.
Two neatly opposed scenarios for the future of the world order illustrate the range of possibilities, albeit
at the risk of oversimplification. The first scenario entails the premature crumbling of the post-
Westphalian system. One or more of the acute tensions apparent today evolves into an open and
traditional conflict between states, perhaps even involving the use of nuclear weapons. The crisis might
be triggered by a collapse of the global economic and financial system, the vulnerability of which we
have just experienced, and the prospect of a second Great Depression, with consequences for peace and
democracy similar to those of the first. Whatever the trigger, the unlimited exercise of national
sovereignty, exclusive self-interest and rejection of outside interference would likely be amplified,
emptying, perhaps entirely, the half-full glass of multilateralism, including the UN and the European
Union. Many of the more likely conflicts, such as between Israel and Iran or India and Pakistan, have
potential religious dimensions. Short of war, tensions such as those related to immigration might
become unbearable. Familiar issues of creed and identity could be exacerbated. One way or another,
the secular rational approach would be sidestepped by a return to theocratic absolutes, competing or
converging with secular absolutes such as unbridled nationalism.
Economic Growth Is Good

Growth prevents conflict
Ernie Reghr, Senior Fellow in Arctic Security at The Simons Foundation, February 4, 2013, “Intrastate
Conflict: Data, Trends and Drivers,” International Relations and Security
Networkhttp://www.isn.ethz.ch/Digital-Library/Articles/Special-Feature/Detail/?lng=en&id=
158597&tabid=1453496807&contextid774= 158597&contextid775=158627, Accessed 5/20/2014
“The most robustly significant predictor of [armed] conflict risk and its duration is some indicator of
economic prosperity. At a higher income people have more to lose from the destructiveness of conflict;
and higher per-capita income implies a better functioning social contract, institutions and state
capacity.” This correlation between underdevelopment and armed conflict is confirmed in a 2008 paper
by Thania Paffenholz which notes that “since 1990, more than 50% of all conflict-prone countries have
been low income states…. Two thirds of all armed conflicts take place in African countries with the
highest poverty rates. Econometric research found a correlation between the poverty rate and
likelihood of armed violence….[T]he lower the GDP per capita in a country, the higher the likelihood of
armed conflict.” Of course, it is important to point out that this is not a claim that there is a direct causal
connection between poverty and armed conflict. To repeat, the causes of conflict are complex and
context specific, nevertheless, says Paffenholz, there is a clear correlation between a low and declining
per capita income and a country’s vulnerability to conflict. It is also true, on the other hand, that there
are low income countries that experience precipitous economic decline, like Zambia in the 1980s and
1990s, without suffering the kind of turmoil that has visited economically more successful countries like
Kenya and Cote d’Ivoire. Referring to both Zambia and Nigeria, Pafenholz says these are cases in which
“the social compact” has proven to be resilient. Both have formal and informal mechanisms that are
able to address grievances in ways that allowed them to be aired and resolved or managed without
recourse to violence.
Ocean Climate Change DA

The disad explained:
The environment will be a big deal on this year’s topic. This file is designed to give
flexibility to your approach of debating environmental issues in relation to the ocean.
Generating a link to exploration in the abstract sense is difficult as most exploration
affs will not read energy exploration but scientific exploration plan texts. However,
teams that read energy exploration link in several ways: through increased access to
fossil fuel production (oil & natural gas), through the increased usage of fossil fuels,
and through increased ship activity in the oceans to transport the extracted material
as well as build the extraction facilities. Mostly all affs will link to the “noise pollution”
arguments since they will use sonar to either map the ocean floor for science for to
look for energy. Controlling the impact framing in relation to magnitude (“tipping
point”) over time frame is important as it is difficult to generate an immediate impact
to the disad. If the oceans control global climate and global climate controls
agriculture and the economy it will also complicate our ability to prevent major
conflicts over resources from arising. This means the disad can access climate change,
food, economic, and hegemony based impacts.
1NC Shell-UQ
Uniqueness: Global ocean health is down but not on the brink of collapse—haven’t
reached tipping points yet
The World Bank, report released by the world bank on ocean health, April 25, 2014,
“Summit Commits to Concrete Actions to Turn Around Ocean Health and Secure Food Security for
Millions of People”, Accessed April 3, 2014, http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-
release/2014/04/25/summit-commits-to-concrete-actions-to-turn-around-ocean-health-and-secure-
food-security-for-millions-of-people
A Summit that brought together more than 600 ocean stakeholders, including 80 ministers from across the world, ocean
science
experts, business leaders, philanthropy and heads of international organizations – committed to a set of concrete actions
responding to the urgency for restoring productive, resilient oceans that drive broad-based blue growth and deliver
food security. The Global Oceans Action Summit for Blue Growth and Food Security – a joint initiative of the Government of the Netherlands,
the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and the World Bank – found unprecedented convergence around the urgent
steps needed to tackle the key threats to the world’s oceans: climate change, overfishing, habitat loss and pollution. Actions focused specifically
on improving governance, enhancing sustainable financing, building partnerships for action and sharing knowledge on successful solution
implementation. The Summit called for: - A stand-alone Sustainable Development Goal on oceans as part of the post-2015 Development
Framework - Much stronger recognition of the escalating impacts from climate change on oceans and ensuring ocean health is incorporated
into the international processes and events heading towards the 2015 UNFCCC conference of parties in Paris - Eliminating harmful fisheries
subsidies that contribute to overfishing and overcapacity and instead incentivizing approaches that improve conservation, build sustainable
fisheries and end illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing - Strengthening the mandate of Regional Fisheries Management Organisations and
their financing and accelerating ratification of agreed mechanisms for improved fisheries practices, better conservation and less pollution,
including the Port State Measures Agreement - Investing in small and medium scale fisheries and local communities as vital stewards for blue
growth and support to sustainable supply chains - Building on existing partnerships like the Global Partnership for Oceans, the Global Island
Partnership and 50in10 to build global momentum and scale up successes - Sharing of knowledge, experiences and solutions through
information and communications technology that can enforce and monitor in real time and connect communities globally The Chair of the
Summit, H.E. Sharon Dijksma, Minister for Agriculture of the Netherlands said: “This week the world community has shown courage and
boldness in The Hague to move ahead and take action on ocean health and food security. What’s needed now is decisive action from the
international community to put solutions into practice.” Árni M. Mathiesen – Assistant Director-General of the FAO said: “This Summit has put
an accent on action and the route to navigate on oceans, fisheries management and aquaculture is much clearer than before.” World Bank
representative Valerie Hickey said: “This
Summit has presented the way forward for a new type of growth – blue
growth which is sustainable, equitable and takes the value of the ocean’s ecosystem services into account. Together, we can
restore ocean health at the speed and scale necessary to drive broad-based blue growth, secure food
security and turn down the heat on climate change. We have the set of actions needed – let’s move on them
now.”
1NC Shell- Development Link

Link: Development of Earth’s oceans causes a laundry list of environmental crisis
Genevieve Anderson, Marine Scientist out of Santa Barbara City College, 2003,
“Human's Impact on the Oceans,” http://www.marinebio.net/marinescience/06future/olhum.htm,
Accessed April 17, 2014
Oil spills in the ocean usually happen when an ocean oil rig springs a leak or when an ocean going tanker
(carrying oil) wrecks. Several large oil spills have resulted from these two means (the Santa Barbara spill in 1969, and the Exxon Valdez
spill in Alaska in 1989. Oil dumped down storm drains that lead to the ocean also may be a source but most areas now have signs to help
prevent this. War can also create oil spills as it did in 1991 when the Gulf War resulted in millions of gallons of oil being released into the
Persian Gulf. Oil spills initially may kill large numbers of marine life however, most of the benthic invertebrates are capable of rather speedy
recoveries (6 months to 5 years depending on the area and spill) because they have tremendous numbers of planktonic larvae that are drifting
in the ocean water and relatively fast growth rates to adult size. The hardest hit during most oil spills are the marine birds
- few recover even if they are cleaned, fed until they molt (getting a new set of feathers) and released. Chemicals released into the ocean cause
a myriad of problems. Pesticides, coming from runoff of agricultural land into the ocean damages marine organisms. When DDT was being used
(as an insect spray on crops), this chemical ended up in the food chain and caused sea birds, like the brown pelican, to lay eggs with soft shells.
This resulted in the brown pelican eggs almost all breaking before the baby could develop and the near extinction of this species. In this case
DDT was eliminated in most countries and the brown pelican population eventually recovered in most areas. Another sad example happened in
the 1950s when mercury was released into the ocean in Minamata, Japan. The mercury got in the food chain and over a hundred Japanese
living in the area became poisoned by eating the shellfish - resulting in birth defects, insanity, and death. These are just a few examples of the
problems with chemicals released into the ocean.< Thermal pollution is a byproduct of the ocean's use as a cooling agent - the cool ocean water
taken in is released at a higher temperature. Although the temperature of release is usually controlled by laws, and is not such a threat as the
other forms of pollution mentioned here, one could imagine what it would be like if more and more plants began using ocean water as a
Noise pollution
coolant. This change in temperature, due to humans in this case, would change the makeup of the species in these areas.
is one of the more recent threats to marine life. Several studies have shown that the noise produced by boats
interferes with many species of marine life. The number of large tankers now cruising the oceans creates a significant level of
noise that may make it difficult for whales to communicate. The other source of noise pollution comes from the testing of
loud noises in the oceans (mostly by the military) which have been linked to the deaths of dolphins (a type of small whale) due to massive
internal hemorrhaging. Habitat destruction occurs directly when man 'develops' marine areas by filling them in with
sediment to create more usable acreage. Most of the
natural estuaries in California have been 'developed .' In
Ecuador many mangrove (a tree that lives by the ocean and is the base for a mangrove community) communities have been
converted into ponds for shrimp mariculture. The list goes on and on - leaving the marine creatures
without a suitable habitat in which to live. Pollution can also create habitat destruction by making the area
unfit.
1NC Shell- Exploration Link

Link: Exploration of Earth’s oceans requires major amounts of ships and water
vehicles
NOAA-National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Non-government
environmental research organization, July 19-21, 2013, “Ocean Exploration 2020 A
National Forum,” http://oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/oceanexploration2020/oe2020_report.pdf, Accessed
April 17, 2014
In 2020, a greater number of ships, submersibles, and other platforms are dedicated to ocean exploration.
Ocean exploration priorities will frequently dictate the types of platforms needed for a national program of ocean exploration. Since mission
priorities change, the mix of platforms needs to include a wide variety of capabilities as well as provide
flexibility and nimbleness. The great majority of Ocean Exploration 2020 participants felt that the current suite of available
platforms is not sufficient to sustain an evolving national program. There was a strong consensus that a more diverse
and dynamic mix of platforms is needed that includes: • Dedicated ships of exploration • Ships of opportunity • A
variety of submersibles—AUVs, ROVs, and HOVs—with a range of depth capabilities that include full
ocean depth • Small, inexpensive ROVs that put ocean exploration in the hands of citizen scientists • Instrumented marine animals •
Stationary observing networks and sensors The value of having one or more dedicated federal ships of
ocean exploration was endorsed. In addition to platforms that move through the water in three dimensions, there was strong support
for seafloor observatories that document changes in the fourth dimension—time. A fully mature national program of ocean
exploration must have both components. In addition to greater investments in ships, better coordination among
ships of exploration and other exploration assets is essential to ensure a maximum science payoff per dollar invested.
1NC Shell- Impact

Impact: The oceans control earth’s climate- destroying the ocean’s delicate
balance shuts down the conveyer belt ensuring environmental collapse and
extinction
Mel Goodwin, PhD, The Harmony Project for the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, 2009, “LEADER’S GUIDE FOR CLASSROOM EXPLORERS”,
Accessed April 25, 2014,
http://oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/okeanos/edu/leadersguide/media/09whydoweexplore.pdf
Global climate is strongly influenced by interactions between Earth’s atmosphere and ocean, but these
interactions are complex and poorly understood. While the deep-ocean might seem far removed from the
atmosphere, one of the most significant climatic influences results from the “deep-ocean thermohaline
circulation” (See the Diving Deeper section on page 18 for more information about the THC). The causes and effects of the THC are not fully
known, but we do know that it affects almost all of the world’s ocean and plays an important role in
transporting dissolved oxygen and nutrients. For these reasons, the deep-ocean THC is often called the “global
conveyor belt.” We also know that the part of the THC that is the Gulf Stream is at least partially responsible for the
fact that countries in northwestern Europe (Britain and Scandinavia) are about 9°C warmer than other locations at
similar latitudes. Recent changes in the Arctic climate have led to growing concerns about the possible effects of
these changes on the deep-ocean THC. Dense water sinking in the North Atlantic Ocean is one of the
principal forces that drives the circulation of the global conveyor belt. Since warmer temperatures and
increased freshwater inflow from melting ice cause seawater density to decrease, these changes could
also weaken the global conveyor belt. Trends toward a warmer climate are having impacts in the tropics as well. A major
concern is the impact of higher temperatures on coral reefs. In the Caribbean, surveys of 302 sites between 1998 and
2000 show widespread recent mortality among shallow- (≤ 5m depth) and deep-water (> 5m depth) corals (Kramer, 2003).
Many scientists believe that the widespread decline of coral reefs is the result of accumulating stresses, one of which is
increased water temperature. There are many other potential impacts of changing climate, ranging from the possible
extinction of species such as the polar bear to year-round access to sea routes through the Arctic. Ocean exploration can provide some of
the essential knowledge about ocean-atmosphere interactions that is needed to understand, predict, and respond to these impacts.
***UQ Ext.***
UQ- Tipping Point

The oceans are heading for an environmental “tipping point” we can’t come back from
once crossed
Ocean Tipping Points, interdisciplinary organization working to improve ocean
ecosystem health, March 8, 2014,“Oceanic Tipping Points”, Accessed May 5, 2014,
http://oceantippingpoints.org/sites/default/files/uploads/TippingPointsOverview.pdf
A growing problem An increasing number of examples of tipping points in ecosystems around the world are raising
concern among scientists and policymakers. In the oceans, diverse ecosystems ranging from reefs to estuaries to
pelagic systems have undergone sudden, dramatic shifts. Changes in ocean climate, the abundance of key species,
nutrients and other factors drive these shifts, with resulting effects on ocean food webs, habitats, and ecosystem functions that have direct
impacts on people’s livelihoods and well-being. Ocean tipping points may be cause for particular concern because
they are hard to anticipate and can be very difficult, if not impossible, to reverse. Tipping points change
the rules For managers of marine ecosystems, an understanding of tipping points is critical because they
change the rules of the game. The new ecosystem state may function quite differently from the previous one, respond differently to
management interventions, and provide different levels and types of benefits to people. Although there have been many critical
advances in the science of ecosystem tipping points in recent years, managers still lack practical tools
and information to help them anticipate and respond to ecosystem shifts. Tipping Points on Land In the native
longleaf pine forests of the US Southeast, the tipping point involves fire. Without frequent enough wildfire, fast-growing shortleaf pine invades,
and the forest shifts rapidly into one that no longer functions in the same way – one that can’t, for example, provide essential habitat for the
endangered red-cockaded wood- peckers that live only there. Tipping
Points in the Ocean In the Baltic Sea, a series of
threats pushed the system over a tipping point in the 1980s, from which it has yet to recover. Overfishing of
top predators and fifty years of nutrient pollution combined with climate change to shift the Baltic from a productive and highly valuable, cod-
dominated ecosystem to one dominated instead by inedible jellyfish.
UQ- Tipping Point

Oceans are on the tipping point now—small actions like the plan could push us over
the brink
Ove Hoegh-Guldberg, Blue Ribbon Panel Chair, Director at the Global Change Institute,
University of Queensland, April 24, 2014, “Ocean Action: A Different Kind of Tipping Point”,
Accessed May 5, 2014, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ove-hoeghguldberg/ocean-action-a-different-
kind-of-tipping-point_b_5191058.html
Recently you may have noticed the

ever-increasing number of international conferences, talks, meetings and
reports on the ocean and its declining health. Just in the last two years, we have had two excellent World Ocean Summits
hosted byThe Economist, which brought together a rich audience of politicians, business leaders, NGOs and experts to focus on the evidence,
challenges and solutions to the changes being observed in our oceans. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has also just
released its fifth assessment report, which, for the first time, includes several chapters focusing on the ocean as a key region. The
IPCC and
other global groups have hosted meetings on everything from ocean acidification and weather patterns to
fisheries and biodiversity. A lot of meeting, travel and talk. One cynical perspective might be that all this talk and
travel is generating carbon dioxide rather than driving tangible progress. Nothing is changing, and the ocean is still
degrading before our eyes. Standing back, however, you can see this activity as a response to a series of looming
biophysical tipping points that could lead to changes we will have to live with for tens of thousands of
years. You only have to look at the issue of ocean warming and acidification to see what is at stake. These biophysical tipping
points could be disastrous, but I am optimistic that we are at the verge of another tipping point, one
where the global community commits to take action now. Tip one way and we face irreversible change
in the ocean's ability to produce food and jobs and protect our planet. That message is writ large across our blue
planet, in "ink" that could be permanent for natural and human systems. Tip the other way, however, and the situation
could be very different. Instead of declining, we could see the emergence of "healing" oceans that produce more, not less, sustainable
food for Earth's growing population. The recent IPCC Working Group III Report, with findings on climate change's impact on crop productivity,
adds a huge amount of urgency to act now and restore ocean health.
UQ- Tipping Point

New models suggest ocean ecosystems are fragile and on the brink
University of Bergen, a European university, February 20, 2014 “Climate change: Unstable
Atlantic deep ocean circulation may hasten 'tipping point'”, Accessed May 5, 2014,
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/02/140220141625.htm
A new study looking at past climate change, asks if these changes in the future will be spasmodic and
abrupt rather than a more gradual increase in the temperature. Today, deep waters formed in the northern North
Atlantic fill approximately half of the deep ocean globally. In the process, this impacts the circum-Atlantic climate and
regional sea level, and it soak up much of the excess atmospheric carbon dioxide from industrialisation --
helping moderate the effects of global warming. Changes in this circulation mode are considered a
potential tipping point in future climate change that could have widespread and long-lasting impacts
including on regional sea level, the intensity and pacing of Sahel droughts, and the pattern and rate of ocean acidification and CO2
sequestration. Until now, this pattern of circulation has been considered relatively stable during warm climate
states such as those projected for the end of the century. A new study led by researchers from the Bjerknes Centre of Climate Research at the
University of Bergen (UiB) and Uni Research in Norway, suggests that Atlantic deep water formation may be much more
fragile than previously realised. The researchers Eirik Vinje Galaasen (UiB), Ulysses Ninnemann (UiB), Nil Irvali (Uni Research), and
Helga (Kikki) Kleiven (UiB) and their colleagues from Rutgers University, USA (Professor Yair Rosenthal), Laboratoire des Sciences du Climat et
de l'Environnement, France (Research Scientist Catherine Kissel) and the University of Cambridge, UK (Professor David Hodell) used the shells of
tiny single-celled, bottom-dwelling foraminifera found in marine sediment in the North Atlantic Ocean to reconstruct the surface ocean
conditions and concomitant deep ocean circulation of about 125,000 years ago. This is the last interglacial period, when the North Atlantic was
warmer, fresher and sea level was higher than it is today and looked a lot like what climate models predict it will look by the end of this century.
"At that time, there were a series of sudden and large reductions in the influence of these North Atlantic waters in the deep ocean. These deep
water reductions occurred repeatedly, each lasting for some centuries before bouncing back. The unstable circulation operated as if it was near
a threshold and flickered back and forth across it," says Eirik Vinje Galaasen, a PhD student and now researcher at UiB's Department of Earth
Science, who is the lead author of the paper published in the journal Science. "These
types of changes hadn't been noticed
before because they are so short-lived. Geologists hadn't focused on century scale ocean changes because they are difficult to
detect," adds Professor Ulysses Ninnemann, from UiB's Department of Earth Science and Galaasen's PhD adviser. "Our study demonstrates that
deep water formation can be disrupted by the freshening of the regional surface water, which might
happen due to enhanced precipitation and glacier melting under future climate change scenarios," says
Yair Rosenthal, a co-author on the paper. The international team studied traces of deep ocean properties imprinted in the sediments on the
seafloor. Coring into the seafloor mud they could look back in time to reconstruct changes in the abyssal ocean at a location South of Greenland
that is sensitive to North Atlantic Deep Water. The mud at this location builds up 10-15 times as fast as normal, recording much shorter changes
than at other sites. Although
the changes are short from a geological perspective, a few centuries of reduced
deep water could be a big deal for societies that would have to grapple with things like draughts and sea
level changes that could accompany them.
UQ- Structural
There’s structural UQ for the disad- most of earth’s oceans haven’t been
explored yet
NOAA-National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Non-government
environmental research organization, July 19-21, 2013, “Ocean Exploration 2020 A
National Forum,” http://oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/oceanexploration2020/oe2020_report.pdf, Accessed
April 17, 2014
When you mention the word “Exploration” most people think of Captain James Cook, Vasco de Gama, Sir Francis Drake, Marco Polo, Ferdinand
Magellan, and Christopher Columbus; all of whom died long ago. But when it comes to “Ocean Exploration”, the greatest ocean
explorers of all time are more than likely still in middle school since that generation of future explorers will explore more of Earth than all
previous generations combined. The reasons are simple. 72% of the world lies hidden beneath the sea and most of it
lies in a world of eternal darkness and is unexplored . In fact, we have better maps of the far side of the moon than half of
the United States of America. Daunting as this task may seem, new advances in undersea exploration technologies and
now greatly accelerating our rate of exploration. The unexplored regions of our oceans not only contain important
keys to unlocking the history of planet Earth, they also contain vast mineral resources, new fisheries, and important places
beneath the sea that need to be set aside as marine sanctuaries. The oceans also contain more lost chapters of human history than all of the
museums of the world combined.
UQ- International Efforts Now

Massive steps being taken now across the planet to curb environmental destruction of
the oceans
Global Oceans Action Summit, international oceanic environmental health summit,
April 25, 2014, “ANNOUNCEMENT GLOBAL OCEANS ACTION SUMMIT FOR FOOD SECURITY AND BLUE
GROWTH 22 to 25 APRIL, 2014 THE HAGUE, THE NETHERLANDS”, Accessed May 5, 2014,
http://www.globaloceansactionsummit.com/
The Hague - We will need to take unorthodox steps to tackle overfishing, climate change and pollution of
the oceans. Governments, business leaders and NGOs from 80 countries commit themselves to firm agreements. In addition, 10
partnerships were announced. We have the solutions for sustainable fisheries and blue growth in our own hands
and now it is a matter of putting this into action on a global scale, and this action starts today. This is the
final conclusion of the Global Oceans Action Summit after a week of high level roundtable discussions in The Hague. From courage to action
Dutch Minister for Agriculture and chair of the summit, H.E. Sharon Dijksma, said about the result: 'This week the world didn’t just
show courage; it showed especially that’s it’s ready for action to tackle overfishing, climate change and
pollution. That is exactly what the world needs right now, as only then will fish and healthy oceans still be able to provide for hundreds of
millions of people after 2030.' Results from the Summit: The only way to end the war of attrition at sea is to stop overfishing and to eliminate
overcapacity From now on, subsidies should be used for sustainable fisheries only; Illegal fisheries must be banned, and we need regional
agreements with businesses to achieve this; Accelerating ratification of agreed mechanisms for improved fisheries practices to make the
fisheries sector more sustainable, and tackling pollution; A
stronger recognition of the impact of climate change on the
oceans is crucial; The oceans must be a special focus in the United Nations Sustainability Objectives. Cross-boundary partnerships At
the summit more than 10 new commitments for public-private partnerships were entered into, leading
to action in many places around the world. Today the following partnerships will be announced: Mauritius, the Seychelles and
the labelling non-profit organisation Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) will start working at certification of fish species and sustainable
fisheries in the Indian Ocean; Conservation International will further develop the Ocean Health Index with partners; Rockefeller Foundation and
the Netherlands pledging funding support of 250,000 euros to WorldFish and FAO to produce a Roadmap for the Future of Fish. Together with
the Netherlands, the WNF will start working on a study into the effectiveness of international ‘Marine protected areas’. The Netherlands had
already announced it is going to work together with Indonesia to prevent fish wastage, and with Grenada to protect the coral. There
are
also partnerships to better exchange the available data and to promote the recovery of fish populations.
UQ- International Efforts Now

Massive steps being taken to stabilize ocean health and sustainability
Dr. Sylvia A. Earle, National Geographic Society Explorer-in-Residence, November 1,
2013, “Indispensable Ocean: Aligning Ocean Health and Human Well-Being”, Accessed May 4, 2014,
http://newswatch.nationalgeographic.com/2013/11/01/indispensable-ocean-aligning-ocean-health-
and-human-well-being/
So, I was cautiously optimistic when potential partners met in Washington, DC in April, 2012 followed in June at the Rio+20 Summit with
the formal launch of the GPO, now a growing alliance of more than 140
countries, international organizations, civil society
groups and private sector interests committed to alleviating poverty while addressing threats to the
health, productivity and resilience of the ocean. It is mobilizing finance and solutions at an
unprecedented scale, focusing on problems including overfishing, habitat destruction, and pollution that
affect communities, countries and global prosperity. Early in 2013, I was asked to be part of a panel of 21 ocean-minded
individuals with distinctly diverse backgrounds from 16 countries. This Blue Ribbon Panel was charged with guiding investments by the GPO—
and others—that would take into account ecological, economic and community sustainability. I participated in most of the intense electronic
exchanges and meetings in Asia, Africa, and the US where leaders in government, science, industry, conservation and social justice analyzed,
scrutinized, sometimes agonized and finally rationalized weighty subjects, skillfully kept on point though the superhuman patience and
diplomatic skill of the Chairman, Australian scientist Dr. Ove Hoegh-Guldberg and the supporting staff from the US Academy of Sciences and the
World Bank. The resulting report, Indispensable Ocean: Aligning Ocean Health and Human Well-Being, has just been released. It is a small
document crammed with big ideas, a useful distillation of serious deliberations aimed at finding solutions of concern to all, emphasizing the
power of public-private partnerships. There is guidance here, whether
your primary focus is on sustaining profitable
extraction of wildlife from the sea, looking to the ocean as a source of oil, gas or minerals, or seeking
support for protection of the ocean’s biodiversity and fundamental life-support functions. It is
encouraging to see the World Bank making a serious effort to invest in maintaining the blue part of the
planetary portfolio that not only underpins human health, wealth and security, but keeps us alive as
well.
UQ- Whale Populations on Brink

Whale populations are down now—every whale death matters
Michael Bastasch, writer for The Daily Caller, April 11, 2014, “Global warming? Blue whales
crushed to death by heavy Arctic sea ice”, Accessed May 4, 2014,
http://dailycaller.com/2014/04/11/global-warming-blue-whales-crushed-to-death-by-heavy-arctic-sea-
ice/
Climate scientists may worry that global

warming is melting the Arctic, but tell that to the blue whales that were
crushed to death by heavy North Pole ice. Global News reports that several endangered blue whales were found dead in ice
pack off the coast of Newfoundland, Canada “probably crushed to death by ice.” One researcher with Department of Fisheries and Oceans
(DFO) “spotted nine dead whales while flying over the ice, about 40 nautical miles west of Cape Anguille.” The blue whales were about
“the length of two school buses”, or about 66 feet long, according to the DFO. Blue whale deaths along the Newfoundland coast aren’t all that
rare, says the DFO, as there have been more than 50 recorded entrapments since the 1800s. “But the blue whale entrapment events have all
happened in this part of the southwest coast of Newfoundland,” the DFO’s Dr. Jack Lawson told Global News. “We’ve taken to calling it the
whale trap.” “Because of the geography of the area, he said, strong easterly winds can push ice from the Strait of Belle Isle out away from shore
and into the open water,” Global News says. “That opens up a channel whales can swim into to feed. Blue whales are known to feed in the area
around this time of year, feasting on the first spring bloom of shrimp.” Lawson said that if a westerly wind comes along “it’ll actually move the
ice close into the shore and crush them, which is what we think happened to these nine whales.” The
whale deaths are a huge
blow to the northwest Atlantic blue whale population — of which there are only about 250, so these
deaths make up about 4 percent of the population. This year has been particularly hard for them since
the sea ice has been much heavier.
***Link Ext.***
Exploration- Sonar
Ocean exploration uses high powered sonar to penetrate deep into the ocean
Mel Goodwin, PhD, The Harmony Project for the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, 2009, “LEADER’S GUIDE FOR CLASSROOM EXPLORERS”,
Accessed April 25, 2014,
http://oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/okeanos/edu/leadersguide/media/09whydoweexplore.pdf
On August 13, 2008, the NOAA Ship Okeanos Explorer was commissioned as “America’s Ship for Ocean Exploration;” the only
U.S. ship whose sole assignment is to systematically explore our largely unknown ocean for the purposes of
discovery and the advancement of knowledge. The ship was originally one of the Navy’s T-AGOS (Tactical Auxiliary General Ocean
Surveillance) class vessels, and as the former USNS Capable, was used to gather underwater acoustical data. To fulfill its mission, the
Okeanos Explorer has specialized capabilities for finding new and unusual features in unexplored parts of
Earth’s ocean, and for gathering key information that will support more detailed investigations by subsequent expeditions. These
capabilities include: • Reconnaissance within a search area to locate unusual features or anomalies; • Underwater
robots (remotely operated vehicles, or ROVs) that can investigate anomalies as deep as 6,000 meters; • Underwater mapping using
multibeam sonar, capable of producing high-resolution maps of the seafloor to depths of 6,000 meters; and • Advanced broadband
satellite communication.
Exploration- Sonar Kills Species

Oil & gas exploration uses invasive sonar which kills ocean life
Matthew Huelsenbeck, marine scientist at Oceana, February 28, 2014, “Don't let
Washington hurt the whales: Column”, Accessed May 4, 2014
http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2014/02/28/ocean-wildlife-science-marine-life-
column/5843781/
For many animals, the ocean is a world of sound, not sight. Animals like whales and dolphins depend on their
sensitive hearing in order to find food, navigate and survive in a murky and often dark environment. But
humans are filling the ocean with sound, disrupting the lives of marine animals. The problem is only getting worse.
An environmental review expected soon from the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) could allow seismic testing for
offshore oil and gas in a huge area of ocean from Delaware to Florida. During this process, seismic airguns would be towed
behind ships, while repeatedly blasting the ocean with intense sound for days to weeks at a time.
Imagine a sound so loud it needs to penetrate through the ocean, miles beneath the Earth's crust and
then bounce back to the surface of the water with information about buried oil and gas . That is what seismic
airgun testing does, creating one of the loudest man-made sounds in the ocean. They are loud enough to kill small animals like fish eggs and
larvae at close ranges, and their acoustic footprint is enormous. Traces of
the sound can cross entire ocean basins,
disrupting the behavior of large animals like whales and dolphins as far as 100 miles away. The science on how
sound impacts marine life is far from settled. The National Marine Fisheries Service is currently developing new guidelines to better estimate
how marine mammals can experience auditory injuries or disturbances to vital behaviors from man-made sound. These guidelines have been
15 years in the making, and they are deemed a "Highly Influential Scientific Assessment" by the Office of Management and Budget. But BOEM is
going rogue. They are looking to rush forward with their environmental review without using this new science because of an arbitrary political
timeline. This is a big mistake. If the final review lacks these new guidelines, it will misrepresent the comprehensive impacts of the proposed
seismic airgun testing, especially in terms of cumulative behavioral impacts like repeated disruptions to
mating, feeding, breathing, communicating and navigating. This includes threats to the nursery of the critically
endangered North Atlantic right whale, the rarest of the large whales. Because only 500 of these individuals remain, it is essential to accurately
estimate and then avoid harm to them as well as to other vulnerable marine life. There is no rush to finish this environmental review or permit
seismic airgun testing, since offshore drilling lease sales in the Atlantic are not available until at least 2017. Therefore, BOEM should require
that the best science be incorporated before any decision about seismic airgun testing is ever made. Accurately predicting impacts to marine
life is important because, in some circumstances, sound
disturbances to marine mammals can turn deadly when
whales or dolphins are scared into dangerously shallow areas and become stranded. For example, in 2008, a
mass mortality event occurred after a geophysical contractor working for ExxonMobil Exploration and Production (Northern Madagascar)
Limited used loud sonar devices , at the same intensity but different frequency as seismic airguns, to map
the seafloor for good spots to drill. More than 75 melon-headed whales were scared by the wall of sound and became trapped in
a shallow lagoon where they later died from exposure, dehydration and starvation. The oil and gas industry describes seismic
testing as " exploration, " and their friends on Capitol Hill call it "the science of discovery." But there is little left to explore
or discover with seismic airguns. We already have better options. We should be exploring quieter
technologies, which are already in development and would be less harmful to marine life.
Exploration- Oil (Offshore Drilling)

Exploring the ocean inevitably leads to discovering and extracting new oil reserves
Emily Atkin, journalist and reporter for Climate Progress, January 17, 2014 , “Oil
Companies Will Soon Use Drones To Find Deep-Sea Fossil Fuels”, Accessed April 26, 2014
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/01/17/3178211/drones-oil-deep-sea-scotland/
When thinking about the possible abilities of unmanned flying drones, the first thing that comes to mind is probably not benefits for the
fossil fuel industry. But in Scotland, that’s exactly what’s happening. According to a report in BBC news, researchers at the University of
Aberdeen have developed drones that can scan rock formations underneath the ocean — in some cases, in the deep
sea. The drones will be able to locate the reserves , then estimate how much they can produce by comparing them to
models of fuel-producing rock formations that occur above sea levels, University of Aberdeen geoscientist John Howell said. The data
collected by the drone is then used to make virtual maps of deep-sea rock formations that Howell says are accurate
within less than a few millimeters. “The advantage of the drone is that it allows us to collect large volumes of data from otherwise
inaccessible cliff sections in remote and often dangerous places,” Howell said. More than 20 oil companies have
financed the research so far, the BBC reported, with each drone expected to cost more than $16,000 each. They are expected to be in full use
by 2014. This is not the first time, however, that drones have been eyed by the energy industry. The Federal Aviation
Administration in July issued an approval that paved the way for a “major energy company” to fly unmanned drones in U.S. airspace. In August,
the company was revealed to be ConocoPhillips, one of the largest oil and gas exploration and production companies
worldwide. Those drones were said to be used to survey ice floes and migrating whales while the company mounts oil exploration
efforts. ConocoPhillips said it also expects to use the drones for emergency response, oil spill monitoring, and wildlife surveillance. Other
drones have been tested or talked about for use in pipeline and wellhead inspections in remote areas.
Exploration- Natural Gas

The plan increases access to natural gas which is problematic for three reason 1)
extraction process is harmful to the environment, 2) burning natural has accelerates
warming, and 3) incentivizes “flaring”
Karl Henkel [Business reporter at The Detroit News ¶ Business Reporter at The Vindicator Printing
company ¶ Editor-in-Chief at The South End] ¶ Natural gas industry in a crash (and burn)¶ April 18,
2012¶ http://www.vindy.com/news/2012/apr/18/crash-and-burn/
But today, natural-gas prices are below $2 per 1,000 cubic feet for the first time in a decade.¶ Gone is the prospect of
gas-only exploration. The operating gas-rig count nationwide was 624 last week, the lowest weekly figure in a decade, according to Houston oil-
and gas-services company Baker Hughes.¶ Gone, too, is
the gaping profit margin.¶ Energy analysts estimate that $5 per 1,000
cubic feet is the profitability point for most drillers; any price less than that, coupled with a deficient way of
transporting or storing, makes for an unfavorable business model.¶ “There are no hard-and-fast rules on that,” said Dan
Whitten, spokesman for Americas Natural Gas Alliance. “What you’re seeing is some companies are making those decisions, and I think some of
that is areas where there are only dry gas potential.”¶ Low natural-gas prices have changed the strategy for drillers in
various ways.¶ First, companies such as Oklahoma City-based Chesapeake Energy Corp., a large mineral-rights holder in Ohio, has decided to
back out of natural-gas plays such as the Barnett Shale in Texas and the Marcellus Shale in Pennsylvania.¶ The company’s rig count in the
Barnett, which was 43 in 2008, is just six this year.¶ Meanwhile, the company hopes to have 40 rigs in the Utica Shale by 2015.¶ But drillers
must also consider what they want to do with natural gas from current wells.¶ Storage is the most obvious option,
but because of the aforementioned mild weather, there’s a surplus of natural gas, and underground storage space is now at a premium. ¶
Drillers can “dial back” natural-gas production at well heads, but not nearly to the extent that it could alleviate the gas surplus.¶ That
brings in another option: flaring , the process in which gas is elevated and burned.¶ The process has been used for
operations reasons for years, but never to the extent it is used today.¶ In North Dakota’s oil-rich Bakken Shale, it is estimated that as much as
one-third of all produced natural gas is flared. ¶ Natural gas normally accompanies oil in the production and extraction
process, which means that even if drillers target oil- and wet-gas-heavy shale plays, natural-gas production still will occur.¶ That is the case in
the Utica Shale, where the most heavily oil-producing well in Ohio also produced 1.5 million MCF of natural gas, albeit in just about six months’
time.¶ Chesapeake says it is prepared for Utica Shale exploration and low natural-gas prices.¶ “The purpose of flaring is to safely consume any
produced gas before it has reached sufficient conditions to enter a sales pipeline,” said Pete Kenworthy, Chesapeake spokesman. “After the
well is connected to the pipeline, if market circumstances warrant, we can wait to turn the well online. In similar conditions, we can also cut
back on production.”¶ Environmentalists have criticized natural-gas flaring as an even worse hazard than
the actual extraction process , which is done by fracking, or blasting a mix of water, chemicals and sand thousands of feet below
the ground to open shale rock formations.¶ “It seems we should slow down the drilling until natural-gas prices rise so
that it becomes a smart business model,” said Vanessa Pesec, president of the Network for Oil and Gas Accountability.¶
“[Flaring] contributes to organic compounds in the air that will affect everyone’s health and
greenhouse gases ,” she added.
Exploration/ Production (Oil/Gas)- Noise Pollution

Ocean oil extraction causes mass noise pollution
Michael Stocker, Executive Director of Ocean Conservation Research, Accessed April 26,
2014, “Seafloor fossil fuel processing”, Accessed April 26, 2014, http://ocr.org/portfolio/seafloor-fossil-
fuel-processing/
As fossil fuel exploration and production moves into ever deeper waters, developing technologies are
moving much of the processing down to the sea floor. Hydrocarbon deposits are not simple pools of oil or pockets
of gas; rather they are typically an untidy mix of oil, gas, brine, and solids. These need to be separated, the useful product
extracted and the waste products dealt with in some manner. Deposits are also often under enormous pressures. The
wellhead pressure of the BP-Horizon disaster was in excess of 13,000 psi (and why stopping the flow was difficult).
Handling multi-phase materials (solids, liquids, and gasses) at enormous pressures is not a formula for
“quiet.” Equipment placed on the seafloor to handle the tasks of separation, reinjection, and flow
control all produce some attendant noises. While none of these processes have yet been characterized or measured,
seafloor equipment is being deployed that are akin to setting up small cities on the seabed. If these were in
an airborne environment the noises would be attenuated within a reasonable distance. That they are in the sea means that
whatever noises they generate will be heard at far greater distances.
Ships- Gotta Build More

These are not enough existing ships, the plan requires building mores ships and
water vehicles for exploration
MechE, The Ocean Engineering and Technology , MIT based technology and environment
organization, Accessed April 17, 2014, “Ocean Science & Engineering,” April 17, 2014,
http://meche.mit.edu/research/ocean/, Accessed April 17, 2014
Ocean Engineering and Technology, which merged with MechE in 2005, is focused on four research areas: acoustics, hydrodynamics, structures
and structural dynamics, and design and marine robotics. Expanding those categories - and mindful of the fact that ocean processes and marine
systems are almost universally complex and therefore require interdisciplinary efforts - the ocean engineering program at MIT, like an octopus,
has eight research "tentacles": Exploringthe ocean environment - We know more about the back side of the moon than about the
lowest depths of the oceans. Exploring the ocean environment requires the development of networks of
unmanned underwater vehicles and of specialized sensors for gathering data on ocean chemistry and
biology. Ocean acoustics and sonar systems - Acoustical methods are the primary means for sensing the oceans, as well as for antisubmarine
and mine detection for national defense. Sonar technology enables long-distance observations in the ocean and requires deep knowledge of
both acoustics and signal processing. Hydrodynamics and free-surface waves - Ships must be able to run in both calm seas
and hurricane-force conditions. Since marine transportation supports 95% of the world's commerce, it is critical to understand the
impact of free-surface gravity waves. Several of our faculty have participated in America's Cup races. Energy - The advent of fast, high-
voltage, high-power semiconductor switching devices is revolutionizing the commercial marine industry,
while all-electric architectures hold many advantages for military ships, which have more demanding
requirements.
Ships- Burn Dirty Fuel

Ships are a key pollution and warming internal link- they burn the dirtiest fuels
and are larger proximate cause
What’s Your Impact?, A registered non-profit organization that was formed by a
group of international environmental activists and is now based in Montreal,
Canada, 2014, “WHAT ARE THE MAIN SOURCES OF CARBON DIOXIDE EMISSIONS?”, Accessed April
25, 2014, http://www.whatsyourimpact.org/co2-sources.php
The transportation sector is the second largest source of anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions. Transporting goods and
people around the world produced 22% of fossil fuel related carbon dioxide emissions in 2010. This sector is very energy intensive
and it uses petroleum based fuels (gasoline, diesel, kerosene, etc.) almost exclusively to meet those needs. Since the 1990s, transport related
emissions have grown rapidly, increasing by 45% in less than 2 decades. Road transport accounts for 74% of this sector's carbon dioxide
emissions. Automobiles, freight and light-duty trucks are the main sources of emissions for the whole transport sector and emissions from
these three have steadily grown since 1990. Apart from road vehicles, the other important sources of emissions for this sector are marine
shipping and global aviation. Marine shipping produces 14% of all transport carbon dioxide emissions. While
there are a lot less ships than road vehicles used in the transportation sector, ships burn the dirtiest
fuel on the market, a fuel that is so unrefined that it can be solid enough to be walked across at room
temperature. Because of this, marine shipping is responsible for over 1 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide
emissions. This is more than the annual emissions of several industrialized countries (Germany, South Korea,
Canada, UK, etc.) and this sector continues to grow rapidly.
Development- General
Human development of the ocean risks mass ecosystem harm—human intervention
disrupts in many ways
Environmental News Service, environmental news organization, February 18, 2014,
“Deep Oceans Need ‘Stewardship’ to Prevent Industrial Damage”, Accessed May 6, 2014, http://ens-
newswire.com/2014/02/18/deep-oceans-need-stewardship-to-prevent-industrial-damage/
The deep ocean is Earth’s least explored environment, but that is rapidly changing. Scientists are calling for a new stewardship ethic as
technological advances open the ocean deeps to the extraction of oil and gas, minerals and precious
metals, and the dwindling supply of land-based materials creates economic incentives for deep sea
industrialization. The deep sea holds a nearly infinite amount of genetic diversity, some of which could provide novel materials or
future therapeutics to treat human diseases, but if not protected, these could be disturbed or lost before humans discover them. “We’re
really in the dark when it comes to the ecology of the deep sea,” said Linwood Pendleton, director of the Ocean and
Coastal Policy Program at the Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions at Duke University. “We know a lot about a few
places, but nobody is dealing with the deep sea as a whole, and that lack of general knowledge is a
problem for decision-making and policy.” Pendleton spoke at the symposium “Deep Ocean Industrialization: A New Stewardship
Frontier” held Sunday at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in Chicago. Cindy Lee Van Dover,
director of the Duke University Marine Laboratory, and Lisa Levin, a biological oceanographer at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography at the
University of California, San Diego, joined Pendleton and other scientists in calling for a stewardship approach to deep sea development. “It is
imperative to work with industry and governance bodies to put progressive environmental regulations in place before industry becomes
established, instead of after the fact,” Van Dover said. “One hundred years from now, we want people to say ‘they got this right based on the
science they had, they weren’t asleep at the wheel.’” Lisa Levin, a biological oceanographer at Scripps Institution of Oceanography in San Diego,
believes the vital functions provided by the deep sea, from carbon sequestration to nurturing fish stocks, are key to the health of the planet. As
the human population has more than doubled in the past 50 years, demand for food, energy, and raw materials from the sea has risen with it,
observed Levin, who has conducted research on the deep sea for more than 30 years. “At the same time, human society has undergone
tremendous changes and we rarely, if ever, think about these affecting our ocean, let alone the deep ocean,” said Levin. “But the truth is that
the types of industrialization that reigned in the last century on land are now becoming a reality in the deep ocean.” “Vast tracts of deep
seabed are now being leased in order to mine nodules, crusts, sulfides, and phosphates rich in elements demanded by our advanced economy,”
she said. At the same time, rising
carbon dioxide emissions are exposing deep-sea ecosystems to additional
stress from climate change impacts that include warmer temperatures, altered food supplies, and
declining pH and oxygen levels. As humans ramp up exploitation of deep-sea fish, energy, minerals,
and genetic resources , a new “stewardship mentality” across countries, economic sectors, and
disciplines is required, Levin said, for the future health and integrity of the deep ocean.
Development- Oil (Offshore Drilling)

Offshore drilling destroys the environment- laundry list of reasons
Jennifer Horton, How Stuff Works contributing writer, B.S. in environmental
studies, Accessed April 16, 2014, “Why is offshore drilling so controversial?,”
http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/energy/offshore-drilling-controversy2.htm, accessed
April 16, 2014
Any time oil drilling is mentioned, you know there's going to be talk of its environmental
impacts. When it comes to offshore oil
drilling, that talk is even more heated, since you're
not just digging underground but also thousands of feet
underwater. Whenever oil is recovered from the ocean floor, other chemicals and toxic substances
come up too -- things like mercury, lead and arsenic that are often released back into the ocean. In
addition, seismic waves used to locate oil can harm sea mammals and disorient whales. ExxonMobil recently had to suspend exploration efforts
near Madagascar after more than 100 whales beached themselves [source: Nixon]. The infrastructure required to drill wells
and transport offshore oil can be equally devastating. A series of canals built across Louisiana wetlands
to transport oil has led to erosion. Along with the destruction of the state's marshland caused by drilling efforts, the canals
have removed an important storm buffer, possibly contributing to the damage caused by Hurricane
Katrina. The petrochemical plants built nearby add to the negative effects [source: Jervis].
Development- Oil (Offshore Drilling)

Ocean exploration would lead to discovering more oil reserves- offshore drilling
would occur
World Ocean Review, German oceanic analysis organization, Accessed April 17,
2014, “Living with the oceans. – A report on the state of the world's oceans,”
http://worldoceanreview.com/en/wor-1/energy/fossil-fuels/, Accessed April 17, 2014
The future of oil lies in our oceans Since industrial oil extraction began in the mid-19th century, 147 billion tonnes of oil have been
pumped from reserves around the world – half of it during the past 20 years. In 2007 alone, oil consumption worldwide reached a total of
about 3.9 billion tonnes. There is no doubt that extraction will soon be unable to keep pace with annually
increasing needs. Experts anticipate that in the next 10 years so-called “peak oil” will be reached, the point at which the world’s oil
supplies go into irreversible decline. Currently the conventional oil reserves – i.e. those which can be recovered easily and affordably
using today’s technology – are estimated to be a good 157 billion tonnes. Of this amount, 26 per cent (41 billion tonnes)
are to be found in offshore areas. In 2007 1.4 billion tonnes of oil, the equivalent of about 37 per cent of annual oil production, was
derived from the ocean. The proportion of offshore production is therefore already relatively high. The most productive areas are currently the
North Sea and the Gulf of Mexico, the Atlantic Ocean off Brazil and West Africa, the Arabian Gulf and the seas off South East Asia. For some
years now the trend has been towards drilling in deeper and deeper water. In 2007 oil was extracted from 157 fields at depths of more than
500 metres. In 2000 there were only 44 such fields. Of these, 91 per cent are situated in the so-called Golden Triangle in the Atlantic between
the Gulf of Mexico, Brazil and West Africa. While the output of the relatively shallow waters of the North Sea (average depth 40 metres) will
reduce in the coming years, production is likely to increase elsewhere, particularly in the Golden Triangle, off India, in the South China Sea and
the Caspian Sea off Kazakhstan. The deeper marine areas therefore harbour additional potential for the future. Experts estimate that the
offshore trend will accelerate as oil becomes increasingly scarce. The downside here is that extraction
is complex and expensive.
For instance, extraction from fields at great depths requires floating production and drilling vessels, or
pumping stations permanently mounted on the ocean bed. >
Geothermal
Geothermal energy development hurts the environment is a laundry list of ways
NewZealand.gov, Official website of the government of New Zealand, July 12,
2013, “Story: Geothermal energy Page 5 – Effects on the environment,”
http://www.teara.govt.nz/en/geothermal-energy/page-5, Accessed April 17, 2014
Depletion of resources The process of extracting geothermal fluids (which include gases, steam and water) for power
generation typically removes heat from natural reservoirs at over 10 times their rate of replenishment.
This imbalance may be partially improved by injecting waste fluids back into the geothermal system. Damage to natural geothermal
features Natural features such as hot springs, mud pools, sinter terraces, geysers, fumaroles (steam vents) and steaming ground can be
easily, and irreparably, damaged by geothermal development. When the Wairākei geothermal field was
tapped for power generation in 1958, the withdrawal of hot fluids from the underground reservoir began to cause long-term
changes to the famous Geyser Valley, the nearby Waiora Valley, and the mighty Karapiti blowhole. The ground sagged 3 metres in
some places, and hot springs and geysers began to decline and die as the supply of steaming water from
below was depleted. In Geyser Valley, one of the first features to vanish was the great Wairākei geyser, which used to play to a height of
42 metres. Subsequently, the famous Champagne Pool, a blue-tinted boiling spring, dwindled away to a faint wisp of steam. In 1965 the Tourist
Hotel Corporation tried to restore it by pumping in some three million litres of water, but to no avail. Geyser Valley continued to deteriorate,
and in 1973 it was shut down as a tourist spectacle. This story has been repeated many times where there has been geothermal development.
Subsidence Extracting geothermal fluids can reduce the pressure in underground reservoirs and cause the
land to sink. The largest subsidence on record is at Wairākei, where the centre of the subsidence bowl is sinking at a rate of almost half a
metre every year. In 2005 the ground was 14 metres lower than it was before the power station was built. As the ground sinks it also moves
sideways and tilts towards the centre. This puts a strain on bores and pipelines, may damage buildings and roads, and can alter surface
drainage patterns. Polluting
waterways Geothermal fluids contain elevated levels of arsenic, mercury, lithium
and boron because of the underground contact between hot fluids and rocks. If waste is released into
rivers or lakes instead of being injected into the geothermal field, these pollutants can damage aquatic
life and make the water unsafe for drinking or irrigation. A serious environmental effect of the
geothermal industry is arsenic pollution. Levels of arsenic in the Waikato River almost always exceed the World Health
Organisation standard for drinking water of 0.01 parts per million. Most of the arsenic comes from geothermal waste water discharged from
the Wairākei power station. Natural features such as hot springs are also a source of arsenic, but it tends to be removed from the water as
colourful mineral precipitates like bright red realgar and yellowy green orpiment. Air emissions Geothermal fluids contain
dissolved gases which are released into the atmosphere. The main toxic gases are carbon dioxide (CO2)
and hydrogen sulfide (H2S). Both are denser than air and can collect in pits, depressions or confined spaces. These gases are a
recognised hazard for people working at geothermal stations or bore fields, and can also be a problem in urban areas. In Rotorua a
number of deaths have been attributed to hydrogen sulfide poisoning, often in motel rooms or hot-pool enclosures. Carbon dioxide is
also a greenhouse gas, contributing to potential climate change. However, geothermal extraction releases far fewer
greenhouse gases per unit of electricity generated than burning fossil fuels such as coal or gas to produce electricity.
Tourism
Tourism concentrates people in the most environmentally sensitive areas
destroying the environment
World Wildlife Foundation, Environmental advocacy organization, Accessed April
17, 2014, “Coastal development problems: Tourism,”
http://wwf.panda.org/about_our_earth/blue_planet/problems/tourism/tourism_pressure/, Accessed
April 17, 2014
Massive influxes of tourists, often to a relatively small area, have a huge impact. They add to the
pollution, waste, and water needs of the local population, putting local infrastructure and habitats under
enormous pressure. For example, 85% of the 1.8 million people who visit Australia's Great Barrier Reef are concentrated in two small
areas, Cairns and the Whitsunday Islands, which together have a human population of just 130,000 or so. Tourist infrastructure In many areas,
massive new tourist developments have been built - including airports, marinas, resorts, and golf courses. Overdevelopment for
tourism has the same problems as other coastal developments , but often has a greater impact as the
tourist developments are located at or near fragile marine ecosystems . For example: mangrove forests and
seagrass meadows have been removed to create open beaches tourist developments such as piers and
other structures have been built directly on top of coral reefs nesting sites for endangered marine
turtles have been destroyed and disturbed by large numbers of tourists on the beaches Careless resorts,
operators, and tourists. The damage doesn't end with the construction of tourist facilities. Some resorts empty their sewage
and other wastes directly into water surrounding coral reefs and other sensitive marine habitats.
Recreational activities also have a huge impact. For example, careless boating, diving, snorkeling, and fishing
have substantially damaged coral reefs in many parts of the world, through people touching reefs, stirring up
sediment, and dropping anchors. Marine animals such as whale sharks, seals, dugongs, dolphins, whales, and birds are also disturbed by
increased numbers of boats, and by people approaching too closely. Tourism
can also add to the consumption of seafood
in an area, putting pressure on local fish populations and sometimes contributing to overfishing. Collection
of corals, shells, and other marine souvenirs - either by individual tourists, or local people who then sell the souvenirs to tourists - also has a
detrimental effect on the local environment. Floating
towns The increased popularity of cruise ships has also
adversely affected the marine environment. Carrying up to 4,000 passengers and crew, these enormous floating
towns are a major source of marine pollution through the dumping of garbage and untreated sewage at
sea, and the release of other shipping-related pollutants.
***Impact Ext.***
Whales- Environment- Species/ Climate Change

Whales are key to the environment—special regulation and climate change
Whale Facts, whale and environmental protection organization, 2014, “Why Are Whales
Important?”, Accessed April 28, http://www.whalefacts.org/why-are-whales-important/
Whales and the environment When it comes to the environment and the oceans ecosystem whales help
regulate the flow of food by helping to maintain a stable food chain and ensuring that certain animal
species do not overpopulate the ocean. A blue whale for example can consume as much as 40 million
krill per day, so you can imagine the impact this would have on stabilizing the aquatic ecosystem if the
blue whale species were to become extinct. When one species of animal that is important to the food chain dies it allows other
species to thrive. At first it may appear that other species are benefiting from no longer having to face a predator such as whales, but over
time these animals will overpopulate and possibly destroy the population of other species that it feeds
on, so whales play an important role in maintaining the balance of the ecosystem by making sure other
species do not overpopulate and destroy the species below them in the food chain. Even whale poop
plays a large role in the environment by helping to offset carbon in the atmosphere. Studies have shown
that the nutrients in sperm whale poop helps stimulate the growth of phytoplankton which pull carbon
from the atmosphere to provide a cleaner and healthier breathing environment for all animals.
Estimates state that as much as 400,000 tonnes of carbon are extracted from the air due to these
whales each year! In additional to feeding carbon fighting phytoplankton the fact that whale poop
stimulates the growth of phytoplankton means that it also helps feed other species that feed on
phytoplankton for their survival. Phytoplankton helps feed the fish allowing them to thrive and
reproduce, and the fish feed many other species that require fish to survive, thus keeping the food chain
stable. In short whale poop plays a major role in maintaining the cycle of aquatic life and is just one of the
many different things that make whales so important.
Whales- Environment- Laundry List

In addition to the moral implications of killing whales, they play a vital role in the
environment- laundry list of reasons
Sara Mynott, professional science communicator, July 09, 2013, “Why Whaling? Why Save
The Whale?”, Accessed April 29 http://www.nature.com/scitable/blog/saltwater-
science/why_whaling_why_save_the
Arguments against whaling are perhaps more intuitive: many whale populations, such as those of the sei and fin whale, are under threat from
human activities and we want to conserve them. Why though? Everybody loves a whale, but what do they add to the ecosystem
and what value are they to us? Beyond the moral obligation that, as we are responsible for much of the
decline in different whale populations, we should also be responsible for bringing whale numbers back up to a healthy level,
where is the incentive? For starters, whales play an important role in ocean ecosystems: Ecology Whales have an
important role to play in nutrient cycling. Their poo, for example, makes organic carbon more accessible to
smaller organisms. Even a dead whale carcass is important in carbon cycling, particularly the export of
carbon to the deep sea. The falling carcass (whale fall) brings carbon acquired at the surface (usually in
the form of plankton) to the sea floor as the whale's body (a large carbon reservoir) sinks. The larger the
whale, the more carbon-filled tissues it has, meaning that larger whales export more carbon. Whaling has
reduced the size of whale populations and the size of whales. It has been estimated that bringing whale populations back to their natural
level will mean 1.6 x 105 tonnes of carbon could be exported to the deep sea through whale falls - that works out
at over 36 double decker busses worth of carbon per day! This is important in the context of global climate change as
this export of carbon to the sediment means it can no longer interact with the atmosphere. As it falls to
the sea floor, a whale carcass can provide food for hundreds of organisms as they flock to a food source
that can keep them going in an environment usually devoid of such bountiful food resources. Here,
scavengers such as hagfish sleeper sharks and many invertebrates chomp their way at the whale's soft tissue, removing 40-60 kg of it per day.
Deep sea worms and crustaceans also feast on the whale carcass, until only the bones remain - the feasting is not over yet though, as this
fuels a host of bone-munching microbes that break down the remains of the whale.
Whales- Economy
Whale populations are key to numerous economies around the world
Sara Mynott, professional science communicator, July 09, 2013, “Why Whaling? Why Save
The Whale?”, Accessed April 29 http://www.nature.com/scitable/blog/saltwater-
science/why_whaling_why_save_the
The Economy Okay, so whales are an integral part of marine ecosystems, but do whales have another value to us? Take a look to
the Scottish Isles, or Canada's western coast for the answer to this one. Whale watching tourism is a lucrative business and
while it's hard to put a value on a species, or on marine biodiversity, it has been estimated that it could generate 413 million US
dollars in marine tourism annually. With much of Japan's whaling being located far from it's coast, tourism presents an unlikely
alternative to the income from selling whale meat here, but many other whaling nations practice much closer to home,
making marine tourism attractive, sustainable and economically viable. There are disadvantages to whale watching
too, as approaching whales and other marine mammals too closely can disrupt their natural behaviour, including feeding patterns and time
spent at the surface. Disruptions to these could have a negative impact on the whale's health, which is why the conduct of whale watching
boats is carefully regulated in countries such as Scotland. Not all countries have strict regulations for this though, and we are still working to
understand the impacts of tourism on whale health. While
whale watching is not a perfect alternative, it is significantly
less harmful to whale populations than commercial whaling and still provides an economic benefit. Their
cuddle-factor aside, whales are important both ecologically and economically, making them important candidates
for conservation. What other marine species do you think should be protected on these grounds?
Overfishing/ Fish loss- A/T “Species Resilient”

Loss of fish populations causes ripples of destabilization- ocean species are not
resilient once we reach a “tipping point”
Philip Ross, MA Journalism and writer for the International Business Times, January 14
2014, “Overfishing Causes Ecosystems To ‘Unravel,’ Fish Populations Can’t Recover After ‘Tipping
Points’ Reached”, Accessed April 29, 2014, http://www.ibtimes.com/overfishing-causes-ecosystems-
unravel-fish-populations-cant-recover-after-tipping-points-reached
As improvements in technology and large-scale fishing methods have made commercial fishing more efficient, faster and more profitable, fish
populationsaround the world have suffered. Starting in the early 1800s, humans have harvested several species of fish to the brink of
extinction. Overfishing is an ecological disaster that affects entire ecosystems, and a new study highlights this point in
bright, neon color. Researchers in the U.S. analyzed fisheries data from around the globe, examining the cumulative effect that occurs
when overfishing depletes a particular population. The results of their investigation, described in a paper published in the journal Proceedings
of the National Academy of Sciences in December, underscore the effect that eliminating one species has on the ecosystem
as a whole. When one fish is no longer there, the entire ecosystem changes, researchers contend, and once
that “tipping point” has been reached, the species can no longer bounce back. “You don’t realize how
interdependent species are until it all unravels,” Felicia Coleman, director of the Florida State University Coastal and Marine
Laboratory and a co-author on the study, said in a statement. The authors noted one particular example of ecosystem collapse that occurred
off the coast of Namibia in southwest Africa. In the 1970s, the northern Benguela ecosystem completely changed as stocks of anchovy and
sardines plummeted. With anchovy and sardines on the way out, bearded goby and jellyfish stepped in to take their place. Which animals
suffered the most? It was actually the populations of African penguins and Cape gannets that bore the brunt of overfishing in the region. The
birds couldn’t survive on goby and jellyfish, and as a result, their numbers declined by 77 percent and 94 percent, respectively. "When you put
all these examples together, you realize there
really is something important going on in the world's ecosystems,"
Joseph Travis, a biological science professor at Florida State University and one of the study’s co-authors, said in a statement. "It's
easy to
write off one case study. But, when you string them all together as this paper does, I think you come
away with a compelling case that tipping points are real, we've crossed them in many ecosystems, and
we'll cross more of them unless we can get this problem under control." Part of the problem, scientists say, is
consumer ignorance about the fish they eat and where it comes from. Also, researchers warn that the fishing industry needs a massive
overhaul, otherwise the world’s food supply will collapse. “What we have today are multinational fleets of roving bandits that conduct serial
depletions and move to more productive grounds,” Robert Steneck from the University of Maine and a co-author of the study told Quartz.
“People in the U.S. are insulated from the reality of overfishing by seeing fish well stocked in their grocery stores.” “Overfishing
and
environmental change have triggered many severe and unexpected consequences,” the authors note in the
study. “As existing communities have collapsed, new ones have become established, fundamentally
transforming ecosystems to those that are often less productive for fisheries, more prone to cycles of
booms and busts, and thus less manageable.”
Overfishing/ Species Loss- “Tipping Point”

Fish population decline pushes us over a “tipping point” which the ocean ecosystem
can’t recover from
Florida State University, researchers at FSU, January 7, 2014 , “Snowball effect of overfishing
highlighted”, Accessed May 3, 2014,
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/01/140107163737.htm
Florida State University researchers have spearheaded a major review of fisheries research that examines the
domino effect that
occurs when too many fish are harvested from one habitat. The loss of a major species from an
ecosystem can have unintended consequences because of the connections between that species and
others in the system. Moreover, these changes often occur rapidly and unexpectedly, and are difficult to
reverse . "You don't realize how interdependent species are until it all unravels," said Felicia Coleman, director of the Florida State
University Coastal and Marine Laboratory and a co-author on the study. Coleman and her co-authors, led by FSU biology professor Joe Travis,
examined case studies of several distressed ecosystems that had been thoroughly changed over the years because of overfishing. For example,
in the Northern Benguela ecosystem off Namibia, stocks of sardine and anchovy collapsed in the 1970s from overfishing and were replaced by
bearded goby and jellyfish. But the bearded goby and jellyfish are far less energy-rich than a sardine or anchovy, which meant that their
populations were not an adequate food source for other sea animals in the region such as penguins, gannets and hake, which had fed on the
sardines and anchovies. African penguins and Cape gannets have declined by 77 percent and 94 percent respectively. Cape hake and deep-
water hake production plummeted from 725,000 metric tons in 1972, to 110,000 metric tons in 1990. And the population of Cape fur seals has
fluctuated dramatically. "When you put all these examples together, you realize there really is something important going on in the world's
ecosystems," Travis said. "It's easy to write off one case study. But, when you string them all together as this paper does, I think you come away
with a compelling case that tipping points are real, we've crossed them in many ecosystems, and we'll cross more of them unless we can get
this problem under control." The full study appears in the Dec. 23 issue of Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Travis and
Coleman and their colleagues are hoping that their research will accelerate changes in how fisheries scientists approach these ecosystem
problems and how fisheries managers integrate system issues into their efforts. They hope that more effort will be devoted to understanding
the key linkages among species that set up tipping points in ecosystems and that managers look for data that can show when a system might be
approaching its tipping point. "It's
a lot easier to back up to avoid a tipping point before you get to it than it is to
find a way to return once you've crossed it" said Travis.
Overfishing/ Shark Loss—Coral Reef

Shark population decline directly weakens coral reef resilience
ENN, Environmental News Network—a non-governmental environment news outlet,
September 23, 2013, “Shark overfishing hurts coral reefs”, Accessed April 29,
http://www.enn.com/wildlife/article/46455?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campa
ign=Feed%3A+WildlifeAndHabitatConservationNews-Enn+(Wildlife+and+Habitat+Conservation+News+-
+ENN)/print/print
The researchers found the overfishing of sharks can result in profound ecological changes. "The reefs provided us with a
unique opportunity to isolate the impact of over-fishing of sharks on reef resilience, and assess that impact in the broader
context of climate change pressures threatening coral reefs," said Ruppert. "Shark fishing appears to have quite dramatic effects on coral reef
ecosystems." "Where shark numbers are reduced due to commercial fishing, there is also a decrease in the
herbivorous fishes which play a key role in promoting reef health." "Our analysis suggests that where shark numbers
are reduced, we see a fundamental change in the structure of food chains on reefs," said project lead and co-author
Mark Meekan."We saw increasing numbers of mid-level predators — such as snappers — and a reduction in the number of herbivores such as
parrotfishes. The parrotfishes are very important to coral reef health because they eat the algae that would otherwise overwhelm young corals
on reefs recovering from natural disturbances." The findings indicate that reefs
depleted of sharks may be slower to recover
from longer-term disturbances, including cyclones and bleaching events. Accordingly, the results suggest that
protecting small reefs from shark fishing could make these ecosystems more resilient to the effects of
climate change. "Healthy populations of reef sharks should be a key target of management strategies that seek to ensure the future
resilience of coral reef ecosystems," conclude the authors.
Coral Reef- Laundry List

Coral reef are key to human survival—economy, food production, storm protection,
and ocean species biodiversity
NOAA, National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration, May 13, 2011 , “Value of Coral
Ecosystems”, Accessed May 5, 2014, http://coralreef.noaa.gov/aboutcorals/values/
Healthy coral reefs are among the most biologically diverse and economically valuable ecosystems on
earth, providing valuable and vital ecosystem services. Coral ecosystems are a source of food for
millions; protect coastlines from storms and erosion; provide habitat, spawning and nursery grounds for
economically important fish species; provide jobs and income to local economies from fishing,
recreation, and tourism; are a source of new medicines, and are hotspots of marine biodiversity. They also
are of great cultural importance in many regions around the world, particularly Polynesia. In the US, coral reefs are found in the waters of the
Western Atlantic and Caribbean (Florida, Puerto Rico, and the US Virgin Islands) and the Pacific Islands (Hawaii, Guam, American Samoa, and
the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands). They are also found along the coasts of over 100 other countries. While it is difficult to
put a dollar value on some of the benefits coral ecosystems provide, one recent estimate gave the
total net benefit of the world's
coral reef ecosystems to be $29.8 billion/year. [a] For example, the economic importance of Hawaiì's coral
reefs, when combining recreational, amenity, fishery, and biodiversity values, were estimated to have
direct economic benefits of $360 million/year. [b] The global value above does not account for the
economic value of deep-sea coral ecosystems, which, while less well studied and understood, also provide important
ecosystem services. Deep-sea corals serve as hot-spots of biodiversity in the deeper ocean and their structure provides enhanced
feeding opportunities, a place to hide from predators, a nursery area for juveniles, fish spawning aggregation sites, and a place for sedentary
invertebrates to grow, much like their coral reef counterparts. These ecosystems have been identified as habitat for commercially important
fishes such as rockfish, shrimp, and crabs.
Deep-sea corals are also being targeted in the search for new medicines.
[c] The value of these services adds to the global value of coral ecosystems.
Noise Pollution- Sonar

Sonar exploration in ocean causes massive noise pollution hurting ocean life
Center for Biological Diversity, organization working to prevent species loss, Accessed
May 5, 2014, “OCEAN NOISE”, Accessed May 5, 2014
http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/campaigns/ocean_noise/
It’s an invisible threat, but noise pollution is a major — and often deadly — menace to ocean wildlife.
Just as there’s hardly a mountaintop free from the roar of airplanes overhead, there’s virtually no place in the world’s oceans where human
sounds aren’t detectable. The
loudest and most disruptive anthropogenic ocean sounds come from military sonar,
oil exploration and industrial shipping, and the Center is working to protect our marine life from each of these threats. Naval sonar
systems work like acoustic floodlights, sending sound waves through ocean waters for tens or even
hundreds of miles to disclose large objects in their path. But this activity entails deafening sound: Even
one low-frequency active sonar loudspeaker can be as loud as a twin-engine fighter jet at takeoff. This
onslaught of noise, which far exceeds the Navy’s own safety limits for humans, can have a devastating effect on marine species — especially
whales, who use their keen sense of hearing for almost everything they do. Sonar
can displace whales from their preferred
habitat and disrupts feeding, breeding, nursing, communication, navigation and other behaviors
essential to their survival. Most appallingly, sonar can directly injure whales — very often killing them — by
causing hearing loss, hemorrhages and other kinds of tissue trauma, or by driving them rapidly to the
surface or to shore.
Noise Pollution- Sonar

Noise pollution in the form of sonar or seismic surveying harms ocean species in a
variety of ways. Some impacts like mass death are obvious but other more subtle
harmful effects emerge too
Linda S. Weilgart, Ph.D. Department of Biology Dalhousie University Halifax, Nova
Scotia Canada, 2008, “The Impact of Ocean Noise Pollution on Marine Biodiversity”, Accessed May
5, 2014,
http://awionline.org/sites/default/files/uploads/legacy-
uploads/documents/Weilgart_Biodiversity_2008-1238105851-10133.pdf
The only study I am aware of which related species diversity to ocean noise suggested a decline in cetacean (whale and dolphin) species
diversity with an increase in the intensity of seismic survey activity (Parente et al. 2007). There was no significant change in
oceanographic conditions measured, and survey effort for cetaceans was constant during this period, supporting the conclusion that the
decline in diversity was due to noise. Moreover, there was an increase in the number of species found in
nearby areas not exposed to intense seismic noise. It seemed as if transient species of dolphins moved out, accounting for the
decreased species diversity. Noise in the form of naval sonar or seismic surveys can be deadly to cetaceans in at least some cases. Whales have been found to die
within hours, by stranding or deaths at sea, from even a transient and relatively brief exposure to moderate levels of mid-frequency military sonar (Fernández et al.
2005; NOAA and U.S. Department of the Navy 2001). Since 1960, when more
powerful sonars emerged, more than 40 mass strandings of
Cuvier’s beaked whale have been reported world-wide. About 28 of these occurred together with naval maneuvers involving sonar or near
naval bases, or with seismic surveys. In contrast, from 1914 to 1960, there was only one mass stranding reported of this species. Whales
appear to die from hemorrhaging in their brain and heart, perhaps as a result of decompression sickness
from an altered dive pattern induced by a panic response to the noise. This family of whales known as the beaked whales
seems particularly sensitive to noise. Beaked whales are also found in small, resident populations that appear to be genetically isolated (Dalebout et al. 2005). In
one well-studied beaked whale population, there was a noticeable decline in numbers for years after a sonar-induced stranding, implying that much or most of the
local population was either displaced or killed (Claridge 2006). Especially if local populations of beaked whales are indeed genetically isolated as is thought, such
effects would cause a decline in MGR. Even giant squid have apparently mass stranded due to seismic air guns (Guerra et
al. 2004). A total of 9 stranded in 2001 and 2003. All suffered internal injuries, some severe, with internal organs damaged. Other
invertebrates have exhibited good hearing ability. Prawn are as sensitive to sound as many fish,
requiring that invertebrates be considered when evaluating the potential impacts of ocean noise on the
marine ecosystem (Lovell et al. 2005). Brown shrimp reared in tanks had a higher metabolic rate under noise conditions, leading to a reduction in growth
and reproduction over three months (Lagardère 1982). Snow crabs exhibited bruised organs and abnormal ovaries, smaller larvae, delayed development, soiled gills,
and signs of stress in response to seismic noise (Department of Fisheries and Oceans 2004). There were indications that lobster showed increased food consumption
and histochemical changes for weeks to months after low-level exposure to seismic noise. Codfish also showed increased food consumption for more than a month
Other sub-lethal effects have also
following seismic noise exposure, as well as an alteration of gene expression in the brains of the exposed cod.
been documented. These may be as serious as lethal impacts because they may affect more animals yet
be harder to detect. Seismic air guns have been shown to extensively damage fish ears at distances of
500 m to several kilometers (McCauley et al. 2003). Reduced catch rates of 40-80% and fewer fish near seismic surveys have been
reported for cod, haddock, rockfish, herring, sand eel, and blue whiting (e.g. Engås et al. 1996; Skalski et al. 1992, Slotte et al. 2004). Only
moderate levels of noise have been enough to cause temporary hearing damage in some species of fish,
with fish occasionally requiring weeks to recover their hearing (Scholik and Yan 2002; Amoser and Ladich 2003). Noise has also
been shown to produce a stress response in some fish. Wysocki et al. (2006) found that all three fish species studied secreted stress hormones in the presence of
shipping noise, regardless of the species’ hearing sensitivity (whether it was a hearing specialist or not). Fish can also react to noise by dropping to deeper depths,
becoming motionless, becoming more active, or forming more compact schools. Ship noise interfered with the ability of toadfish to detect sound in a river estuary,
which could affect communication necessary for reproduction (Vasconcelos et al. 2007). Bluefin tuna showed a disruption in their schooling structure and swimming
behavior with boat noise, as well as an increase in aggressive behavior (Sarà et al. 2007). As coordinated schooling helps tuna to home more accurately to spawning
and feeding grounds, their migrations could be impacted. Reef fish, at the critical settlement stage, need to be able to hear aspects of reef noise to select suitable
habitat (Simpson et al. 2008). Anthropogenic noise that interferes with their “soundscape” could impact their natural behavior.
Oil Production Kills Environment

Oil spills devastate marine ecosystems
Michael Sutton, Vice President Center for the Future of the Oceans, Montgomery Bay
Aquarium, February 21, 2012, “Business: Blue and Green” https://www.bsr.org/en/our-
insights/bsr-insight-article/business-blue-and-green
Pollution represents another major threat. Plastic trash, when ingested, frequently kills albatross and sea turtles. Oil
spills devastate coastal
communities and pose a significant and immediate threat to ocean ecosystems. It goes without saying that spills
also are bad for business: Fishing, tourism, and other ocean-related industries in the Gulf of Mexico
were devastated by the Deepwater Horizon spill. And BP has already lost hundreds of millions of dollars
and may have to pay an additional US$25 billion to settle related litigation.

Drilling will result in an oil shock and destroys the environment
Chrystia Freeland, writer for Reuters, August 9, 2012, “The Coming Oil Boom”, Accessed May
5, 2014, http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/10/us/10iht-letter10.html?_r=2
NEW YORK — Forget America’s fiscal cliff, Europe’s currency troubles or the emerging-markets slowdown.
The most important story in the global economy today may well be some good news that isn’t yet making as many headlines —
the coming surge in oil production around the world. Until very recently, our collective assumption was that oil was
running out. That was partly a matter of what seemed like geological common sense. It took millions of years for the earth to crush
plankton into fossil fuels; it is logical to think that it would take millions of years to create more. The rise of the
emerging markets, with their energy-hungry billions, was a further reason it seemed obvious we would have
less oil and gas in 2020 than we do today. Obvious — but wrong. Thanks in part to technologies like horizontal drilling and
hydraulic fracking, we are entering a new age of abundant oil. As the energy expert Leonardo Maugeri
contends in a recent report published by the Belfer Center at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard, “contrary to what most people believe,
oil supply capacity is growing worldwide at such an unprecedented level that it might outpace
consumption.” Mr. Maugeri, a research fellow at the Belfer Center and a former oil industry executive, bases that assertion on a field-by-field analysis of
most of the major oil exploration and development projects in the world. He concludes that “by 2020, the world’s oil production
capacity could be more than 110 million barrels per day, an increase of almost 20 percent.” Four
countries will lead the coming oil boom: Iraq, the United States, Canada and Brazil. Much of the “new” oil is coming
on-stream thanks to a technology revolution that has put hard-to-extract deposits within reach: Canada’s oil
sands, the United States’ shale oil, Brazil’s presalt oil. “The extraction technologies are not new,” Mr. Maugeri explains in the report, “but the
combination of technologies used to exploit shale and tight oils has evolved. The technology can also be used to reopen and recover more oil from conventional,
established oilfields.” Mr.
Maugeri thinks the tipping point will be 2015. Until then, the oil market will be “highly
volatile” and “prone to extreme movements in opposite directions.” But after 2015, Mr. Maugeri
predicts a “glut of oil,” which could lead to a fall, or even a “collapse,” in prices. At a time when the global meme is of
America’s inevitable economic decline, the surge in oil supply capacity is an important contrarian indicator. Mr. Maugeri calculates that the United States “could
conceivably produce up to 65 percent of its oil consumption needs domestically.” That national energy boom is already providing a powerful economic stimulus in
some parts of the country — just look at North Dakota. Crucially, at a time when one of the biggest social and political problems in the United States is the
disappearance of well-paid blue-collar work, particularly for men, oil patch jobs fill that void. What Mr. Maugeri dubs the next oil revolution also has tremendous
geopolitical implications. One way to understand the battlegrounds of our young century is through the pipelines that flow beneath them. The coming surge in oil
production, particularly from North America, will transform that geopolitical equation. Equally significant is the impact of oil on the most important human problem
of our times: protecting the environment. The
sources of oil that will fuel the coming boom are harder to reach than the
supplies of the 20th century, and the technologies required to extract them are more invasive. That will
be one fault line in what is sure to be the escalating battle between environmentalists and the oil
industry.
Oil Production= Runaway Climate Change

Oil responsible for increasing greenhouse gas emissions which will cause runaway
warming
Wayne Parry, senior writer for LiveScience, July 20, 2012, “Greenhouse gas emissions
continue to climb in 2011”, Accessed May 5, 2014, http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-205_162-
57476887/greenhouse-gas-emissions-continue-to-climb-in-2011/
In 2011, the burning of fossil fuels, as well as other activities such as cement and oil production,
produced 3 percent more carbon dioxide in 2011, bringing this segment of emissions to an all-time
37.5 billion-ton (34 billion-metric tons) high that year, a European analysis reports. Top emitters The past
decade has seen a 2.7 percent annual increase in carbon dioxide emissions. China, the United States, the European
Union, India, the Russian Federation and Japan rank as the top five emitters, from highest to lowest. Last year's increase was driven by China and India, which
saw their carbon dioxide emissions jump by 9 and 6 percent, respectively. Meanwhile, emissions from the European Union, the United States and Japan all
decreased, according to the report, Trends in Global CO2 Emissions. "Although all developing countries together increased their emissions on
average by 6 percent, the increases in China and India caused by far the largest increase in global emissions," the report notes. The
report, by the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency and the E.U.'s Joint Research Centre,
does not include carbon dioxide emitted by deforestation, forest fires and other land-use related
activities. These sources could potentially add between 10 and 20 percent to the carbon dioxide
emission figures, the authors write. The authors also note that renewable energy technology, such as solar, wind and biofuels,
accounts for a small share of energy sources; however they found its use is accelerating. Carbon countdown If global emissions of
carbon dioxide continue to increase at their current rate, within two decades they will exceed the
amount necessary to limit global warming to 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit (2 degrees Celsius), the target
established in international negotiations, the authors of the report write.

Offshore drilling kills marine ecosystems
Nicholas Cunningham, Policy Analyst at the American Security Project, February 17,
2012, “Offshore Oil Drilling in the U.S. Arctic, Part Three: Concerns and Recommendations”, Accessed
May 5, 2014, http://www.thearcticinstitute.org/2012/07/offshore-oil-drilling-in-us-arctic-part_19.html
Oil drilling in the marine environment has been shown to have deleterious effects on the marine environment.
Evidence suggests that noise from seismic surveys conducted during oil exploration damage acoustic animals
such as whales, which can ultimately lead to fatalities if within close proximity.[ii] While whales can generally
alter migration patterns to avoid such dangers, an increase in industrial activity may push whales
further away from preferred habitats, potentially damaging feeding or spawning patterns. Increased
tanker traffic associated with higher oil exploration and production will worsen noise pollution in the Chukchi and Beaufort
Seas. Additionally, the impacts of hydrocarbon releases in the marine environment have been shown
to cause detrimental impacts on reproductive health, immunological and neurological functioning, as
well as higher incidences of mortality for marine wildlife.[iii] Contaminants from oil and gas drilling are also
believed to travel higher up on the food chain, ultimately having cascading effects for marine
ecosystems. Shell’s 2012 exploration plans include drilling exploratory wells in the Chukchi Sea, where bowhead whales migrate to during the spring
months.[iv]
Ocean Acidification= Species Loss

Ocean acidification makes the habitat unlivable for various keystone species
NOAA, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, April 30, 2014 , “NOAA-led
researchers discover ocean acidity is dissolving shells of tiny snails off the U.S. West Coast”, Accessed
May 5, 2014, http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2014/20140430_oceanacidification.html
“Our findings are the first evidence that a large fraction of the West Coast pteropod
population is being affected by ocean
acidification,” said Nina Bednarsek, Ph.D., of NOAA’s Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory in Seattle, the lead author of the paper.
“Dissolving coastal pteropod shells point to the need to study how acidification may be affecting the larger marine
ecosystem. These nearshore waters provide essential habitat to a great diversity of marine species,
including many economically important fish that support coastal economies and provide us with food."
The term “ocean acidification” describes the process of ocean water becoming corrosive as a result of absorbing nearly a third of the carbon
dioxide released into the atmosphere from human sources. This change in ocean chemistry is affecting marine life, particularly organisms with
calcium carbonate skeletons or shells, such as corals, oysters, mussels, and small creatures in the early stages of the food chain such as
pteropods. The pteropod is a free-swimming snail found in oceans around the world that grows to a size of about one-eighth to one-half inch.
The research team, which also included scientists from NOAA’s Northwest Fisheries Science Center and Oregon State University, found that the
highest percentage of sampled pteropods with dissolving shells were along a stretch of the continental shelf from northern Washington to
central California, where 53 percent of pteropods sampled using a fine mesh net had severely dissolved shells. The
ocean’s absorption
of human-caused carbon dioxide emissions is also increasing the level of corrosive waters near the
ocean’s surface where pteropods live. “We did not expect to see pteropods being affected to this extent
in our coastal region for several decades,” said William Peterson, Ph.D., an oceanographer at NOAA’s Northwest Fisheries
Science Center and one of the paper’s co-authors. “This study will help us as we compare these results with future observations to analyze how
the chemical and physical processes of ocean acidification are affecting marine organisms.” Richard Feely, senior scientist from NOAA’s Pacific
Marine Environmental Lab and co-author of the research article, said that more research is needed to study how corrosive waters may be
affecting other species in the ecosystem. "We do know that organisms like oyster larvae and pteropods are affected by
water enriched with carbon dioxide. The impacts on other species, such as other shellfish and larval or
juvenile fish that have economic significance, are not yet fully understood." “Acidification of our oceans
may impact marine ecosystems in a way that threatens the sustainability of the marine resources we
depend on,” said Libby Jewett, Director of the NOAA Ocean Acidification Program. “Research on the progression and impacts of ocean
acidification is vital to understanding the consequences of our burning of fossil fuels.”
Ocean Acidification= Species Loss

Ocean acidification destroys a litany of environmental factors essential to human
survival
Climate Interpreter, Organization building awareness about oceanic environmental
issues, December 18, 2013, “Ocean Acidification - Effects on Humans”, Accessed May 5, 2014,
http://climateinterpreter.org/content/ocean-acidification-effects-humans
Ocean acidification will have drastic effects on shelled organisms and on coral reefs, but what about its
effects on humans? Many people mistakenly believe that the oceans may be turning to acid, and that it will no longer be safe for
humans enter the water. This is not true, even in the most extreme scenarios for the next century. An ocean pH of 7.8 is in not directly harmful
to humans, in fact many swimming pool maintenance guides suggest that people keep their pool pH between 7.2 and 7.8. So, why would
ocean acidification be detrimental to human health? The previous two lessons were focused on the marine food chain and
on the coral reef ecosystem. Humans are inextricably linked to the health of the ocean . We have always relied
on the ocean's resources for food, recreation, transportation and medicines. From an interpretive standpoint, the
important thing is to help people realize how they are personally connected to the ocean, and then to be able to explain to them how that
connection is being jeopardized by ocean acidification. One
of the most obvious connections people have with the
ocean is seafood. Most of the shellfish we eat are going to be negatively impacted by ocean acidification
due to the fact that they will be unable to build sturdy shells. Some oyster hatcheries in the Pacific Northwest have
already been impacted, and have seen declines in larval settlement and survival rates. Pteropods may seem insignificant to many people, but
since they are a major food source for fish, their survival is very important to us. Most people recognize the aesthetic qualities of coral reefs,
but it
is important that people realize the vital role reefs play in our daily lives. There is a good chance
that people are already connected to at least one of these roles, and NOAA's coral reef website
http://coralreef.noaa.gov/aboutcorals/values/ breaks it down in a user-friendly manner by dividing the value of coral reefs into five categories:
Biodiversity http://coralreef.noaa.gov/aboutcorals/values/biodiversity/ Coastal Protection
http://coralreef.noaa.gov/aboutcorals/values/coastalprotection/ Fisheries http://coralreef.noaa.gov/aboutcorals/values/fisheries/
Medicine http://coralreef.noaa.gov/aboutcorals/values/medicine/ Tourism and Recreation
http://coralreef.noaa.gov/aboutcorals/values/tourismrecreation/ The virtual seafood buffet website listed below is a fun and visual way to
make direct connections between people and ocean acidification. You can click on food items, the fish in the tank, or even on the person to find
out how ocean acidification will affect it! Lesson Take Away: Ocean acidification will affect humans too! It will affect the
food we eat since most of our shellfish requires calcium carbonate to form or to fortify their shells. Many of the fish we eat are also
dependent on shelled animals for their food source, so the entire food chain is in jeopardy! The uncertain future of coral reefs
due to ocean acidification is also a major concern. The presence of healthy coral reefs is imperative to
our survival because we rely on them for food, coastal protection, medicines and tourism dollars.
Sea Level Rise

Ice caps susceptible to melting—increased warming will cause sea levels to rise 188
feet
Alister Doyle, Environment Correspondent, May 5, 2014, “Antarctic Ice Shelf On Brink Of
Unstoppable Melt That Could Raise Sea Levels For 10,000 Years”, Accessed May 5, 2014
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/05/05/antarctic-ice-melt_n_5263660.html
OSLO, May 4 (Reuters) - Part of East Antarctica is more vulnerable than expected to a thaw that could trigger an
unstoppable slide of ice into the ocean and raise world sea levels for thousands of years, a study showed on
Sunday. The Wilkes Basin in East Antarctica, stretching more than 1,000 km (600 miles) inland, has enough ice to raise sea
levels by 3 to 4 metres (10-13 feet) if it were to melt as an effect of global warming, the report said. The Wilkes
is vulnerable because it is held in place by a small rim of ice, resting on bedrock below sea level by the coast of the frozen continent. That
"ice plug" might melt away in coming centuries if ocean waters warm up. "East Antarctica's Wilkes Basin is like a bottle on a
slant. Once uncorked, it empties out," Matthias Mengel of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, lead author of the study in the
journal Nature Climate Change, said in a statement. Co-author Anders Levermann, also at Potsdam in Germany, told Reuters the main finding
was that the ice flow would be irreversible, if set in motion. He
said there was still time to limit warming to levels to keep
the ice plug in place. Almost 200 governments have promised to work out a U.N. deal by the end of 2015
to curb increasing emissions of man-made greenhouse gases that a U.N. panel says will cause more droughts, heatwaves,
downpours and rising sea levels. Worries about rising seas that could swamp low-lying areas from Shanghai to Florida focus most on ice in
Greenland and West Antarctica, as well as far smaller amounts of ice in mountain ranges from the Himalayas to the Andes. Sunday's study is
among the first to gauge risks in East Antarctica, the biggest wedge of the continent and usually considered stable. "I would not be surprised if
this (basin) is more vulnerable than West Antarctica," Levermann said. BIG THAW Antarctica, the size of the United States and Mexico
combined, holds enough ice to raise sea levels by some 57 metres (188 feet) if it ever all melted.
Sea Level Rise

Skeptics are wrong, warming is real and sea level rise isn’t over exaggerated
John Cook, the Climate Communication Fellow for the Global Change Institute at the
University of Queensland and founder of Skeptical Science, 2014 , “How much is sea level
rising?”, Accessed May 5, 2014, http://www.skepticalscience.com/sea-level-rise-basic.htm
Climate Myth... Sea level rise is exaggerated "We are told sea level is rising and will soon swamp all of our cities. Everybody knows that the
Pacific island of Tuvalu is sinking. ... Around 1990 it became obvious the local tide-gauge did not agree - there was no evidence of 'sinking.' So
scientists at Flinders University, Adelaide, set up new, modern, tide-gauges in 12 Pacific islands. Recently, the whole project was abandoned as
there was no sign of a change in sea level at any of the 12 islands for the past 16 years." (Vincent Gray). Gavin
Schmidt investigated
the claim that tide gauges on islands in the Pacific Ocean show no sea level rise and found that the data
show a rising sea level trend at every single station. But what about global sea level rise? Sea level rises as ice on
land melts and as warming ocean waters expand. As well as being a threat to coastal habitation and
environments, sea level rise corroborates other evidence of global warming The blue line in the graph below clearly
shows sea level as rising, while the upward curve suggests sea level is rising faster as time goes on. The upward curve agrees with global
temperature trends and with the accelerating melting of ice in Greenland and other places. Because the behavior of sea level is such an
important signal for tracking climate change, skeptics seize on the sea level record in an effort to cast doubt on this evidence. Sea level bounces
up and down slightly from year to year so it's possible to cherry-pick data falsely suggesting the overall trend is flat, falling or linear. You can try
this yourself. Starting with two closely spaced data points on the graph below, lay a straight-edge between them and notice how for a short
period of time you cancreate almost any slope you prefer, simply by being selective about what data points you use. Now choose data points
farther apart. Notice that as your selected data points cover more time, the more your mini-graph reflects the big picture. The lesson? Always
look at all the data, don't be fooled by selective presentations. Other skeptic arguments about sea level concern the validity of observations,
obtained viatide gauges and more recently satellite altimeter observations. Tide gauges must take into account changes in the height of land
itself caused by local geologic processes, a favorite distraction for skeptics to highlight. Not surprisingly, scientists measuring
sea
level with tide gauges are aware of and compensate for these factors. Confounding influences are accounted for in
measurements and while they leave some noise in the record they cannot account for the observed upward trend. Various technical criticisms
are mounted against satellite altimeter measurements by skeptics. Indeed, deriving millimeter-level accuracy from orbit is a stunning technical
feat so it's not hard to understand why some people find such an accomplishment unbelievable. In point of fact, researchers demonstrate this
height measurement technique's accuracy to be within 1mm/year. Most importantly
there is no form of residual error that
could falsely produce the upward trend in observations. As can be seen in an inset of the graph above, tide gauge and
satellite altimeter measurements track each other with remarkable similarity. These two independent systems mutually support the observed
trend in sea level. If
an argument depends on skipping certain observations or emphasizes uncertainty while
ignoring an obvious trend, that's a clue you're being steered as opposed to informed. Don't be mislead by only a
carefully-selected portion of the available evidence being disclosed. Current sea level rise is after all not exaggerated , in fact
the opposite case is more plausible. Observational data and changing conditions in such places as Greenland suggest if there's a
real problem here it's underestimation of future sea level rise. IPCC synthesis reports offer conservative projections of sea level increase based
on assumptions about future behavior of ice sheets and glaciers, leading to estimates of sea level
roughly following a linear
upward trend mimicking that of recent decades. In point of fact, observed sea level rise is already above IPCC projections and
strongly hints at acceleration while at the same time it appears the mass balance of continental ice envisioned by the IPCC is overly optimistic
(Rahmstorf 2010 ).
Oceans Prevent Human Extinction/ Turns Economy

Ocean ecosystem decline destroys the world economy and kills the human race
Peter Seligmann, chairman and CEO of Conservation International, April 2014, “Ocean
Health Is Human Health”, Accessed May 4, 2014, http://blog.conservation.org/2014/04/ocean-health-is-
human-health/
The largest place on the planet is in trouble. Oceans cover 71% of the Earth’s surface, and ocean ecosystems
generate at least US$ 21 trillion in economic benefits each year. But a perfect storm of massive challenges, from
collapsing fisheries to plastic pollution to ocean acidification, is threatening the integrity of marine ecosystems. These threats put at risk the
essential benefits
people receive from healthy oceans: sustainable fisheries, coastal protection, carbon
sequestration, coastal economies and livelihoods, tourism and recreation and many others. This week, I was
one of 700 leaders from governments, business, civil society and communities attending the Global Oceans Action Summit in The Hague,
Netherlands. I am encouraged by the fact that many countries and businesses attending the summit have moved beyond the point of talking
about problems to taking immediate action for ocean health and begin the transition toward a more sustainable society. More than 27 years
ago, I founded the organization Conservation International (CI) to take on the most urgent and important issues of our time. Today, I believe
ocean health is one of those issues. We
simply cannot survive — let alone prosper — if we do not reverse the
destruction of the ocean’s natural capital. Ocean health is a complex challenge. In order to achieve sustainable solutions, all
sectors of society must come together and contribute their unique skills and perspectives. Governments and financial institutions need to
accelerate efforts to bring stakeholders together to develop shared vision, goals and measures of ocean health and provide the financing
necessary to deliver on these ambitious plans. It is also essential that this is done rapidly in effective and practical ways. We need to be
impatient. We cannot wait for everybody around the world to sign on to one consensus plan. Instead, we must partner with those who are
committed to immediate action to improve ocean health. Here’s some good news: Some of the groundwork is already done. Tools like the
Ocean Health Index are already allowing scientists to define the baseline for ocean health against which to evaluate the success of future
actions and interventions. We need to recognize that our measures are only as good as the accuracy and resolution of the data they are based
upon. Therefore, countries need to adopt the Ocean Health Index and compile the necessary data to guide the identification of priorities and
tracking of progress. While the initial cost (in time and money) of creating tools like the Ocean Health Index and the required data may seem
high, they should not be viewed as “costs” per se; in fact, they represent sound investments. The
true cost would be if we
continued to mismanage our most valuable global resources. For example, the World Bank estimates
the losses from poor fisheries management to total US$50 billion worldwide. We cannot afford to ignore the
management of our oceans. The well-being of our society — indeed, our very survival — depends on their
health. This is particularly true for the 40% of countries that have larger ocean areas than land, and even
more so for the 18% of nations that have 10 times more ocean than land. Clearly, the path for the development
aspirations of these countries goes through ocean health. From the Global Oceans Action Summit, it is clear to me that businesses are
increasingly aware of their supply chains’ dependence on healthy oceans. Companies present at the summit emphasized their commitment to
innovation and best practices, including finding ways to reduce the need for feed in aquaculture and to eliminate illegally caught fish from their
supply chains. Throughout the last couple of years, I have seen a growing number of businesses begin to measure their carbon and freshwater
footprints and to use the information to improve their performance. Next, we need companies to report on their impacts on ocean health —
positive and negative — and demonstrate that performance can improve and will ensure continued return on investments, both economically
and ecologically. Non-governmental organizations, including CI, play a key role in innovating and developing new ocean sustainability tools and
solutions. These organizations can often take greater risks to develop new innovations than what governments and businesses are willing to
accept, thereby accelerating new approaches and action. The most immediate opportunity for action and results that I saw at the summit is the
importance of rewarding the governments, companies and organizations who are already leading the way to improve marine health. All sectors
of society need to stand behind leaders who have demonstrated political will and courage by embracing ambitious ocean initiatives and targets.
A perfect example is the Pacific Oceanscape, an initiative led by 15 nations in the Western and Central Pacific who aim to accelerate
collaboration for ocean health. At the summit, Prime Minister Henry Puna of the Cook Islands spoke of his country’s contribution to the Pacific
Oceanscape by creating the Cook Islands Marine Park, the largest marine managed area in the world extending a staggering 1.1 million square
kilometers (about 425,000 square miles — an area almost as large as Ethiopia). The rest of the world should support these nations —
technically, financially and politically — to deliver on their bold vision and aspirations for a healthy ocean that can continue to benefit people
economically, nutritionally, socially and environmentally. I invite the international community to work with us in partnering with these nations
to demonstrate to the world that action and progress are possible, and that ocean health really is human
health .
Oceans Prevent Human Extinction/ Turns Economy

Ocean collapse kills global economy and kills off humanity
Dr. Graham J. Edgar, Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of
Tasmania, 2013, “About the Global Ocean Refuge System (GLORES)”, Accessed May 4, 2014,
http://globaloceanrefuge.org/about/
The fate of humankind could hinge on our capacity to recover life in our world’s largest life support
system ― the oceans. To ensure our future, we need a robust solution that will allow oceans and the life within them to flourish despite
existing and future threats. Using the latest science, powerful new technologies and novel ways of influencing governance, the Global Ocean
Refuge System (GLORES, pronounced glôr-ees) will facilitate enduring ocean stewardship on a global scale. The world needs an effective global
system of strongly protected areas to recover marine life so people regain the benefits of healthy oceans including fresh seafood, clean
beaches, abundant well-paid jobs and major tax revenues to governments. GLORES can make this happen. Living oceans are essential
to human survival and prosperity, but are in deep trouble worldwide.[i] The growing human population is demanding
more while reducing the oceans’ capacity to sustain us. We now risk mass extinction and severe
reductions in crucial ecosystem services.[ii] Global institutions recognize the issue and the World Bank states that “without
action to turn around the declining health of the oceans, the consequences for economies, communities and
ecosystems will be irreversible.”[iv] At the urging of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), governments and international
governmental organizations have strategically secured essential food crops in facilities such as the Global Seed Vault in Svalbard. But the vast
majority of marine species cannot yet be maintained outside their habitats; the only way to conserve them is in their habitats. Humankind
needs a comprehensive, science-based and cost-effective system to safeguard life in the sea.
Oceans Prevent Human Extinction

Ocean health is directly linked to human survival—humanity won’t make it without a
robust ocean ecosystem
Dr. Sylvia A. Earle, National Geographic Society Explorer-in-Residence, November 1,
2013, “Indispensable Ocean: Aligning Ocean Health and Human Well-Being”, Accessed May 4, 2014,
http://newswatch.nationalgeographic.com/2013/11/01/indispensable-ocean-aligning-ocean-health-
and-human-well-being/
In a presentation at the World Bank headquarters in 2009, I began by showing the classic image of Earth from space and commented: “There it
is—The World Bank. Throughout the
history of humankind, we have been drawing down the assets, living on
the capital without accounting properly for the losses.” This is especially true of the ocean, where
impacts are less obvious than for terrestrial systems. Current policies and mind-sets globally were formed decades ago
when it seemed the ocean was “too big to fail.” But failing it is, with about half the coral reefs, kelp forests, mangroves,
sea grass meadows and coastal marshes globally gone or in serious decline, hundreds of coastal dead zones, steep reduction in numerous
commercially exploited species of sharks, swordfish, tunas, cod, salmon and many others. At the same time, the
role of the ocean in
governing climate, weather, production of oxygen, the carbon cycle, water cycle and overall planetary
chemistry has come into clear focus. Now we know: If the ocean is in trouble, so are we . It is time to take
care of the ocean as if our lives depend on it —because they do. I admit to being skeptical at The Economist’s World
Ocean Summit in Singapore early in 2012 when World Bank President, Robert Zoellick announced the formation of the Global Partnership for
Oceans (GPO) and the intent to commit funding aimed at alleviating the decline of critical ocean systems that in turn are affecting the economy,
health, security, and very existence of people, especially those who are least well-off. Zoellick spoke of addressing perverse subsidies that have
fostered over-sized industrial fishing fleets that have laid waste to vast regions of the sea with social
and economic consequences
to people everywhere, especially those in coastal areas who rely directly on the ocean for sustenance. He
noted the costly neglect of ocean research, concerns about global warming, ocean acidification, sea level rise and the connections of
ocean health to human survival and well-being.

Ocean health is key to human survival—not past the tipping point yet
Marine Conservation Institute, marine scientists and environmental-policy advocates
dedicated to saving ocean life for us and future generations, December 18, 2013 ,
“MARINE CONSERVATION INSTITUTE ANNOUNCES “14 THINGS HUMANS CAN DO TO MAKE THE OCEANS
MORE ABUNDANT IN 2014””, Accessed april 4, 2014, http://www.marine-
conservation.org/news/releases/2013/14-things-for-the-ocean-in-2014/
In honor of the start of another year of trying to motivate humankind to work together to save our oceans, Marine Conservation
Institute today announced its list of “14 Things Humans Can Do to Make the Oceans More Abundant in 2014.” The world’s oceans are vital to
human survival , yet they face growing challenges. The list from Marine Conservation Institute contains specific ocean issues, and
geographic areas representative of those issues, that need continued attention in 2014 and beyond. 1. Establish marine protected areas (Ross Sea, Antarctica).
The creation of marine protected areas is one of the best tools available for ocean protection. The
waters around Antarctica are still relatively untouched by human activity and home to almost 10,000
unique species. Although talks surrounding the creation of a protected zone in the Ross Sea broke down this year, international partners have vowed to
return to the table in 2014 and continue working to protect this ocean area. 2. Reduce introductions of alien species (Arctic Ocean). As the planet
warms, and sea ice melts, ships are now able to transit this once impenetrable region, bringing
unwelcome visitors along with them. The Arctic Ocean has long been protected against invasive species
by its ice cover and cold temperatures, but new shipping lanes are carrying new creatures to waters
around the North Pole. Scientists are studying these changes, and renewed commitments to curb the transport and introduction of alien species are
required to ensure that the Arctic Ocean isn’t overrun as shipping expands in this fragile region.

Healthy oceans are key to all life- food, medicine, climate, jobs
NRDC, National Resources Defense Council is the nation's most effective environmental action
group, combining the grassroots power of 1.3 million members and online activists with the courtroom
clout and expertise of more than 350 lawyers, scientists and other professionals, October 4, 2011,
“Reviving Our Oceans” Accessed May 5, 2014 http://www.nrdc.org/water/oceans/policy.asp
The oceans are the planet's life support system. We depend on oceans to moderate our climate and
filter pollution. We rely on the rich diversity of ocean life to supply us with food and medicines. Our oceans give
us a place to play, to work, to rest and to discover. In recent years, however, two major independent commissions reported
that our oceans are in serious trouble -- in a state, according to the Pew Oceans Commission, of "silent collapse,"
threatening jobs, cultures, coastal ecosystems and marine life. Urgent Ocean Threats Oceans are not, as once
imagined, inexhaustible resources, so vast that human activity can barely make a dent. In fact, the evidence is just
the opposite. Major threats to ocean health include the following:

Collapse of Marine ecosystems causes extinction
Thair Shaikh, staff reporter for CNN, June 21, 2011, “Marine life facing mass extinction, report
says”, Accessed May 5, 2014, http://articles.cnn.com/2011-06-
21/world/ocean.extinction.global.warming_1_mass-extinction-coral-reefs-marine-life?_s=PM:WORLD
Marine life is under severe threat from global warming, pollution and habitat loss, with a high risk of " major
extinctions " according to a panel of experts. These are the conclusions of a distinguished group of marine scientists who
met at Oxford University, England, in April to discuss the impact of human activity on the world's oceans. The meeting, led by the
International Programme on the State of the Ocean (IPSO), examined the combined effects of pollution, acidification, ocean warming, over-
fishing and depleting levels of oxygen in the water. The panel found that oceanic
conditions are similar to those of "previous
major extinctions of species in Earth's history," and that we face losing marine species and entire marine
ecosystems, such as coral reefs, within a single generation. The interim report, produced in partnership with the
International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), was presented to the U.N. on Tuesday. The study also said that the speed of decline of
marine ecosystems is faster than predicted. Alex Rogers, IPSO's scientific director, said: "The oceans are a common heritage of
mankind. The extinction threat we believe is real ." Rogers, professor of Conservation Biology at the Department Of
Zoology, University of Oxford, told CNN: "The rate of change we are seeing in the quantities of carbon dioxide going into the atmosphere and
then being absorbed into the oceans is so great that it is difficult to compare what is happening now with what has happened in the past but
we do know that past disturbances in the carbon cycle have been a feature of mass extinction events." According to the panel -- which
consisted of 27 marine experts from 18 organizations -- most if not all the five "global mass extinctions" in Earth's history were probably caused
by the "deadly trio" of global warming, ocean acidification and lack of water oxygen or hypoxia. It states that these three factors are present in
the ocean today and gives examples of marine ecosystems suffering severe disturbance, such as the mass "coral bleaching" in 1998 that killed
16% of all the world's tropical coral reefs. According to the report, over-fishing has reduced some commercial fish stocks and populations of by-
catch species by more than 90%. Dan Laffoley, senior advisor on Marine Science and Conservation for IUCN, and co-author of the report, said:
"The challenges for the future of the ocean are vast, but unlike previous generations we
know what now needs to happen. The
time to protect the blue heart of our planet is now, today and urgent." Marine scientists often describe
oceans as the earth's circulatory system, performing numerous vital functions which make the planet
habitable, such as creating more than half our oxygen, driving weather systems while modulating the
atmosphere, as well as providing us with vital resources.
Disad O/W Exploration

Any risk of the disad o/w the case—exploration doesn’t achieve anything
Ryan Carlyle, Subsea hydraulics engineer, January 31, 2013, “Why Don't We Spend More On
Exploring The Oceans, Rather Than On Space Exploration?”, Accessed April 25, 2014
http://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2013/01/31/why-dont-we-spend-more-on-exploring-the-oceans-
rather-than-on-space-exploration/
I’m one hundred and twenty miles offshore in the Gulf of Mexico right now, working on installing seafloor equipment for an oil project. No one
spends more time exploring the deepest oceans than the oil industry. In the last twenty years, there has been a veritable explosion of
deepwater exploration, with extensive subsea surveys for pipelines and anchors and oil well infrastructure. We
have fantastic subsea
robots that let us see and work down to 10,000 ft depth — as well as a host of seismic imaging systems
to see below the seafloor, sonar, Doppler current sensors, monitoring buoys, and so forth. The equipment to
explore the oceans exists today and is in routine use for energy exploration. For example: Remote Operated Vehicles (ROVs): So as someone
whose job deals with exploring the ocean deeps — see my answer to Careers: What kinds of problems does a subsea
hydraulics engineer solve? — I can tell you that the ocean is excruciatingly boring. The vast majority of
the seafloor once you get >50 miles offshore is barren, featureless mud. On face, this is pretty similar to the empty expanses of
outer space, but in space you can see all the way through the nothing, letting you identify targets for probes or telescopes. The goals of
space exploration are visible from the Earth, so we can dream and imagine reaching into the heavens.
But in the deep oceans, visibility is less than 100 feet and travel speed is measured in single-digit knots.
A simple seafloor survey to run a 100 mile pipeline costs a cool $50 million. The oceans are vast,
boring, and difficult/expensive to explore — so why bother? Sure, there are beautiful and interesting features like
geothermal vents and coral reefs. But throughout most of the ocean these are few and far between. This is a pretty normal view from a subsea
robot: Despite the difficulty, there is actually a lot of scientific exploration going on in the oceans. Here’s a pretty good public website for a
science ROV mission offshore Oregon: 2009 Pacific Northwest Expedition To reinforce my point about it being boring, here’s a blog entry from
that team where they talk about how boring the sea floor is: 2009 Pacific Northwest Expedition What IS really interesting in the deep ocean is
the exotic life. You
see some crazy animals that are often not well-known to science. Something floats by the
camera 5000 ft down, and you say “what the hell was that?” and no one knows. Usually it’s just some variety of
jellyfish, but occasionally we find giant* isopods: *This is a moderately small specimen. They have been recorded at 2.5 ft long. Or giant alien
squid monsters: Unfortunately, deep-sea
creatures rarely survive the trip to surface. Their bodies are
acclimated to the high pressures (hundreds of atmospheres), and the decompression is usually fatal. Our
ability to understand these animals is very limited, and their only connection to the surface biosphere is
through a few food chain connections (like sperm whales) that can survive diving to these depths.
We’re fundamentally quite disconnected from deep ocean life . Also, there is no hope of ever establishing human
habitation more than about 1000 ft deep. The pressures are too great, and no engineering or materials conceivable today would allow us to
build livable-sized spaces on the deep sea floor. The two times humans have reached the deepest part of the ocean, it required a foot-thick
flawless metal sphere with barely enough internal space to sit down. As far as I can tell, seafloor living is all but impossible — a habitable moon
base would be vastly easier to engineer than a seafloor colony. See my answer to International Space Station: Given the actual space station
ISS, would it be cheaper to build the equivalent at 3-4-5 miles deep underwater? Why? To recap: we
don’t spend more
time/money exploring the ocean because it’s expensive, difficult, and uninspiring. We stare up at the stars and
dream of reaching them, but few people look off the side of a boat and wish they could go down there.
Climate Change= Human Extinction

Climate change will cause human extinction—disease, food shortages, and ecosystem
collapse
Deborah Snow, writer for the Sydney Morning Herald, March 31, 2014, “Climate change
could make humans extinct, warns health expert”, Accessed May 5, 2014 ,
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/climate-change-could-make-humans-extinct-
warns-health-expert-20140330-35rus.html
The Earth is warming so rapidly that unless humans can arrest the trend, we risk becoming ''extinct'' as
a species, a leading Australian health academic has warned. Helen Berry, associate dean in the faculty of health at the University of
Canberra, said while the Earth has been warmer and colder at different points in the planet's history, the
rate of change has never been as fast as it is today. ''What is remarkable, and alarming, is the speed of the change since the
1970s, when we started burning a lot of fossil fuels in a massive way,'' she said. ''We can't possibly evolve to match this rate [of
warming] and, unless we get control of it, it will mean our extinction eventually.'' Professor Berry is one of three leading
academics who have contributed to the health chapter of a Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report due on Monday. She and
co-authors Tony McMichael, of the Australian National University, and Colin Butler, of the University of Canberra, have outlined the health risks
of rapid global warming in a companion piece for The Conversation, also published on Monday. The three warn that the adverse effects
on population health and social stability have been ''missing from the discussion'' on climate change.
''Human-driven climate change poses a great threat, unprecedented in type and scale, to wellbeing,
health and perhaps even to human survival,'' they write. They predict that the greatest challenges will come
from under nutrition and impaired child development from reduced food yields; hospitalisations and
deaths due to intense heatwaves, fires and other weather-related disasters; and the spread of infectious
diseases. They warn the ''largest impacts'' will be on poorer and vulnerable populations, winding back recent hard-won gains of social
development programs.
Climate Change= Real/ Human Caused/ Extinction

Climate change is real, human caused, and kills off the human race
Lesley Docksey, writer for Global Research, July 14, 2013, “Climate Change and its Disastrous
Impacts on Earth and Humanity”, Accessed May 5, 2014, http://www.globalresearch.ca/climate-change-
and-its-disastrous-impacts-on-earth-and-humanity/5342677
Climate change along with the disastrous effects it will have on the earth and humanity is being ignored
by much of society. I differentiate between the earth and humanity because many people only relate to the problems that humans
might suffer, not fully understanding that what damages the earth also damages us. During the 1992 UN Earth Summit in Rio,
media headlines were screaming “We’ve only got 20 years to save the earth!” An environmentalist dryly pointed out, “No. The earth will
survive. We have 20 years to save humanity.” But we
cannot even begin to contemplate our own extinction. So those
twenty years passed and no
meaningful actions were taken. We have compromised our survival. Twenty vital
years, during which we could have learnt to change our behaviour, control carbon emissions and put in
place a better, cleaner way of living. Governments and corporations blocked any real changes. We must not stand in the way of
‘progress’, they said. And by and large, the public remained totally unengaged. A few years ago some British historians recognised that part of
the problem was a failure of education, and started to demand that historians and all other academics, whatever their speciality, should include
climate change in their thinking and in their teaching. A similar demand of universities was being made in the United States. Just over 12 years
ago a new concept entered the conversation, the word for which is ‘anthropocene’. Some earth scientists say we are now in a new geological
age – the anthropocene – because of the changes visited upon the earth by man. There are those who challenge the argument as a scientific
conceit. But they surely cannot deny that the
whole basis of life on earth, from the smallest microbes to the largest
trees and mammals, is now hugely affected by the activities of man, and we need some way of describing this. A
seminar in Chicago earlier this year also addressed the problem, saying that “most of the relevant research on climate change has focussed on
how it will affect the material conditions of life on this planet.” Yet this
threat to the earth, caused by human activity, will
affect every area of human life; not just the physical. Our emotional, spiritual and intellectual lives will
be in turmoil. It is time that those of us who care about what the coming changes might do to the future of humanity started to engage
our fellows on things other than the physical disasters, floods and droughts, mass migrations, food shortages and
all the conflicts that could arise out of the struggle to survive. For most of our history human activity has harmed the
earth that sustains us. We are so proud of our intellectual achievements, our history of creating civilisations, yet almost all civilisations have
depended on some form of energy use – the more advanced the civilisation, the more dependent it becomes on energy. And civilisations have
almost always included militarization, weapons and war. But – imagine
a future of no future, of no schools or universities,
no musical instruments or theatres, no art, no writing, no research, no science. All that will disappear if
humanity is overwhelmed by climate change. Then who will be left to mourn the silencing of Beethoven and Brahms? This
isn’t just a problem for academicians. It concerns all of us and our sense of history is a good place to start seeking an answer. The
thing about history is that it simply doesn’t exist if there is no one there to witness it, to record it, to remember what happened and, just as
important, why. And even with a record, if there is no one there to read it and understand it, no one to whom the knowledge can be passed, no
children who can sit and listen to their elders tell the lore of their tribe, then history is dead. Climate change may take away our
future and without a future there is no past.
***Random Section***
A/T “Protected Zones Check Impact”

Wrong—conservation and protection areas in the squo won’t check the impact
Dr. Graham J. Edgar, Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of
Tasmania, 2013, “About the Global Ocean Refuge System (GLORES)”, Accessed May 4, 2014,
http://globaloceanrefuge.org/about/
Protecting marine life in their ecosystems is the best way to maintain biological diversity, abundance and resilience. There are now thousands
of marine protected areas, totaling 3% of the oceans,[v] but weak protection offers little or no conservation benefit[vi].
Only strongly protected areas demonstrably increase diversity and abundance of marine life.[vii] Most
existing marine protected areas are “paper parks” offering little protection. Moreover, geographic coverage
is very uneven, and in many regions, key ecosystems have no protection. Only 1% of the entire ocean is
strongly protected – free from fishing and other extractive uses[viii] – and this is just 1/20th-1/30th the area marine
biologists are urging the world to protect. Strong, effective protected areas are being created too slowly (Figure 1) to
avert profound changes in global systems and ocean ecosystems, jeopardizing great numbers of humans. So far, governments,
international governmental organizations and NGOs have not been doing an adequate job of protecting
marine life. The world needs a much more effective, faster solution that aligns the interests of the public and private sectors, now and in
the future.
Offshore Drilling- Spills Inevitable

Offshore drilling spills are inevitable
Steven Mufson, writer for the Washington Post, April 19, 2012, “Two years after BP oil
spill, offshore drilling still poses risks”, Accessed May 4, 2014,
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/two-years-after-bp-oil-spill-offshore-drilling-still-
poses-risks/2012/04/19/gIQAHOkDUT_story_1.html
But three recent incidents in other parts of the world show just how risky and sensitive offshore drilling remains. In
the North Sea, French oil giant Total is still battling to regain control of a natural gas well that has been
leaking for nearly four weeks. Meanwhile, Brazil has confiscated the passports of 11 Chevron employees and
five employees of drilling contractor Transocean as they await trial on criminal charges related to an
offshore oil spill there. And in December, about 40,000 barrels of crude oil leaked out of a five-year-old
loading line between a floating storage vessel and an oil tanker in a Royal Dutch Shell field off the coast of Nigeria. Many experts
say that even with tougher regulations here in the United States, such incidents are inevitable. “I’m not
saying we shouldn’t do it [offshore drilling], but we ought to go at it with our eyes open,” said Roger Rufe, a retired Coast Guard vice admiral.
“We can’t do it with a human-designed system and not expect that there will be occasional problems with it.” Shell is one company particularly
anxious to avoid the slightest whiff of trouble. It is on the verge of getting the final two permits needed to drill this summer in the Chukchi Sea,
off Alaska’s Arctic Coast, a plan that has aroused opposition from a broad array of environmental groups. So on April 10 when federal regulators
told Shell that they had spotted a 1-by-10-mile oil sheen in the eight miles of water between two Shell production platforms in the Gulf of
Mexico, executives acted quickly. They promptly mobilized an oil cleanup vessel and sent two remotely operated underwater vehicles to scour
the sea floor. It turned out that the oil — only six barrels — came from a natural seep common in the gulf. “Post-Macondo, there’s no such
thing as a small spill,” said an executive from another big oil company, who asked for anonymity because he was not authorized to comment.
With the anniversary of the BP spill, many experts are reassessing U.S. progress since the accident. And environmentalists are assessing
damages. A National Wildlife Federation report said, for example, that the shrimp catch increased last year but that since
the spill 523
dolphins have been stranded onshore, four times the historic average; 95 percent of them were dead. A
team of scientists led by Peter Roopnarine of the California Academy of Sciences said oysters collected post-spill contain higher
concentrations of heavy metals in their shells, gills and muscle tissue than those collected before the spill. The
members of the presidential Oil Spill Commission that investigated the BP spill said in a report that they were
“encouraged” by reforms at the Interior Department, which oversees drilling in U.S. waters. But they said they are
dismayed by the failure of Congress to enact some reforms into law, worried about the prospect of Arctic drilling, and
concerned that the United States had not altered the embargo of Cuba to allow U.S. vessels to respond if there was a spill from a rig drilling in
Cuban waters. Environmental
groups are more adamant. Oceana, a group opposed to offshore drilling, said “offshore drilling
safety has not improved.” That assertion was disputed by Michael R. Bromwich, who oversaw the overhaul of the Interior
Department agency now divided into the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement and the Bureau of Ocean Enforcement and
Management. “Sometimes it takes a crisis to get changes,” Bromwich said at a recent conference. He said better regulation was built on three
legs: prevention, containment and spill response. He hailed advances in the first two areas but conceded that the ability to scoop up spilled oil
“has developed painfully little since the Exxon Valdez,” the infamous 1989 incident in which a drunken tanker captain ran his ship aground close
to the Alaskan shore. “Once oil is in the water, it’s a mess,” Rufe said, “and we have not demonstrated an ability to get up
more than 3 to 5 percent of the oil spilled.”
EU CP
EU CP – 1NC Shell
Text: The European Union should increase exploration and/or development of the
Earth’s oceans by:
(Insert whatever action the plan takes minus any United States agents of action)
The EU is set for expanded development and exploration of the oceans – only political
support is needed
European Commission, January 20th, 2014, “Blue Energy: COMMUNICATION FROM THE
COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL
COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,”
http://www.kowi.de/en/Portaldata/2/Resources/fp/2014-COM-blue-energy.pdf, accessed: 5/24/14
As the EU contemplates its energy and climate change policy beyond 2020, it is timely to explore all possible options in a sustained and
collective effort to mitigate the effects of climate change and to diversify Europe’s portfolio of renewable energy sources. Supporting
innovation in low-carbon energy technologies can help to tackle these challenges. No stone should be left unturned. For
ocean energy
to deliver on its potential, the time is ripe to bring Member States, the industry and the Commission
together to work in a collaborative manner to accelerate its development. This Communication therefore sets out
an action plan to guide further development of the ocean energy sector. Completion of this action plan in the period 2014-2017 should help the
industrialisation of the sector, so that it can provide cost-effective, low-carbon electricity as well as new jobs and economic growth for the EU
economy. Common goals are best served through a coordinated and inclusive approach. Althoughtoday the ocean energy
sector is relatively small, it could scale up in order to be in a position to contribute to economic growth
and job creation in the EU. The sector could also contribute to the EU's 2050 greenhouse gas reduction ambitions if the right
conditions are put in place now. By providing the necessary political impetus to this emerging sector, through the
measures outlined above, ocean energy should, in the medium to long term, be able to achieve the necessary
critical mass for its commercialisation and become another European industrial success story.
Solvency – Ocean Energy Development

EU key – it’s the leader in the ocean energy market
European Commission, January 20th, 2014, “Blue Energy: COMMUNICATION FROM THE
COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL
COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,”
http://www.kowi.de/en/Portaldata/2/Resources/fp/2014-COM-blue-energy.pdf, accessed: 5/24/14
The ocean energy sector can become an important part of the blue economy, fuelling economic growth
in coastal regions, as well as inland. Pan-European supply chains could develop as the industry expands
involving both innovative SMEs and larger manufacturing companies with relevant capabilities in, for
example, shipbuilding, mechanical, electrical and maritime engineering but also environmental impact
assessment or health and safety management. Increased demand for specialised ships is also to be
expected, for instance. These are likely to be constructed in European shipyards.
The position of European industry in the global ocean energy market is currently strong. This is
evidenced by the fact that most of the technology developers are based in Europe. Growing competition
from China, Canada and other industrialised nations is, however, expected. The UK's Carbon Trust
estimated that the global wave and tidal energy market could be worth up to €535 billion between 2010
and 2050. Creating the conditions under which the sector could prosper now would enable the EU to
capture a sizable share of the market in the future. Innovation through research and development can
allow the EU to generate export opportunities for both technology and expertise. It is critical, therefore,
to ensure that the EU can maintain its global industrial leadership.
EU on board with “blue energy”

Martin McAdam, Executive Director, Aquamarine Power, “Ocean Energy Development: Now Is Not the
Time to Be Faint-hearted,” December 2nd, 2013,
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2013/12/ocean-energy-devlopment-now-is-
not-the-time-to-be-faint-hearted, accessed: 5/25/14
Last month the European Ocean Energy Association hosted its first conference outside Brussels at
Dynamic Earth in Edinburgh. It was a great event. European ocean energy, and a surprising number of
officials, came to the home of the wave industry. What got me at this conference is that Europe is now
listening. We heard of the 'Blue Growth' plan. Blue Growth is the long term strategy to support
sustainable growth in the marine sector. The 'blue' economy represents 5.4 million jobs and a gross
added value of just under €500 billion a year. However, further growth is possible in a number of areas
which are highlighted within the strategy. Thankfully marine energy is now one of the blue growth
areas. While marine renewable energy includes offshore wind — it also considers wave and tidal energy
as well as ocean thermal energy conversion. Marine energy, according to the official EU communication
on the matter, has "the potential to enhance the efficiency of harvesting the European energy resource,
minimize land use requirements…and reduce European greenhouse gas emissions (by about 65 Mt of
CO2 in 2020)."
Solvency – Indian Ocean

EU key to projects in Indian Ocean
Brahma Chellaney, Professor of Strategic Studies at the independent Center for Policy Research, New
Delhi, November 29th, 2013, “Bridge between Europe and Asia — Strategic Challenges in the Indian
Ocean,” Körber Policy Brief No. 1, http://chellaney.net/2013/11/29/bridge-between-europe-and-asia-
strategic-challenges-in-the-indian-ocean/, accessed: 5/24/14
The EU should help promote rules-based cooperation in the Indian Ocean region. The European Union,
by citing its own efforts to resolve maritime-boundary questions and other issues in Europe, can lend a
helping hand to create a regulatory regime and to promote environmental protection in the Indian
Ocean region. In this endeavor, the EU must collaborate with the Indian Ocean Rim Association (IORA), which
consists of 20 diverse member-nations ranging from India, Indonesia, and Australia to small island-countries
such as the Comoros and Seychelles. Given its own institutionalized framework of cooperation, the EU, more than
any other institution in the world, can help promote rules-based cooperation in the Indian Ocean region.
The threats to navigation and maritime freedoms, including in critical straits and EEZs in the Indian
Ocean region, can be countered only through adherence to international rules by all parties, as well as through
monitoring, regulation and enforcement. In this context, NATO is already playing a limited security and political role in the region, with its
contribution to combating piracy in the Horn of Africa. The
EU can also encourage collaborative projects between
regional states so that they adopt new technologies and best practices to protect environmental
security and build maritime cooperation. Collaborative projects will yield significant peace dividends by helping to reduce the
risks of unilateral action by any side and by contributing to building regional crisis stability. European wealth is dependent on peace and stability
in the Indian Ocean. This region serves as a test case of Europe’s ability to translate its economic heft into political influence to help shape
regional developments in a positive direction.
EU key to all Indian Ocean projects

Brahma Chellaney, Professor of Strategic Studies at the independent Center for Policy Research, New
Delhi, November 29th, 2013, “Bridge between Europe and Asia — Strategic Challenges in the Indian
Ocean,” Körber Policy Brief No. 1, http://chellaney.net/2013/11/29/bridge-between-europe-and-asia-
strategic-challenges-in-the-indian-ocean/, accessed: 5/24/14
Against this background, it is apparent that maritime-security challenges in the Indian Ocean need to be addressed in a holistic strategic
framework. Nontraditional issues — from energy security and climate security to transnational terrorism
and environmental degradation — have become as important as traditional issues, such as freedom of
navigation, security of sea lanes, maritime boundary and domain security, arms proliferation, and
challenges to law and order (including piracy and sea robbery, criminal activities like drug, people, and arms smuggling, illicit fishing,
illegal immigration, and maritime terrorism). The Indian Ocean is the maritime center of the world and of critical
importance to the European Union’s economic and energy interests. The flow of trade through the maritime Silk Road of the
Indian Ocean follows the same route and pattern from which the littoral states drew wealth and strength in history. Europe could serve as a
guide on how to build institutionalized cooperation in this region, where, with maritime boundaries still to be finalized, jurisdictional “creep,”
threatens to impede freedom of navigation. Seabed mining, for its part, is presenting both new challenges and
opportunities on the high seas. Europe has a role to play on environmental protection and resource
sustainability. Environmental degradation in the Indian Ocean, after all, can influence climatic patterns and atmospheric general
circulation in the entire Northern Hemisphere. Good governance, built through interstate cooperation and
collaboration, can help stem the threats to maritime security and ecosystems. France and Britain, through their
military presence in the Indian Ocean, are promoting their own geopolitical interests in the region. European states, however, can
collectively play a role to support peace and stability and environmental sustainability in the Indian
Ocean. After all, the Indian Ocean, which accounts for 50 percent of the world’s container traffic and 66 percent of its seaborne trade in oil, is
of critical importance to European trade.
Solvency – Pacific
EU can do projects in the Pacific
Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat 2014, “European Development Fund,”
http://www.forumsec.org/pages.cfm/strategic-partnerships-coordination/european-development-
fund/, accessed: 5/24/14
The Pacific Regional Indicative Programme (PRIP) encompasses all Pacific regional projects funded
through the European Development Fund (EDF). Cooperation between the European Union (EU) and the
Pacific members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) grouping began in 1975 with the signing of
the Georgetown Agreement. The Pacific ACP States have benefited from a number of financial
programmes provided through the European Commission (EC), including the PRIPs funded under the
EDF. EDFs are usually programmed in five-year cycles. The regional envelope under the Pacific RIP is
administered by the Regional Authorising Officer (RAO), an office held by the Secretary General of the
Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat. Project implementation is undertaken on behalf of the Pacific ACP
States by technical agencies in the region. To date, EU financial support through the Pacific Regional
Indicative Programmes has totaled to approximately 318 million Euros. This support has been spread
over a number of sectors of which the largest portion of 42% was for programmes supporting natural
resources and the environment. A further 18% has been programmed in the Telecommunications and
Travel sector, with 13% towards the development of human resources. 12% has supported activities in
the Tourism sector and 7% for Trade activities, with energy receiving 5%, and the remaining 3% covering
non-focal sectors.
Solvency – Deep Sea Fishing

EU has the largest share of deep-sea fishing vessels – changing its policies is key
PEW Environment Group, Conservation Arm of the Pew Charitable Trusts, January, 2012, “Out of
The Abyss,” http://www.pewenvironment.org/uploadedFiles/PEG/Publications/Report/deep-Out-of-
the-Abyss-Final-md.pdf, accessed: 5/24/14
The European Union’s deep-sea fishing fleet is one of the largest in the world. In the northeast Atlantic –
home to some of the most heavily exploited deep-sea fish stocks – the EU is responsible for 75 percent
of the total regional catch of deep-sea species.6 The EU is also a major player in high seas bottom fishing
– an activity that frequently targets deep-sea species. The EU has an estimated 103 vessels conducting
high seas bottom fishing, which is approximately one-third of the high seas bottom fishing fleet
globally.7 Given its size, the EU is uniquely poised to significantly improve the sustainability of deep-sea
fishing and reduce negative impacts on vulnerable marine ecosystems (VMEs).
The EU is a global leader in deep sea fishing

PEW Environment Group, Conservation Arm of the Pew Charitable Trusts, January, 2012, “Out of
The Abyss,” http://www.pewenvironment.org/uploadedFiles/PEG/Publications/Report/deep-Out-of-
the-Abyss-Final-md.pdf, accessed: 5/24/14
The EU’s deep-sea fishing fleet is one of the largest in the world. The EU is a major player in high seas
bottom fishing, which frequently targets deep-sea species. The EU high seas bottom fishing fleet
consisted of an estimated 103 vessels in 2006, which represented approximately 36 percent of the high
seas bottom fishing fleet globally.61 In the northeast Atlantic – home to some of the most heavily
exploited deep-sea fish stocks – the EU is responsible for 75 percent of the reported regional catch of
deep-sea species.62 Given its size, the EU can play an important, constructive role by ensuring that
deep-sea fishing is both sustainable and does not cause significant adverse impacts on VMEs. Such
leadership is needed now more than ever. There is already widespread evidence of significant damage
to deep-sea ecosystems such as cold-water corals and serious declines in deep-sea fish species, target as
well as non-target species, in the northeast Atlantic. Catch and market data suggest the EU can act to
protect the deep sea with relatively little economic impact. The EU’s deep-sea landings in 2010 were
worth an estimated 101 million Euro – just 1.3 percent of the value of all EU fishery product landings in
2008 (see Appendix II). The EU’s reported deep-sea catch in 2010 was 45,554 tonnes, just 1.2 percent of
the EU’s entire catch in the northeast Atlantic.
Solvency – Maritime Security

EU can do maritime security initiatives
Vessel Finder, “European Union gives $3m for shipping security in the Indian Ocean,” May 14th, 2014,
http://www.vesselfinder.com/news/2079-European-Union-gives-3m-for-shipping-security-in-the-Indian-
Ocean, accessed: 5/25/14
The EU is concerned about the maritime security in the Indian Ocean and for that reason it gives €2.3
million ($3 million) in the fight against maritime crimes in the region. The money will be used for
improvement of the maritime security. The financial support of the European Union is aiming to create
good environment for economic growth in the region. The EAC (East African Community) continues its
fight against the piracy threat, drugs and human trafficking, arms smuggling, illegal fishing and maritime
pollution. The stability in the region could be easily threatened by human factor and depletion of the
natural resources. The representative of the EU in Tanzania, Filiberto Sebregondi said: "Improving
maritime security is key to create favourable conditions for economic growth and social development.
The Maritime Security (MASE) Programme will support the EAC in taking part in global and regional
efforts towards a safer Eastern Africa." 4 organisations of Eastern and Southern Africa (the East African
Community (EAC), the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA), the Inter-
Governmental Authority on Development (IGAD), and the Indian Ocean Commission (IOC)) participate in
the so-called Maritime Security (MASE) Programme (supported with €37.5 million).
Solvency – Maritime Research

EU level maritime research initiatives already exist
European Commission Expert Group, Expert Group on Marine Research Infrastructures, EU
Marine and Maritime Research Strategy, January, 2013, “Towards European Integrated Ocean
Observation,”
http://www.innovation.ca/sites/default/files/Rome2013/files/EC%20Marine%20Infrastrucure%20Expert
%20Group%20Report%202013.pdf, accessed: 5/24/14
Launched in 2007, the EU maritime policy (IMP) pursues the broad objective of an integrated and
sustainable development of sea-related activities. The EU Strategy for Marine and Maritime Research
(MMRS)2 was adopted in 2008 to provide a solid science base to the IMP and respond to societal needs
such as blue growth, the good environmental status of the seas, the adaptation to climate change and
marine / coastal safety. The MMRS considers the coordinated development of marine research
infrastructures at European level in relation to these needs as an essential objective to be pursued by
the Commission in cooperation with Member States. Marine Research Infrastructures (MRIs) must also
be managed at the European scale because marine challenges do not stop at national borders and
synergies can be achieved at European level.
Solvency – Marine Biotech

EU can spur biotech discoveries – changing policies already
ESF Marine Board, European Science Foundation, September, 2010, Marine Biotechnology: A New
Vision and Strategy for Europe,
http://www.esf.org/fileadmin/Public_documents/Publications/marine_biotechnology_01.pdf, accessed:
5/24/14
The absence of a common policy to provide equitable access to marine resources for biodiscovey is
further compounded by a complete lack of coordination between Member States on this issue and concrete
coordination bodies such as a ‘Marine Biotechnology Centre or Institute’ operated at the European level or within the frame of an
intergovernmental agreement. It is, therefore, difficult to get an accurate up-to-date figure on the status of biodiscovery based on marine
resources in Europe, at least for the primary steps in the process which include sampling, and possibly culture, fractionation, and screening for
active compounds. An analysis of the scientific literature will shed light on some of the marine biodiscovey effort that is ongoing but will
provide little if any information on screening activities being undertaken by the private sector which is missing. For marine drug
discovery, the last decade was characterised by a very low level of investment from major
pharmaceutical companies. Moreover, the pharmaceutical industry has tended to privilege R&D on chronic diseases with less
attention paid to infectious ones, driven by the need to minimise risk and maximise profitability. In fact, marine drug biodiscovery has been
mainly conducted by academic teams funded by governments and a few small and medium sized pharmaceutical companies willing to assume
the risks of this preliminary step in drug R&D. However, EU
policy during the last decade has already paved the way
for further coordination in marine biodiscovery at European level. Multiple initiatives have been
developed and there is already a very active network of marine biological stations with a specific policy
dedicated to the management and conservation of various marine resources (see Section 4.2 below).
But substantial reforms still needed

5/24/14
The EU currently lacks a coherent Marine Biotechnology RTD policy and needs to prepare one without
delay. Instead, individual European countries support, to varying degrees, national Marine
Biotechnology initiatives, programmes, and RTD policies and/or strategies. As a result, the European
Marine Biotechnology effort is fragmented and based on national rather than EU needs and priorities.
There is a need, therefore, to better co-ordinate and plan existing Marine Biotechnology activities and to identify and coordinate future R&D
needs at multiple geographical scales, taking into account the variable levels of access to marine resources. A coordinated effort is also needed
at pan-European level to mobilise and optimise human resources and available infrastructures. Such efforts should address both fundamental
research and advanced application-oriented research and take an industry-academia collaborative approach.
Now key for EU leadership

5/24/14
There is now a strong momentum to drive progress in European Marine Biotechnology in the coming
decade. If Europe does not act now through a concerted effort by all the identified actors and stakeholders and through
increasing its support with targeted funding and coordinated research, it will begin to lose ground on other global leaders in
this field such as the USA, Japan and China. The successful implementation of the integrated strategy
presented in this Position Paper has the potential, not only to significantly advance European research in
Marine Biotechnology, but, in turn, to contribute significantly towards the development of knowledge-based jobs and economic growth
and to meet critical societal challenges in the areas of food, environment, energy and health in the coming decade and beyond.
Solvency – Marine Sensors

Infrastructure exists for revamping marine sensors
Observation,”
In general, for the marine environment, biochemical sensors are less developed than physical sensors. In
order to address challenges related to pressures and variations on marine biodiversity, pollution of the marine environment, we need to fill
gaps in this area by supporting development and deployment of new biochemical sensors and devices. The potential of new methods and
technologies like genomics and marine acoustics to assess (pressures on) biodiversity should be explored. Mainstreaming of genomics into
Earth observation should be advanced. Oceanographic vessels will continue to be an essential component of marine research infrastructures.
However, the development of sensors and the increasing use of autonomous and unmanned platforms
may change how ships are used. Many oceanographic vessels of the European regional fleet will need to be renewed in the
coming years. There is a need for strategic reassessment and coordination at European level of
oceanographic vessels as part of a broader assessment and coordination of European marine research
infrastructures. JPI Oceans could provide an opportunity to make such an assessment, coordinated with
member countries and the European Commission, and building upon the work done by the Eurofleets
research project.
Solvency – Biodiversity
The EU has programs in place to ensure maritime biodiversity – integrated actions
crucial
Ronán Long, Jean Monnet Chair of European Law at the School of Law, National University of Ireland
Galway, 2011, “The Marine Strategy Framework Directive: A new European approach to the regulation
of the marine environment, marine natural resources and marine ecological services,” Journal of Energy
and Natural Resources Law 29 (1) pp. 1-44,
http://vmserver14.nuigalway.ie/xmlui/bitstream/handle/10379/1787/MSFD%20Article%20(JENRL).pdf?
sequence=1&origin=publication_detail, accessed: 5/24/14
The reasons why the EU is pursuing this ambitious goal are founded on the belief that “the marine
environment is a precious heritage that must be protected, preserved and, where practicable, restored
with the ultimate aim of maintaining biodiversity and providing diverse and dynamic oceans and seas
which are clean, healthy and productive.”8 In the words of the preamble of the Directive, this objective
cannot be sufficiently achieved by Member States alone and can therefore, by reason of the scale and
effects, be better achieved at EU level.9 For all intents and purposes, the Directive sets out a
comprehensive blueprint to realise these laudable objectives on a regional basis in the North-east
Atlantic Ocean, the Mediterranean Sea, the Baltic Sea, and the Black Sea. By doing so, it is the first
concerted attempt by the EU to apply an ecosystems-based approach to the management of human
activities that impinge upon the quality of the marine environment and to expedite the progress made
by Member States in adopting specific management tools such as maritime spatial planning as a means
to resolve conflicting uses of the ocean environment.10 As the environmental pillar of the EU’s
integrated maritime policy, it is anticipated that the MSFD will have a major bearing on the future
regulation of offshore industries in general and those based in the European coastal environment in
particular including the hydrocarbon, aggregate, fishing, and energy industries. 11 Moreover, as will be
seen below, the Directive is tangible evidence of the considerable efforts undertaken by the EU in recent
years to fulfil its obligation under several international agreements aimed at halting the loss of
biodiversity and conserving marine ecological systems including the 1992 Convention on Biological
Diversity.12
Solvency – Fines
The EU has a system of maritime fines in place
Shane Bosma, Postgrad Dip (Maritime Law), 2012, 26 A&NZ Mar LJ, “The Regulation Of Marine
Pollution Arising From Offshore Oil And Gas Facilities – An Evaluation Of The Adequacy Of Current
Regulatory Regimes And The Responsibility Of States To Implement A New Liability Regime”, accessed
5/24/15
The conventional sanction imposed against corporations is the fine. As has been adopted in EU
regulations, imposing fines in an amount that is calculated by reference to a certain percentage of
turnover or assets ensures that fines are dissuasive and in proportion with the economic capacity of the
organization. For example, EU regulations impose fines as a function of turnover from the previous year;
from 1% to 10% in less serious cases, and from 10% to 20% in the most serious cases.216 208 Ibid 44-45.
The distinct advantage of structuring fines in such a way is that it compels corporations to factor the
likelihood and potential amount of such fine as part of its financial accounting of its risk management
function. The flexibility of other sanctions is also potentially available as a function of the imposition of
criminal liability. These may include the payment of compensation to victims, such as in the Zeebrugge
Ferries Case in the UK, the awarding of criminal restitution for the damage caused to the wildlife and
natural environment, as was ordered in the Exxon Valdez Case in the US, the imposition of operational
duties to improve the risk management of the organization or restrictions to entrepreneurial activity,
and may even include the confiscation of property gained as a result of the prohibited activity. 217
Solvency – Seabed Mapping

European seabed mapping initiatives underway
Observation,”
The mapping of seabed with topography, geology, habitats and ecosystems is of high value for marine
industries, protection of the marine environment and science. There are still important gaps in the
mapping of European sea beds, as only a few countries have undertaken this task and the completion of
this mapping in a systematic way. A seamless multi-resolution digital seabed map of European waters of
the highest resolution possible, covering topography, geology, habitats and ecosystems, to be
completed by 2020, would represent a major flagship project with a high societal and scientific value for
Europe.
Solvency – Satellite Programs

EU satellite programs exist – funding key
Observation,”
Satellite and airborne remote sensing are important and cost-effective means to acquire a number of
key variables such as sea surface temperature, colour or sea level. These are essential variables used on
a daily base by oceanographers to produce the services / products needed by end-users. Satellites and
infrastructures allowing such measurements are generally jointly owned by member states of the
European Space Agency (ESA) and managed by European Agencies. Satellites and infrastructures
providing remote sensing of ocean surface properties (or close to the surface) are broadly well
developed. The main challenge regarding these infrastructures is to sustain their financing as well as the
financing of the missions that delivers key data/services for marine scientists and stakeholders.
Solvency – Arctic Climate

EU key to Arctic climate adaptation
Ecologic Institute, Berlin-based Think Tank, December 21st, 2010, “EU Arctic Footprint and Policy
Assessment: Final Report,” http://arctic-footprint.eu/sites/default/files/AFPA_Final_Report.pdf,
accessed: 5/24/14
Together with the rising impacts of climate change in the Arctic, there is a need for the EU to adopt an
ambitious integrated policy approach across all scenarios to support climate change adaptation in the
North. This would encompass concerns related to biodiversity and the environment, local communities
and economic activities (e.g. tourism, transport, fisheries, and energy). The need for adaptation
measures is relevant for all scenarios, but is most urgent under the Race for Resources – High impact
scenario. To address environmental and social needs, the EU could streamline adaptation measures with
conservation approaches (e.g. Natura2000). The health of Natura2000 sites could serve as a vital
indicator of increasing adaptation challenges and as a platform for developing new approaches to
conservation. EU action to upgrade existing infrastructure with new technologies, e.g. to further
enhance the safety and security of various offshore and land installations is necessary across all
scenarios. This could include supporting projects or enhancing the quality and performance of maritime
infrastructure in Russia and Greenland. The EU-Russia Agreement may evolve into one of the vital
instruments for EU action. Moreover, the EU's regional policy and cross-border cooperation may be
utilized in response to climate change impacts, as they adversely affect economic, social and territorial
cohesion within the EU, EEA, Russia and Greenland. In the following decades, development of new
programmes of new objectives addressing adaptation challenges may be considered. Such programmes
would allow EU funding to respond to multiple challenges, such as adaptation of local and indigenous
communities and lack of infrastructure for economic activities.
Solvency – Arctic Council/Exploration

EU key to Arctic council
Timo Koivurova, Research Professor of Arctic Environmental and Minority Law and a Director of the
Northern Institute for Environmental and Minority Law at the Arctic Centre of the University of Lapland,
November 1st 2009, “Canada, The Eu, And Arctic Ocean Governance: A Tangled And Shifting Seascape
And Future Directions,” http://www.law.fsu.edu/journals/transnational/vol18_2/koivurova.pdf,
accessed: 5/24/14
The EU plays an important role in the Council even though it participates only as an ad hoc observer.
Three of the eight Artic Council members are Member States of the Union; namely Finland, Sweden and
Denmark. Moreover, seven out of the eight non-Arctic states observers to the Council are Members.
Germany and the United Kingdom, who are increasingly demanding a better position in the Council. The
current Arctic Council chair, Norway, is trying to meet these expectations in its chair-period by
enhancing their participation in the work of the Council. As studied below, the Commission is currently
planning its future Arctic policy, which may lead to the EU demanding a better position in the Arctic
Council.
But more integration is key

Ecologic Institute, Berlin-based Think Tank, December 21st, 2010, “EU Arctic Footprint and Policy
Assessment: Final Report,” http://arctic-footprint.eu/sites/default/files/AFPA_Final_Report.pdf,
accessed: 5/24/14
There is a need for the EU to strengthen the policy process across all scenarios. In particular, in the high-
and middle impact scenarios, the EU could strengthen the policy process by promoting more co-
ordination between the existing multilateral agreements applicable in the Arctic. This would not be
limited to current inter-secretariat co-ordination but also co-operation between working-groups
(composed of representatives of states parties) between those multilateral agreements that have the
most impact in the Arctic. For example, the EU‘s Northern Dimension involves all relevant Arctic policy
actors, but it lacks institutional strength. The EU could commit to shifting the main focus of the ND from
the Baltic Sea to its already existing Arctic work, in particular trying to link with the Barents Euro-Arctic
region, thereby creating synergies and avoiding overlaps, and maintaining the preparedness for action.
Importantly, the ND and Barents Euro-Arctic Region could follow the precedent of the Arctic Council and
grant the region‘s indigenous peoples the status of permanent participants, allowing these groups direct
access and influence in the region‘s decision-making. In particular, the Race for Resources - High-impact
scenario would require more effective collaboration with the Arctic Council. For all EU policy decisions
relevant for the Arctic, the EU could cooperate with the Arctic Council. This type of cooperation would
affect all policy areas, streamline EU Arctic policies with trans-Arctic interests and raise the legitimacy of
the EU in Arctic policy development.
2NC AT Perm
Permutation fails – organizational complexity
CALAMAR, Cooperation Across the Atlantic for Marine Governance Integration, June 8th 2011, “A
Comparison: EU and US Ocean Policy,” http://calamar-
dialogue.org/sites/default/files/CALAMAR_1_Sum.pdf, accessed: 5/25/14
In the face of exacerbated climate change and increased global demand for marine resources, the
European Union (EU) and the United States (US) have a common interest in conserving marine resources
while sustainably developing the maritime economy.1 At the same time, the EU and the US face
challenges in developing an integrated maritime governance framework, which could help foster these
goals. Key obstacles stem from a reliance on sector-based governance approaches, as well as inherent
complexity in managing a growing number of interconnected activities across different levels of
government.
Joint development fails and the CP’s multilateral framework is a prerequisite

Stuart Harris, Visiting Fellow, Department of International Relations, Research School of Pacific and
Asian Studies, College of Asia and the Pacific, Australian National University, June 2008, School of
International, Political & Strategic Studies Working Paper, Published in Martina Timmermann and Jitsuo
Tsuchiyama (eds), Institutionalizing Northeast Asia: Regional Steps Towards Global Governance
http://ips.cap.anu.edu.au/sites/default/ files/08-6.pdf, accessed 5/14/14
Although joint development of ocean resources has been proposed, talks between the two sides have
been inconclusive. The Chinese development is already at an advanced stage, and this puts Japan at a disadvantage. The continuing
efforts by the Chinese to explore and develop within the disputed area could in fact be seen as putting pressure on Japan to agree to China’s
joint development proposals, as yet with no positive response from Japan.34 The situation is not helped by China’s
unwillingness to
provide information that Japan regards as necessary for its decisions. Some industry sources, however, doubt that this is a
particularly attractive area, with the
natural gas resources not seen as substantial and production costs likely to be high.35 In these circumstances, the region’s options are limited.
More might have been possible had there already existed a regional cooperative institutional
arrangement; in a regional, as distinct from a bilateral, dialogue, a sense of ‘shaming’ or ‘peer pressure’ has some
influence.
Chinese involvement through the perm doesn’t solve- their leadership in regional
forums trades off with US
Dick Nanto, Specialist in Industry and Trade Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division for
Congressional Research Services, January 4, 2008, “East Asian Regional Architecture: New Economic
and Security Arrangements and U.S. Policy,” www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL33653.pdf, accessed 5/25/14
The core question for many analysts, therefore, is what to do about the growing influence of China in Asia. What is clear is that China sees
itself as a regional economic and military power. It is aiming to establish its position as the leader of Asia,
is already displacing Japan and the United States among Southeast Asian nations as the primary trading partner and source of economic
assistance, and has pursued a “charm offensive” that appears to be winning the “hearts and minds” of people in many of the countries there.
China has accomplished this through skillful diplomacy, use of aid resources, and by presenting a more friendly face, but it also has relied on
formal trade and other agreements. Nevertheless, the United States still is the dominant military power in Asia. As one observer noted, the
danger in this rise of China as a friendly economic giant, is that countries in the region could
“subordinate their interests to China’s and no longer reflexively look to the United States for regional
solutions.”In the six-party talks, for example, some have suggested that the United States is “outsourcing” its leadership role to China.
2NC AT Perm
Perm independently links to politics
CALAMAR, Cooperation Across the Atlantic for Marine Governance Integration, June 8th 2011, “A
Comparison: EU and US Ocean Policy,” http://calamar-
dialogue.org/sites/default/files/CALAMAR_1_Sum.pdf, accessed: 5/25/14
The advent of new leadership and recent ocean policy initiatives on both sides of the Atlantic have
brought opportunities to enhance cooperation and increase integrated ocean governance through
mutual exchange and fostering of stakeholder networks. The benefits of such cooperation are clear,
given the shared interests of the EU and US regarding integrated ocean governance. The challenge
before the EU and the US is to conserve marine resources while further developing the maritime
economy in an environmentally sustainable manner that safeguards not only their own marine heritage,
but that of the entire world. Implementing the necessary changes will require significant commitment
and political will.
2NC AT No Funding
Plenty of funding for new projects in place
Marine Institute, Ireland’s National agency responsible for Marine Research, Technology
Development and Innovation (RTDI), 2013, “€200 million earmarked for marine research in the EU’s
Horizon 2020 programme in 2014-2015,”
http://www.marine.ie/home/aboutus/newsroom/news/%E2%82%AC200millionearmarkedformarineres
earchintheEUsHorizon2020programmein2014-2015.htm, accessed: 5/24/14
The €80 billion Horizon 2020 programme (2014-2020) was officially launched in the Dublin Convention
Centre on 10th December by EU Commissioner for Research, Innovation and Science, Maire Geoghegan
Quinn and Minister for Research and Innovation, Sean Sherlock, TD. An audience of over 2,000
participants heard that more than €15 billion (18%) of the €80 billion budget would be allocated over
the first two years. This funding is intended to help boost Europe's knowledge-driven economy, and
tackle issues that will make a difference in people's lives. European Commissioner Máire Geoghegan-
Quinn said: "It's time to get down to business. Horizon 2020 funding is vital for the future of research
and innovation in Europe, and will contribute to growth, jobs and a better quality of life. We have
designed Horizon 2020 to produce results, and we have slashed red tape to make it easier to participate.
So I am calling on researchers, universities, businesses including SMEs, and others to sign up!"
2NC AT “All Show, No Action”

Political imperatives are being turned into action – not all show
Ronán Long, Jean Monnet Chair of European Law at the School of Law, National University of Ireland
Galway, 2011, “The Marine Strategy Framework Directive: A new European approach to the regulation
of the marine environment, marine natural resources and marine ecological services,” Journal of Energy
and Natural Resources Law 29 (1) pp. 1-44,
http://vmserver14.nuigalway.ie/xmlui/bitstream/handle/10379/1787/MSFD%20Article%20(JENRL).pdf?
sequence=1&origin=publication_detail, accessed: 5/24/14
In view of this, it may be fair to conclude this article by suggesting that the most significant contribution
made by the MSFD thus far is that it is slowly galvanising the various statutory bodies in the Member
States into action on the grounds that the protection of the marine environment, the sustainable
management of marine natural resources and the conservation of functioning ecosystems, are now
firmly rooted in the EU regulatory code as binding legal obligations. As a result, these tasks can no
longer be dismissed as simply political imperatives lacking legal substance. This in turn ought to mean
that future damage to the marine environment or marine ecosystems will no longer go unchecked in the
EU provided that the Member States remain true to the letter and spirit of the MSFD. What is more, the
rigid timetable for the implementation of the broad-range of daunting tasks set down by the Directive
provides us with a useful yardstick by which to measure the progress of the Member States and the EU
in discharging the commitment given at a number of international fora including the 2002 WSSD to
promote sustainable uses of the seas and to conserve marine ecosystems203 The MSFD should
therefore be welcomed by all interested parties as an essential and long overdue regulatory intervention
by the EU in the field of marine environmental policy and marine natural resources law. Ultimately, it
will be judged on how successful it is in reversing the current trend in natural resource degradation and
in implementing strategies to protect ecosystems, as well as its contribution to the integrated
management of the marine environment in line with the EU’s commitment at the 2002 WSSD.
Geoengineering CP
Geoengineering Explanation
Geoengineering involves the manipulation of the Earth’s climate to avoid catastrophic climate change
from the greenhouse gas effect. This specific counterplan has the United States fund and implement an
iron fertilization project. Iron fertilization is basically dumping iron into the ocean which would increase
the reproduction rate of phytoplankton. Those phytoplankton are similar to other plants in that they
absorb carbon dioxide and release oxygen thus reducing the amount of carbon dioxide in the
atmosphere.
1NC Iron Fertilization CP

The United States Federal Government should plan and launch an ocean iron-
fertilization initiative. This initiative should comprehensively study the effects of iron-
fertilization.
Iron fertilization solves global warming
David Biello, associate editor for energy and the environment at the Scientific American, 7-18-2012,
“Controversial Spewed Iron Experiment Succeeds as Carbon Sink,” Scientific American,
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=fertilizing-ocean-with-iron-sequesters-co2
Fertilizing the ocean with iron could help reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide levels, according to newly released
findings of a research cruise. Why? In a word, diatoms.¶ A hunger for iron rules the microscopic sea life of the Southern Ocean
surrounding ice-covered Antarctica. Cut off from most continental dirt and dust, the plankton, diatoms and other life that make up the broad
bottom of the food chain there can't get enough iron to grow. And that's why some scientists think that artificially fertilizing
such waters with the metal could promote blooms that suck CO2 out of the air. Then, when these microscopic creatures
die, they would sink to the bottom of the ocean and take the carbon with them.¶ Such blooms occur naturally, of course, so the first part of the
hypothesis is not controversial. What remained questionable until now is whether such blooms in fact sequestered much carbon or if it was
being quickly recycled back into the atmosphere. The problem for scientists is that oceanic waters tend to mix, which makes monitoring and
delineating an experiment in the ocean challenging.¶ The solution, devised by biological oceanographer Victor Smetacek of the Alfred
Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research in Germany and his colleagues, was to use an eddy. Such swirling currents can be
remarkably self-contained. In fact, the new research to be published in Nature on July 19 shows that less than 10 percent of the eddy's
waters mixed with the surrounding ocean. (Scientific American is part of Nature Publishing Group.)¶ With such ideal conditions, the group
dissolved seven metric tons of iron sulfate in acidic seawater and spewed the solution into the ship's propeller wash starting on
February 13, 2004, covering a circular patch in the eddy of some 167 square kilometers. That's the equivalent of adding 0.01 gram of iron per
square meter, levels similar to those found in the wake of a melting iceberg. They then monitored the fate of the patch off and on for five
weeks, while also adding supplemental iron fertilizer after two weeks to keep concentrations high enough to promote growth. ¶ As expected,
microscopic sea life bloomed. Chaetoceros atlanticus, Corethron pennatum, Thalassiothrix antarcticus and nine other species of
diatoms grew in abundance, boosting the amounts of chlorophyll, organic carbon and other signs of life in the waters to depths of as much as
100 meters beneath the surface.¶ By the middle of the third week after the researchers stopped adding iron, the bloom began to die. So
many diatoms died, in fact, that they overwhelmed any natural systems for decay and fell in large numbers below 500 meters in depth. At least
half of the total bloom biomass sank below 3,000 meters, according to the scientists' calculations. Fresh diatom cell corpses littered the
seafloor as well, and the research team believes that much of the bloom ended at the bottom as a layer of fluff. "Since the aggregates sank so
rapidly and the water column was more or less 'empty' on day 50, they must have settled out," Smetacek argues. "Layers of fluff have been
reported from various regions, including the Southern Ocean." The results offer fresh hope to would-be geoengineers hoping
to draw down ever-increasing concentrations of industrial CO2 in the atmosphere, such as the ill-fated company
Planktos and its failed bid to fertilize the ocean off Ecuador with iron. This new experiment induced carbon to fall 34 times as fast
as natural rates for nearly two weeks—the highest such rate ever observed outside the laboratory. As the deceased
oceanographer John Martin of Moss Landing Marine Observatories in California famously said in 1988: " Give me half a tanker of
iron, and I'll give you the next ice age. "
Iron Fertilization Works

Testing proves iron fertilization hypothesis true
ScienceDaily, “Ocean Carbon: Dent In Iron Fertilization Hypothesis Previously Proposed To Address
Climate Change” 05-08-2009. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/05/090506131512.htm,
Accessed 4-11-2014.
In the 1980s, oceanographer John Martin of the Moss Landing Marine Laboratories, who died in 1993,
proposed that iron added to regions of the ocean that are otherwise rich in nutrients but poor in iron
(so-called high-nutrient, low-chlorophyl, or HNLC, regions) can stimulate the growth of phytoplankton –
a bold scientific hypothesis that has since been proven correct. Martin went further, however, when he
suggested that artificial iron fertilization of the oceans could change the climate. “Give me half a
tankerful of iron and I’ll give you an Ice Age,” he boasted in 1988. In testing the Iron Hypothesis, SOFeX’s
investigators acknowledged that matters were not quite that simple, and that the crucial question was
not whether plankton blooms could be induced but whether the carbon they captured was removed to
the deep sea. The SOFeX research vessels fertilized and measured two regions of ocean, one in an HNLC
region at latitude 55 degrees south and another at 66 degrees south. Carbon Explorers were launched at
both these sites; a third Carbon Explorer was launched well outside the iron-fertilized region at 55°S as a
control. Berkeley Lab scientists Todd Wood, Christopher Guay, and Phoebe Lam were members of the
expedition, while Bishop monitored and communicated with the Carbon Explorers from Berkeley over a
computer link to communications satellites. One question was whether the relatively silicate-poor
waters of the more northerly 55° region would allow plankton known as diatoms to form silicon
skeletons. If large diatoms could not grow in this HNLC region, the SOFeX researchers theorized,
enhanced carbon sinking would not occur. Partly for this reason, most of the effort by the ships was at
66°S, where silicon wasn’t considered a limiting factor. To the researchers’ surprise, the iron-augmented
region at 55°N did form a vigorous plankton bloom. Dubbed the North Patch, Carbon Explorers tracked
this bloom throughout the Antarctic summer, measuring carbon particles, including waste from grazing
zooplankton and other aggregates, sinking beneath the bloom and carrying 10 to 20 percent of the fixed
carbon out of the surface layer – at least to below 100 meters. The initial results of the SOFeX
experiment, published in Science in April, 2004, seemed to support the Iron Hypothesis in an
unexpected way.
Iron fertilization would be effective

Quiren Schiermeier, nature News,. “Fertilizing the sea could combat global warming” 04-22-2004.
http://www.bioedonline.org/news/news.cfm?art=921, Accessed 4-11-2014.
Dumping iron sulphate in the ocean to cause plankton blooms might not seem an eco-friendly way to
tackle global warming. But, according to the most extended trial of the technique so far, it could prove
an effective one. The outcome of the trial in the Southern Ocean, which surrounds Antarctica, was
published in last week's Science. It suggests that each atom of iron added to the sea could pull between
10,000 and 100,000 atoms of carbon out of the atmosphere by encouraging plankton growth, which
captures carbon and sinks it deep towards the ocean floor1. If successfully scaled up, such 'iron
fertilization' of the sea could make a real dent in the high level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere,
which is causing global warming. Some researchers estimate that using the technique in the Southern
Ocean alone could absorb 15% of carbon dioxide build-up. But ecologists caution that the technique
could damage marine ecosystems in ways yet to be established2.
AT: International Disagreement

Fertilization happens on international waters, unrestricted
Hugh Powell, MA Ornithology, 11-13-2007, Science writer Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution,
“Fertilizing the Ocean with Iron”, http://www.whoi.edu/oceanus/viewArticle.do?id=34167, Accessed 4-
11-2014.
At present, iron fertilization falls into a gray area in both international law and formal carbon-trading
markets, but this is changing. Iron fertilization would happen on the open ocean, which is not owned by
any country, according to David Freestone, senior adviser in the Legal Office of the World Bank, who
briefed the symposium participants. While international treaties such as the London Convention, which
governs ocean dumping and pollution, might address iron addition, treaty nations have not yet decided
whether it might constitute pollution because its possible side effects remain unknown. Further, no
overarching international agency exists to enforce the treaty, so responsibility falls to individual nations,
he said. Ship crews intending to flout an international treaty could do so by electing to fly the flag of a
country that has not signed it—a route that has already been publicly considered by one company.
Carbon trading markets are young but growing, Neeff said. Strictly regulated markets, set in motion by
the Kyoto Protocol treaty, last year traded 430 million tons of carbon offsets (worth billions of dollars)
among companies required to reduce total emissions. (One ton of carbon equals 3.67 tons of carbon
dioxide.) Regulatory markets don’t allow for iron fertilization at present, but this may change as more
carbon sink projects gain approval.
AT: Iron Fertiliztaion Bad

All of their impact turns are reasons why we need to increase R&D
Hugh Powell, MA Ornithology, 11-13-2007, Science writer Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution,
“Fertilizing the Ocean with Iron”, http://www.whoi.edu/oceanus/viewArticle.do?id=34167, Accessed 4-
11-2014.
Between these viewpoints a middle ground emerged: “There are plenty of ways to do it wrong, but
done right, [iron fertilization] does actually sequester carbon for hundreds of years in the place that it
would ultimately end up anyway,” Watson said. That may be a tremendous advantage compared with
more familiar but less secure approaches like planting trees, he said. Skeptics should not dismiss the
idea out of hand before scientists have had the chance to work out the details. One way to quell doubts
lies with carefully conducting larger experiments. But iron fertilization is unlikely to receive much more
federal funding. It falls to entrepreneurs concerned about the climate problem to fund the work, and
they need scientists’ participation to make sure the right questions are asked and answered.
Geoengineering Solves – Inevitable

Geoengineering is inevitable – solves impact to warming and provides time for
eventual carbon reductions
Ronald Bailey, reason’s science correspondent, 6-10-2008, “An Emergency Cooling System for the
Planet,” Reason Magazine, http://reason.com/archives/2008/06/10/an-emergency-cooling-system-fo,
Accessed 4-11-2014.
So if we don't want to perpetuate poverty in the name of preventing climate change, geoengineering may be our way out. Why? Because
geoengineering would provide more time for the world's economy to grow while inventors and entrepreneurs
develop and deploy new carbon neutral energy sources to replace fossil fuels. Wigley also noted that cutting greenhouse
gas emissions is a tremendous global collective action problem. It seems unlikely that fast-growing poor countries like India and
China will agree cut back on their use of fossil fuels any time soon. If that's the case, then emissions reductions in rich
countries would have almost no effect on future temperature trends. Geoengineering could give humanity more
time to resolve this collective action problem, too. So let's take Wigley's second proposal first—changing the
reflectivity of clouds. Researchers know that this can be done because it already happens with ship tracks. Ship exhaust
over the oceans injects particles into the atmosphere that serve as cloud condensation nuclei, creating clouds in the wakes of ships. Ship
exhaust produces and brightens clouds so that they cool the planet by reflecting sunlight back into space, but only by a little bit. However,
recent modeling research by University of Edinburgh engineer Stephen Salter and his colleagues calculates
that doubling the number of cloud condensation nuclei would more than compensate for any warming
associated with a doubling of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. This could be accomplished by having ships deliberately
inject seawater into the atmosphere where salt particles would serve as extra cloud condensation nuclei. In 2006, Chemistry
Nobelist Paul Crutzen proposed injecting sulfate particles into the stratosphere to reflect some sunlight back into space
(an idea discussed by reason contributor Gregory Benford more than ten years ago). This might be done with giant cannons. Crutzen argues
that it would cost between $25 and $50 billion per year to shoot enough sulfate particles into the stratosphere to reduce incoming sunlight by
1.8 percent. Thiswould be enough to counter the predicted warming produced by doubling atmospheric carbon
dioxide. An earlier study by Yale University economist William Nordhaus estimated that the sulfate injection
proposal would cost about $8 billion per year. This compares nicely with the $125 billion per year Nordhaus calculated it would have
cost the U.S. to implement the Kyoto Protocol. Wigley spent most of his time at AEI discussing the possible risks involved with the sulfate
injection proposal. Wigley argued that sulfates injected into the stratosphere would be equal to only about 10 percent of those humanity
already injects into the lower atmosphere, so this wouldn't greatly boost acid rain. In April, a study by some of Wigley's National Center for
Atmospheric Research colleagues found that injecting sulfates would further deplete the ozone layer that shields the earth's surface from
damaging ultraviolet light. Wigley simply noted in passing that even more recent research suggests that the damage to the ozone layer will be
less than the April study estimated. Stratospheric sulfate injection might also change rainfall patterns, perhaps reducing precipitation from the
monsoons on which millions of Asian farmers are dependent. In response to these worries, Wigley noted that stratospheric sulfates might
reduce the intensity of monsoons by two to three percent which contrasts with a current monsoon variability of 30 percent. But one big
problem that sulfate injection would not solve is the continuing acidification of the ocean that is occurring as extra carbon dioxide from the
atmosphere dissolves into the seas. This acidification could eventually pose problems for creatures such as mollusks and corals that use calcium
carbonate to grow their shells and skeletons. What is the safe level at which to stabilize carbon dioxide? The current greenhouse gas
concentrations are equivalent to 385 parts per million (ppm) of carbon dioxide, up 100 ppm over pre-industrial levels. In the past some
researchers suggested that stabilizing concentrations at 550 ppm would avoid the most serious effects of global warming. Now other
researchers are arguing that we have to get back to 350 ppm. Wigley sees no signs that humanity is on a track to stabilize carbon dioxide
concentrations at 550 ppm. Consequently, he believes that we
will have to resort to geoengineering as a way to buy the
time humanity needs to figure out how to cut carbon dioxide emissions. He foresees an effort to ramp up
stratospheric sulfate injection over 75 years to counter the climatic effects of rising carbon dioxide concentrations.
Geoengineering Solves – Inevitable

Geoengineering is inevitable
David Stephen, staff writer, 7-12-2012, “Climate change will make the world endear geoengineering,”
Ground Report, http://www.groundreport.com/Business/Climate-change-will-make-the-world-endear-
geoengin/2947042, Accessed 4-11-2014.
The appropriate time for large scale deployment of geoengineering will be something like now, that the world experiences extreme weather
events. ‘Geoengineer the climate, engineer it to save us’ will be the prevalent spout from people because of hard to
bear recurrent extremes of devastating magnitude. The losses and impact from weather extremes, of the past few weeks around the world, has
prompted serious concerns. Rich and powerful nations are being hurt likewise small and developing nations. Similar weather occurrences have
rocked some of the affected places previously, and made news but was seen as a snippet of future climate change. The story today is different.
The chronology and parallelism of present events suggest that there are changes in the climate setup of the world, evident by the anomalies.
The knowledge is that global warming is responsible, based on the accumulation of greenhouse emissions in the troposphere –- the lowest part
of the earth’s atmosphere. Some disagree with this, stating that global warming or anthropogenic emissions are not responsible for climate
change. Some in this class have their ‘facts’ and take on major evidences that support the knowledge. Global warming aside this
opposition is also facing hard times with decision makers, to agree on a global effort for mitigating
emission. The issues facing global warming from the human viewpoint can be tied to actual occurrence. If things really get extreme, and
pains go round, who will have the time for disputes to facts or agreement? The occurrence factor has made many who have ‘evidence’, points
or passionate about the climate to lean back. Now though, polls in the States report gain in the percentage of climate change believers, and
global press reports on these extremes continue to mention climate change, allowing decision makers and their advisers to possibly give
another thought to the information. With more
extremes in future, successive and following the same sequence, global warming
or mitigation of emissions will not be the issue, geoengineering (or climate engineering) will. The world may be
tepid to absolutely push the important-for-the-future mitigation, while harm is, from past ones. Greenhouse gases that have
accumulated in the troposphere will cause significant warming into the future even if emissions were stopped. This presents a need for
geoengineering if the earth’s average temperature slips or extreme events suddenly line. Geoengineering present technologies to increase the
reflectivity of the earth’s atmosphere or surface and to remove carbon dioxide -- a major greenhouse emission -- from the atmosphere. Their
use come at scales, but will contribute to lowering the average temperature of the earth in a number of years. Managing solar radiation by
increasing earth’s reflectivity is seen as the quickest and likely to adopt in urgent situations, while carbon dioxide removal flow with the gradual
clean energy and mitigation objective. Some volcanic eruptions do climate engineering by injecting aerosols into the stratosphere. This is the
case for a geoengineering technology called aerosol-injection. Geoengineering has its bad sides and efforts to resolve them have kept the
subject at the research level. Agreeing to deploy it for the benefit of the world can come in a year or so, if the world is bashed badly by weather
events. Mitigation will also be increased, but geoengineering, most likely aerosol-injection at choice points will be used
for a few years.
Geoengineering Solves – Cheap

Geoengineering is inevitable and cheap
Marc Gunther, veteran journalist, speaker, and writer whose focus is business and sustainability,
contributing editor at FORTUNE magazine, 2-9-2010, “Is geoengineering inevitable?”
http://www.marcgunther.com/2010/02/09/is-geoengineering-inevitable/, Accessed 4-11-2014.
Geoengineering, says scientist David Keith, “is like chemotherapy. It’s something nobody should like.” But if you can’t avoid cancer,
chemotherapy may be your best option. And, if it becomes evident that the earth can’t avoid the catastrophic impacts of climate change, it is
not merely possible that governments will turn to geoengineering. Some people believe that it is all but certain. Geoengineering, as you
probably know, is the deliberate large-scale manipulation of the planet to counter global warming. It can take a number of forms, as the graphic
below shows, some perhaps still to be discovered. Long a taboo subject, geoengineering is being talked about openly these days by scientists,
environmentalists and policy thinkers. 409420aa.2 The National Academy of Sciences held a workshop on geoengineering in June. Influential
books including SuperFreakonomics and Whole Earth Discipline, by longtime environmentalist Stewart Brand, argue that it’s time to take
geoengineering seriously. A congressional subcommittee held its second hearing on geoengineering just last week. Among those testifying was
Keith, who directs the energy and environmental systems group at the University of Calgary and, interestingly, also leads a team of engineers
who are developing a technology to capture CO2 from ambient air. I heard him speak a week ago during a six-hour workshop on
geoengineering organized by the Environmental Defense Fund, a nonprofit known for its pragmatism. EDF invited me to attend, on the
condition that I seek permission from the scientists before quoting them. Geoengineering is not a new idea — it was mentioned in a 1965
report on the environment delivered to President Lyndon Johnson. But until recently, environmentalists have avoided talking about it because
they worry that a focus on geoengineering will divert attention and resources from their attempts to get governments and business to curb
carbon emissions–attempts which, it must be said, have had limited success so far. Nor is geoengineering entirely unproven. Experts say solar
radiation management (SRM), the form of geoengineering that has drawn the most attention lately, can be achieved by adding
light-scattering aerosols to the upper atmosphere or increasing the reflectivity of clouds below. What makes
scientists think it will work? When the Mount Pinatubo volcano in the Philippines erupted in 1991, spewing fine particles of sulfur
dioxide into the stratosphere, enough sunlight was reflected back into space that the earth was cooled by about
0.5 degrees C, at least for a time. The trouble is, solar radiation management surely will have other consequences as well. Some are
known—less precipitation and less evaporation, which is bound to affect agriculture—and others are not. “The concerns, really, are the
unknown unknowns,” says Keith. The EDF workshop was itself a sign that geoengineering is moving closer to the mainstream. It was organized
for EDF’s trustees and senior staff during a board meeting at Cavallo Point in Sausalito, Ca.; the organization hasn’t decided yet whether to
support further research into geoengineering but, to its credit, it is open-minded about the idea. Listening to the presentations, I found myself
appalled at times and thrilled at others. This is a fascinating subject, one that raises many more questions than there are answers. One useful
way to think about geoengineering in general and SRM in particular is to compare them to mitigation, the current approach to climate change.
Mitigation means reducing carbon emissions, most importantly by replacing the burning of fossil fuels (coal and oil) with low-carbon energy
sources such as wind, solar, nuclear power, so-called cleaner coal and biofuels–on a vast scale. Mitigation requires enormous expenditures of
capital and takes a very long time to work because CO2 emitted today persists in the atmosphere for decades. Even if we could arrange for an
international agreement to curb emissions, which we cannot, it will take decades to reverse the rising concentrations of carbon in the
atmosphere. By contrast, solar radiation management is arguably “fast, cheap and imperfect,” said Keith–particularly if it is done crudely and
without proper governance, oversight and testing. As little as $5 to $10 billion a year could pay for a short-term
program, scientists estimate. By email, Keith put it this way: “The raw cost of implementation is less than 10% and probably
less than 1% of the cost of cutting emissions when you average costs over 100 years.” Most of the technology required
is within reach. “It’s pretty clear that you could do it if you wanted to, and you could do it now,” Keith said. “If we
put a lot of reflective aerosols in the upper atmosphere, it gets colder and it gets colder quickly.” What the best
way to block the sun’s rays? That’s to be determined. Keith explained that high-flying planes could scatter sulfate
particles in the stratosphere, although little is known about how the aerosols would be formed into particles and therefore how long
they would stay in the air. Stephen Salter, an emeritus professor of engineering design at the University of Edinburgh,
said a fleet of about 500 self-driven sailing ships could be designed to spray salt water into the air that would
increase the reflexivity of clouds, thereby blocking sunlight. SuperFreakonomics, meanwhile. put a spotlight on Intellectual
Ventures Lab, a Seattle-based company led by former Microsoft chief technology officer Nathan Myrhvold that is researching geoengineering.
Here’s a four-minute video about an Intellectual Ventures’ invention called the StratoShield, essentially a giant hose held up by helium ballo0ns
that would inject a fine mist of aerosolized sulfur dioxide 18 miles above the earth. You can be sure that if research money is made available to
study geoengineering, new ideas for tinkering with the earth on a global scale will arise. Two years ago, I wrote a
cnnmoney.com column about a startup called Climos that is exploring techniques for removing carbon dioxide from the air by sprinkling iron
dust on oceans. (For what it’s worth, the scientists at EDF’s event told me that will never work.)
AT: Acid Rain

No tangible effect on acid rain
Accessed 4-11-2014.
Wigley spent most of his time at AEI discussing the possible risks involved with the sulfate injection
proposal. Wigley argued that sulfates injected into the stratosphere would be equal to only about 10
percent of those humanity already injects into the lower atmosphere, so this wouldn't greatly boost acid
rain. In April, a study by some of Wigley's National Center for Atmospheric Research colleagues found
that injecting sulfates would further deplete the ozone layer that shields the earth's surface from
damaging ultraviolet light. Wigley simply noted in passing that even more recent research suggests that
the damage to the ozone layer will be less than the April study estimated.
AT: Monsoons
No tangible effect on monsoons
Accessed 4-11-2014.
Stratospheric sulfate injection might also change rainfall patterns, perhaps reducing precipitation from
the monsoons on which millions of Asian farmers are dependent. In response to these worries, Wigley
noted that stratospheric sulfates might reduce the intensity of monsoons by two to three percent which
contrasts with a current monsoon variability of 30 percent.
Seabasing CP
Seabasing Explanation
This counterplan has the US fund and deploy a comprehensive seabasing system. Seabasing is meant to
be a replacement for land based forward deployment. The problem with land based forward
deployment is that it relies on the consent of the host country. This can be a problem for the US if the
political situation in the country changes as the other country could violate the agreement. Seabasing
allows the US to quickly deploy forces across the earth without the chance of losing access. This
counterplan is good against affs that claim hegemony advantages because it allows you to solve their
impacts and avoid a politics disadvantage.
1NC Seabasing CP
The United States Federal Government should develop and implement a mobile Sea
Basing naval capability.
Seabasing is key to naval power projection and hegemony
Commander Michael F. Perry, US Navy, 6-5-2009, “IMPORTANCE OF SEABASING TO LAND POWER
GENERATION”, USAWC PROGRAM RESEARCH. http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-
bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA508337&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf, Accessed 4-11-2014.
This study reaches six conclusions regarding the importance and future of Seabasing. First, given America’s increasingly limited access
to overseas bases, Seabasing is essential to land power generation and will likely become even more essential throughout the
21st Century. Specifically, land power is of little use without access to the internal lines of communication that it seeks to
sever and control. Seabasing provides the most efficient and effective means of placing boots on the ground,
particularly in the increasingly frequent case where modern air and seaports are unavailable due to underdevelopment, devastation or
anticipated losses. Rather, Seabasing allows applying force directly to an objective from the relative security of the sea.
Second, Corbett was right. The ultimate center of gravity of any opponent is its homeland and internal lines of
communication. Sea and air power lack the direct and sustained influence required to achieve a decisive and lasting victory.
Thus, historically, and for the foreseeable future, “imposing one’s will on an enemy involves threatening the integrity of his state” by
“threatening or conducting an invasion of his homeland.”98 Such “gun boat diplomacy” works best when one clearly has the ways and means
to impose a desired end. Seabasing allows Joint Force Commanders to rapidly mass and move land power around the
periphery of a continental opponent and attack at the times and places of their choosing . This clearly communicates the
ability of U.S. forces to rapidly respond anywhere in the world. Nothing could be more important to deterring
aggression against the U.S. and its allies and supporting American foreign policy.99 Thus, Seabasing “is the most
promising option available to national security planners, both civilian and military, because it can achieve political purpose in
a manner which most other joint capabilities cannot match. ”
Seabasing Good – Hegemony

Seabasing is key to global power projection.
The rise of the Soviet Navy during the Cold War presented a new peer competitor and slowed
development of sea based support of land power generation. However, the fall of the Soviet Union has
renewed interest in “Seabasing.” 3 Once again, the U.S. lacks a peer competitor on the high seas and must
reconsider its relevance to national security. The primary difference is that Huntington’s advice has become
even more relevant and important. In particular, Seabasing supports the National Security Strategies of
the U.S. with mobile operational and logistics platforms that help offset the dramatic decline in U.S. access to
overseas bases. These national security strategies require rapid access to potential Joint Operating Areas and
deployment of follow-on forces as necessary to deter potential aggressors and execute and reinforce U.S.
Foreign Policy. In response, Sebasing allows the U.S. Navy to project military power on short notice anywhere in
the globe either unilaterally or in support of Joint and combined operations. This eliminates the need to
support marginally democratic regimes for fear of losing access to overseas bases or forcibly seize or establish
marginally useful expeditionary air and sea ports. Rather, Joint Force Commanders can apply force directly
to an objective at the time and place of their choosing from the relative safety of the high seas. As a result,
Seabasing has become a Joint Integrating Concept of great importance to all aspects of the U.S.
Department of Defense. Specifically, Seabasing forms one of the “Pillars” of the “Sea Power 21” strategy to
evolve the U.S. Navy from a “blue-water, war-at-sea” force to a “global joint operations” force, which is
capable of confronting “regional and transnational dangers” on land as well as sea .4
Seabasing is key to US credibility

Similarly, Seabasing is essential to transforming the U.S. Army and Air Force to a more responsive and truly joint
force. Yet, over 50 years after Huntington first described its importance, the U.S. Navy and Department
of Defense are still struggling to clearly define the goals and objectives of Seabasing and overcome the
“mythology and misunderstanding” that has “stifled” its development.5 This study defines Seabasing
and its relevance to the classic strategies of sea power as well as the current National Security Strategies
and Joint Military Doctrine of the United States. As will be shown, Seabasing has become increasingly
important to the land and air, as well as sea, services of the U.S. Department of Defense. In particular,
Seabasing has become increasingly essential to land power due to the decreasing number of nations willing to
grant the U.S. access to overseas bases. Finally, this study discusses the decisions and challenges that have
slowed development of Seabasing and concludes that Seabasing can only be developed efficiently and
effectively if progressed in a truly joint and organized fashion. At stake is the ability of the U.S. to deter
aggression and reinforce its foreign policy with credible and timely threats to potential adversaries and offers of
assistance to allies located throughout the world.
Seabasing Outweighs Softpower

Counterplan solves all the reasons that soft power constrains heg
Colonel Christopher Mayette, United States Marine Corps, 3-26-2009, “SEABASING: A STRATEGY FOR
THE 21ST CENTURY?”, Strategy Research Project. http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-
bin/GetTRDoc?Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf&AD=ADA500880, Accessed 4-11-2014.
A persistent physical military presence provides significant influence in a region. Forward deployed forces support
rapid employment of those forces, but presence alone conveys varying diplomatic messages. The presence of U.S.
forces can be seen as a show of support, demonstration of commitment or as a threat to foreign governments and their
populations. Considerations such as diplomatic anti-access, alienation of the host nation population or government and
perceptions of the United States are areas of concern in any basing strategy. Seabasing provides flexible options to
convey U.S. interests particularly in developing nations and areas where the U.S. has no longstanding allies. Diplomatic anti-
access techniques pose a unique challenge to U.S. intervention efforts. To overcome diplomatic anti-access with force
undermines the overall legitimacy of U.S. efforts. Given the vast superiority of U.S. conventional military capabilities relative to
most adversaries, it is likely these adversaries will leverage political and diplomatic efforts in conjunction with physical components to deny,
delay or degrade U.S. intervention.36 From the political and diplomatic perspective, adversaries will likely seek allies
within a variety of international bodies to pursue ways of undermining U.S. intervention.”
Land basing is unsustainable – the cp removes the need for soft power
John Pruitt. “The Influence of Sea Power in the 21st Century,” Working Paper 00-4 August 2000,
Accessed 4-11-2014.
Troops on the ground invariably conflict with the culture of the occupied country. Only in the rarest of cases is the
continuing stationing of troops overseas sustainable. Britain found the maintenance of large ground forces away from the home island hard to maintain and prone to conflict. In effect, British culture was
subtlety and cultural

moved with them and, though often segregated in cantonments, invariably caused friction with the local populace. Conversely, international engagement of other nations was vital to the British and is vital today. However, a
sensitivity, not entirely natural to the image of a high security military compound in a foreign land, are what will be most needed in
the years ahead. Granted there are places in the world that need some U.S. military ground presence, most only on a very temporary basis. I would put the current deployments of troops for humanitarian and peac ekeeping operations in this category. Permanent
presence is required for only the most vital interests. I place our allies in Europe and Japan, as well as the resource rich Persian Gulf in this category. In these latter cases host nation acquiescence and support are usually basic requirements. In the many other more short-term areas
maritime-basing offers the best opportunity for influence while minimizing the risk of cultural conflict.
Seabasing solves soft power

Littoral areas have always offered opportunity for operational maneuver from the sea.15 However, they have become increasingly
important as the number of overseas bases available to U.S. forces has steadily declined from 170 in 1945 to 26 in 2005.16
This loss of bases eliminates lines of operation, shortens operational reach, and makes U.S. foreign policy vulnerable
to “anti-access” strategies designed to prevent the massing, employment and support of U.S. forces.17 More specifically, the anti-access problems consist of: Over flight restrictions: Countries, allied, neutral, and/or hostile, can refuse permission
: Governments can arbitrarily limit or deny the U.S. access to basing facilities often
for U.S. aircraft to overfly their airspace; Base access problems
unexpectedly and at critical moments; Limited base infrastructure: Joint Operating Areas frequently lack deepwater, well-developed,
and/or operational sea and air ports, particularly in developing areas of the world or the aftermath of natural disasters, and; Distorted foreign
policy: The U.S. has frequently supported unpopular and undemocratic regimes to secure access to overseas bases at
great cost to its prestige, credibility, and national budget.18 Seabasing seeks to overcome these threats with a
floating base that can be rapidly assembled in the freedom of the high seas along any shore in the world. This eliminates
the politics that frequently slow, limit, or prevent establishing land bases, places over 75% of the world’s
population within the 240 nautical mile reach of Seabasing, and describes the most important aspect of Seabasing
to land power generation.19
AT: No Capability
Military is already developing seabasing – Empirically works
Douglas M. King, Colonel USMC, and John C. Berry, ret. Marine officer, 3rd Q 2008, “Seabasing:
Expanding Access,” Joint Force Quarterly,
http://www.quantico.usmc.mil/seabasing/resources/BSSB/Seabasing%20Article.pdf, Accessed 4-11-
2014.
The Navy and Marine Corps have been involved in a number of seabasing initiatives, both operational and
programmatic, which have expanded into joint endeavors. The creation of Global Fleet Stations (GFS),
for example, is an operational initiative designed to increase the capability and capacity for discrete,
proactive activities as describe in the Naval Operations Concept 2006: “Focusing primarily on Phase 0
(shaping) operations, Theater Security Cooperation, Global Maritime Awareness, and tasks associated
specifically with the War on Terror, GFS offers a means to increase regional maritime security through
the cooperative efforts of joint, inter-agency, and multinational partners, as well as Non-Governmental
Organizations. Like all sea bases, the composition of a GFS depends on Combatant Commander requirements,
the operating environment, and the mission.”15 To date, GFS experiments have been conducted with our
partners in South America and West Africa and have been deemed highly successful.
Deployable in less than ten years

Indian Express, 5-4-2009, “All at sea,” http://www.indianexpress.com/news/all-at-sea/454035/1,
Accessed 4-11-2014.
Basing troops and equipment on foreign soil is fraught with difficulty. Even friendly countries can cut up rough at crucial moments,
as America found when Turkey restricted the use of its territory and airspace during the invasion of Iraq in 2003. In an occupied country the
situation is worse, as a base is a magnet for attacks. Nor can you always put your base where you need it. If a country does not want to host it,
and cannot be bribed to, that-short of invasion-is that. But no one owns the high seas, and partisans rarely have access to
serious naval power. So America, still the world's only superpower and thus the one with most need for foreign bases, is
investigating the idea of building military bases on the ocean. They would, in effect, be composed of parts that can be rearranged
like giant Lego bricks. The armed forces could assemble them when needed, add to them, subtract from them and eventually dismantle them
when they are no longer required-and all without leaving a trace. Constructing such bases is a formidable technological challenge. Not only do
you have to provide quarters for servicemen, but you also have to handle, store and retrieve large amounts of supplies and weapons without
access to dockside cranes. Shuffling the containers carrying these, so that those needed immediately are accessible, is akin to solving a moving-
block puzzle where the blocks weigh many tonnes each. But America seems committed to the idea, and the first seabases should be
deployable within a decade.
The US is developing Seabasing and it will be longterm

General Michael W Hagee, Commandant of the Marine Corps, 3-10-2004, FDCH Testimony, Accessed
4-11-2014.
In the near-term, the Marine Corps' top priorities are to maintain our high state of readiness and to provide capable forces that meet the
demanding needs of the Unified Combatant Commanders in order to prosecute the Global War On Terrorism in support of the Nation. For the
long-term, the Marine Corps and Navy are committed to developing a Seabasing capability that will provide a critical
joint competency for assuring access and projecting power that will greatly improve the security of the United States. The
marked increase in our warfighting capability will be apparent as we introduce new systems such as the MV-22 Osprey, the
Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle, the Joint Strike Fighter, and the Lightweight 155mm howitzer into our force structure, using them to enhance
the already potent combat power of our Marine Air-Ground Task Forces as integral elements of our Nation's joint force.
AT: No Capability
The Navy is already developing seabasing
Kris Osborn, military analyst, 12-10-2013, “Navy, Marine Corps Build New Sea-Basing Ships,” DOD
Buzz, http://www.dodbuzz.com/2013/12/10/navy-marine-corps-build-new-sea-basing-ships/2,
Accessed 4-11-2014.
The U.S. Navy and Marine Corps are preparing to take final delivery of the first of several new sea-basing
platforms designed to increase forward presence and allow the services to operate without needing a
pier, port or land-staging area, service officials said.¶ The Navy plans to build four new sea-basing ships
to include two Mobile Landing Platforms, or MLPs, and two modified MLPs configured into what the
Navy calls Afloat Forward Staging Bases, or AFSBs.¶ With a decade of war in Iraq and Afghanistan ending
and the U.S. rebalancing to the vast waterways of the Pacific, the Navy and Marine Corps are examining
their expeditionary strategy. Officials have said they want to increase forward presence, improve
amphibious equipment and provide new platforms for sea-basing air and maritime assets.
Seabasing is less expensive than land basing

Naval Requirements, 10-10-2013, “September 2013 Thoughts: Sea Basing,”
http://amphibiousnecessity.blogspot.com/2013/10/september-2013-thoughts-sea-basing.html
Sea Basing is more expensive in simple terms, an aircraft carrier does cost more than an air base; the
question is do 3 aircraft carriers cost more than 20-30 airbases needed to cover the world with similar
coverage – and this of course is not placing a value on the fact that those bases could be denied at any
time by the host government, that those bases will have to be supplied, that heavy equipment will still
have to be moved by sea rather than air which will require some security of the sea and that any money
spent on an air base in a foreign country is automatically go out of the source nation’s economy,
whereas building a ship keeps it within the source nation’s economy; as well as serving as mobile
advertisement for the source nation’s skill base & industry. This though is the accounts and the real
reason to choose sea basing is the strategy, the reach, the flexibility it provides the nation possessing it
with.
AT: Links to Politics

Seabasing avoids politics and is key to long term power projection
Naval Requirements, 10-10-2013, “September 2013 Thoughts: Sea Basing,”
http://amphibiousnecessity.blogspot.com/2013/10/september-2013-thoughts-sea-basing.html,
Accessed 4-11-2014.
Global interests[1] require a global presence to protect them; which means a nation that has such
interest’s needs to find a way of supporting operations globally. This can be done by forward basing,
setting up establishments & agreements with allies to allow for support – i.e. a large footprint, or by using vessels such as aircraft carriers and
amphibious ships to provide air support, maintenance, logistical hubs, command & control with small staging facilities ashore – i.e. a small
footprint. Now both options have advantages and disadvantages; for forward basing those facilities & agreements bind nations together for
good and bad (which can be potentially be embarrassing should the regime do something which does not fit with the basing nations preferred
rules of conduct) but they are also a permanent platform which doesn’t need to return home for maintenance or be redeployed to a more
pressing system. However, the biggest problem is that the use of those facilities can be denied at any time by the host
nation – it’s not uncommon because they have to consider their own security and their own politics
before anything else.¶ Sea basing in comparison is more complicated to set up and run; but it is also more flexible in that it
can be redeployed from region to region depending upon changing operational focus, furthermore it
could never be denied for use by another nation except by enemy action. A scenario is which sea basing has an
advantage as it can’t be profiled, mapped and targeted using information available to anyone with access to
Google maps. However, whilst an aircraft carrier or large amphibious ship, escorts and auxiliaries do cost a little more than an air base, a
battalion or so of troops to secure it, a fleet of ships & trucks to supply it: the cost differences between the two systems shift
though when the issues of establishing, securing & supplying multiple bases to achieve equivalent levels
of global reach as the sea based system are taken into account; not to mention the political capital that
would have to be expended, and the fact the sea based systems[2] are procured from within keeping
the money within the national economy, rather being spent to support another’s. Sea basing though is
about more than global reach, and it is because of its other geo-strategic attributes that it is of use to all
nations, whatever they size/form.
Eco Security Kritik

This file is a critique of environmental securitization. With this file you should be able to put for a vast
array of distinct arguments to tailor your position to respond to your opponents’ arguments. The basic
thesis behind this position is that attempts to manage the ocean construct a larger regime of truth that
both legitimizes expertise and other forms of control. This approach to nature reduces nature to its
component parts which enables flawed policy making. The alternative is to reject this approach to
managing the environment.
1NC Eco Security K

The affirmative’s securitization of the oceans naturalizes a scientific rationalist
approach to the nature – that instrumental approach removes decision making from
public control and reduces the oceans as a resource to be secured.
Emily Martens, University of Miami, 2011, "The Discourses of Energy and Environmental Security in
the Debate Over Offshore Oil Drilling Policy in Florida" (2011). Open Access Theses.Paper 254, Accessed
5-26-2014.
For Foucault, discourse becomes a tool for power, whereby standards of social conduct can be articulated and
institutionalized through the implementation of economic and political structures. Discourse is a
portrayer of knowledge, where “knowledge is a tool of power” (Foucault 1976; Leiss 1994: 106). In the
juxtaposition of the US energy and environmental security discourses, the assumptions, or truths upon
which the discourse is built are the sources of a power struggle in which each side believes it correctly
portrays reality and an acceptable human response to that reality. The use of the term security, therefore,
becomes a discursive tool wherein legitimacy can be harvested, particularly by the State and political leaders
who have access to the media, by playing on certain fears about the future. To combine this with Dalby’s notion of
security as the expression of a desire to insulate from a perceived threat, it can be surmised that security as a discourse, is
wielded by the powerful to produce sentiment that would legitimize certain policies and actions that
may not necessary be considered necessary by the citizenry. Security, therefore, can be a means through
which to gain consent by articulating threats to the objects of security in terms of how their continued
insecurity threatens society and the livelihoods of the population; for instance, access to safe and cheap
energy resources (energy security) or a clean ocean in which to swim and harvest food (environmental security).
However divergent the energy and environmental security discourses may seem to be they operate
under similar assumptions derived from the Enlightenment, promoting scientific rationality as the
means through which society’s mastery over nature is the means to secure mankind from external
threat.
1NC Eco Security K

Domination over nature is linked to exploitations of humans – difference is used a
justification for extermination
Val Plumwood, Australian Research Council Fellow at the Australian National University, 1993,
Feminism and the Mastery of Nature. Pg. 4. Accessed 5-26-2014.
Thus it is also exclusion from the master category of reason which in liberation struggles provides and
explains the conceptual links between different categories of domination, and links the domination of
humans to the domination of nature. The category of nature is a field of multiple exclusion and control,
not only of nonhumans, but of various groups of humans and aspects of human life which are cast as
nature. Thus racism, colonialism and sexism have drawn their conceptual strength from casting sexual,
racial and ethnic difference as closer to the animal and the body construed as a sphere of inferiority, as
a lesser form of humanity lacking the full measure of rationality or culture. As Vandana Shiva points out (1989,
1991). It Is not only women's labour which traditionally gets subsumed 'by definition' into nature, but the
labour of colonised non-western, non-white people also. The connections between these forms of
domination in the west are thus partly the result of chance and of specific historical evolution, and
partly formed from a necessity inherent in the dynamic and logic of domination between self and other,
reason and nature. To be defined as 'nature' in this context is to be defined as passive, as non-agent and
non-subject, as the 'environment' or invisible background conditions against which the 'foreground'
achievements of reason or culture (provided typically by the white, western, male expert or entrepreneur) take place. It is to
be defined as a terra nullius, a resource empty of its own purposes or meanings, and hence available to be
annexed for the purposes of those supposedly identified with reason or intellect, and to be conceived
and moulded in relation to these purposes. It means being seen as part of a sharply separate, even alien
lower realm, whose domination is simply 'natural', flowing from nature itself and the nature(s) of things.
Such treatment, standard in the west for nature since at least the Enlightenment, has since that time been opposed and officially condemned
for humans (while all the while normalised for marginalised groups such as women and the colonised).
Alternative – reject their securitized managerial approach to nature
Our alternative creates a new form of politics for movements to work from.
Marcel Wissenburg and Yoram Levy, 2004, Liberal Democracy and Environmentalism: The End of
Environmentalism?” Wissenburg & Yoram, 2004. Pg. 4, Accessed 5-26-2014.
Environmentalism is traditionally not only concerned with the capability of existing political
arrangements and institutions to successfully address the environmental challenge. It also entails or
suggests a different conception of the good society. In addition to solving environmental problems,
environmentalism is also, maybe even primarily, concerned with an analysis of the nature of such
problems. In addition to a concern with acting effectively within a given political institutional context,
environmentalism is also engaged in redefining and reshaping that context. And in addition to its
concern with institutional design, environmentalism is also engaged in specifying and defining the
environmental goals those institutions should promote, goals like the preservation of a self-sustaining
nature or natural biodiversity. In other words, prior to its instrumental dimension environmentalism
has a normative and moral dimension determining the way in which the whole environmental issue
makes sense to us - if at all. It is with regard to this dimension that we ask whether environmentalism
has come to an end. The empirical approach cannot answer this question, since, by its very nature, it
treats the normative and moral dimension as a given.
Link – Ocean Resources

Their discourse of “resource conflicts” is a militarized justification for unending liberal
violence and intervention
Philippe Le Billon, a geographer, author and Associate Professor at the University of British Columbia,
and a researcher at the Liu Institute for Global Issues, PhD from Oxford, 2004, “The Geopolitical
Economy of 'Resource Wars,” http://www.neiu.edu/~dgrammen/2004LEBILLON.pdf
While much attention had been previously devoted to the risk of armed conflicts resulting from the vulnerability of supply of
'strategic resources* for major powers or environmental scarcity in poor countries, most resource-related wars in the 1990s have
opposed domestic or regional politico-military entrepreneurs over locally abundant and internationally valuable resources, such as oil, timber,
or diamonds. In this light, some interventions by regional powers have been tainted by the 'lust' for valuable
resources, as with the Ugandan or Zimbabwean military deployment in the Democratic Republic of Congo.' Speaking of the 'poisonous mix*
of diamonds and greed fuelling the war in Sierra Leone, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan even suggested that 'when a whole Guincan battalion
[of peacekeepers] on its way to Sierra Leone — 900 men with Armoured Personal Carriers — said they were disarmed [by rebels], you wonder
... Did they sell them?*2 This introductory essay examines the
geopolitical economy of so-called 'resource wars', that is,
armed conflicts revolving 'to a significant degree, over the pursuit or possession of critical materials'.* The
term 'resource war' itself
emerged in the US in the early 1980s in reference to perceived Soviet threats over US access to Middle Eastern oil and
African minerals.' Beyond this conventional geopolitical and strategic perspective on resource competition, this essay argues that the
significance of resources in wars is largely rooted in the political and economic vulnerabilities of resource dependent states. This essay stresses
the links between (mis(governance, conflicts, and the historical legacy of the social construction and exploitation of 'resources' by
imperial powers, as well as the current multiscalar practices of the global political economy in which commodity and financial (lows arc rarely
matched with informational and 'ethical' ones. Resources have specific historic, geographic, and social qualities participating
in shaping
the patterns of conflicts and violences. The discursive construction and materiality of oil and diamonds, for
example, entail distinct social practices, stakes, and potential conflicts associated with their territorial control, exploitation,
commercialization, and consumption. Among these qualities, their territorialization as well as physical, economic and discursive
characteristics come to define resources both materially and socially in dialectic relationships with institutions and practices. As pointed out by
Kevin Dunn in the case of Central Africa, 'the
material aspects of a war economy are intrinsically linked to its
discursive production'; whereby perceptions of threats, sectarian identity politics and spaces of (insecurity inform and
reflect the so-called 'greedy' dimensions of (violent) resource extraction and trade.
Link – Biodiversity
Environmentalist approaches are coercive and destroy indigenous knowledge
Macip and Valencia 12 Ricardo F., professor at Beneme´rita Universidad Autońoma de Puebla,
Puebla, Mexico. C.Z., professor Universidad de Las Ame´ricas-Puebla, Puebla, Mexico. “‘If we work in
conservation, money will flow our way’: hegemony and duplicity on the Coast of Oaxaca, Mexico,”
Dialect Anthropol 36. pp. 82-83, 85
All these efforts to intervene, regulate, and educate the organized population within civil society as
‘‘conservationist brothers and sisters’’ have not been enough to stop the main predatory practices it
targeted, nor to reduce the intensity of poverty in the region. Turtle eggs are thoroughly harvested for a
profitable black market and turtle meat is sold on a shadowy regional market. Certain flag species have
turned into an eco-fetish for conservation, but the efforts to halt the extinction of some species
(Dermochelys coriacea, Eretmochelys imbricata,Chelonia agassizii) cannot be considered successful,
whereas the recovery of another (Lepidochelys olivacea) cannot be credited to the ban (Early 2011).
Even more problematic is the fact that the very same villagers who are the subjects of conservation are
also active poachers and dealers (Early 2010: 133). This dual role as conservationists and poachers is not
only an open secret in the villages, but also something from which the scientific teams in charge of
conservation programs benefit. One such instance involves having poachers on payroll who are able to
recognize nests of specific endangered species in the sand (Early 2010: 129). Clearly, local knowledge is
used in constant bargaining and deception over meaningful conservation practices, but underpaid field
researchers and poachers do not control the process, they merely contribute to its confusion day after
day by simply trying to get by. The Mexican state’s relationship to international conservationist
discourses, organizations, and governments has thus produced a clientele of organized double-crossing
individuals who deceive the conservationists projects that they have been coerced into.
Link – Eco Managerialism

Environmental apocalypticism causes eco-authoritarianism and mass violence against
those deemed environmental threats – also causes political apathy which turns case
Frederick Buell, cultural critic on the environmental crisis and a Professor of English at Queens College
and the author of five books; 2003, “From Apocalypse To Way of Life,” pg. 185-186)
Looked at critically, then, crisis
discourse thus suffers from a number of liabilities. First, it seems to have
become a political liability almost as much as an asset. It calls up a fierce and effective opposition with
its predictions; worse, its more specific predictions are all too vulnerable to refutation by events. It also
exposes environmentalists to being called grim doomsters and antilife Puritan extremists. Further,
concern with crisis has all too often tempted people to try to find a “total solution” to the problems
involved— a phrase that, as an astute analyst of the limitations of crisis discourse, John Barry, puts it, is
all too reminiscent of the Third Reich’s infamous “final solution.”55 A total crisis of society—
environmental crisis at its gravest—threatens to translate despair into inhumanist authoritarianism;
more often, however, it helps keep merely dysfunctional authority in place. It thus leads, Barry
suggests, to the belief that only elite- and expert-led solutions are possible.56 At the same time it
depoliticizes people, inducing them to accept their impotence as individuals; this is something that has made many people today feel,
ironically and/or passively, that since it makes no difference at all what any individual does on his or her own, one might as well go along with
it.
Environmental alarmism is unfounded and not a justification for taking action

Amy Kaleita, PHD, Assistant Professor Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering, 2007, “Hysteria’s
History” Environmental Alarmism in Context”,
http://www.pacificresearch.org/docLib/20070920_Hysteria_History.pdf
Alarmism is given more weight than it deserves, as policy makers attempt to appease their constituency
and the media. It polarizes the debaters into groups of “believers” and “skeptics,” so that reasoned, fact-
based compromise is difficult to achieve. Neither of these aspects of alarmism is healthy for the development of appropriate
policy. Further, alarmist responses to valid problems risk foreclosing potentially useful responses based on ingenuity and progress. There are
many examples from the energy sector where, in the presence of economic, efficiency, or societal demands, the marketplace has responded by
developing better alternatives. That is not to say that we should blissfully squander our energy resources; on the contrary, we should be careful
to utilize them wisely. But energy-resource hysteria should not lead us to circumvent scientific advancement by cherry-picking and favoring one
particular replacement technology at the expense of other promising technologies. Environmental
alarmism should be taken
for what it is—a natural tendency of some portion of the public to latch onto the worst, and most
unlikely, potential outcome. Alarmism should not be used as the basis for policy. Where a real problem exists,
solutions should be based on reality, not hysteria.
Link – Environment
Ecological protection legitimizes violent interventionism
Stephen James, Institute for Human Security, La Trobe University, “Human Security, Environmental
Security, Securitization and Sovereignty” in Journal of Human Security Studies Vol 2 No 1 2013 Winter
issue, pgs 30-48.
Inventively, Eckersley seeks to transform what she terms the negative sovereignty of non-intervention
so that states, especially those in the South, can invoke it to protect ecosystems. She does this by
arguing that ecological protection could be linked to a state’s protection of its territorial integrity (which
includes ecosystems) and political independence, which includes the capacity and right to determine
standards for, and to maintain, the quality of its natural environment in accordance with international
law. Additionally, environmental hazards caused by other states and entering into the victim state—such
as toxins, radiation, waste, or acid rain—may be condemned and resisted on the basis of human rights
norms, including the rights to life, health, and to an adequate environment. Eckersley even maintains
that some of these damaging environmental intrusions amount to attacks on the victim state and are
thus prohibited under Article 2(4) of the UN Charter. However, Eckersley’s interpretation of “attack” is
not yet part of international law and the analogy between armed attack and environmental intrusions
will sometimes be strained given the difference in intention between one state’s armed attack and
another state’s recklessness or negligence causing environmental harm. But this will not always be the
case: conceivably a state could intend to cause harm to the environment of another state.
Environmental protection is linked to the military industrial complex

issue, pgs 30-48.
For example, states might cause such harm as
part of a “scorched earth” strategy of warfare, with or without the
use of biological or chemical weapons (one thinks of Iraq’s destruction of oil wells and the USA’s use of
Agent Orange and napalm in the Vietnam War).42 By universalizing the principles reinforcing this
sovereign “green shield,” a state benefiting from the invocation of self-determination, sovereignty, and
non-intervention would itself be required not to use its territory in ways that harm the ecosystems and
human and non-human species in other states. In particular, its economic activities would be duly
restrained by this norm. Although Eckersley does not herself make the argument, one might extrapolate that just as the “democratic
peace thesis” supposes that the best way to achieve global peace is for as many states as possible to democratize, since such states are thought
not to wage war against each other,43 the more
states employ the principle of non-intervention to protect their
own environments—the greener they become—the more likely it is that environmental degradation will
be prevented or at least retarded. Eckersley imagines that states might internalize a general norm of
environmental stewardship as part of their very being, much as they now exercise proprietary,
exploitative dominion over their territories. Indeed, according to Eckersley, stewardship should replace
proprietorship as the ruling global value. One obstacle to the needed process of socialization, however, is that many states,
especially in the South, will jealously guard their economic sovereignty, preferring it to any environmental benefit a green shield might bring.
Difficult questions can also be raised about the framing of these issues in terms of ecosystems within states, given that ecosystems will
sometimes straddle a number of state borders as some river systems do.
Environmental security allows state governments to expand sovereign power and lash
out at others under the name of ecological protection.
Michael Mason, Prof. at Department of Geography and Environment, London School of Economics and
Political Science, 2013, Zeitoun, part of the Water Security Research Centre, School of International
Development, University of East Anglia, “Questioning environmental security”, The Geographical Journal
pp. 1475-4959
From a geographical perspective, environmental security straddles uneasily across a territorial/postterritorial axis, where tensions are
immediately apparent between competing spatial performances of security. This expresses contrasting claims over the political subjectivity
being secured. It is not surprising that state actors have invoked environmental security practices and discourses according to territorial
doctrines of national security, whereby environmental risks supplement traditional threats to the state. Thus, ‘climate security’, ‘biosecurity’
and ‘energy security’ are employed to refer to the protection of state interests with regard to the projected and perceived consequences of
environmental change, biotechnologies and fossil fuels scarcity. Numerous think-tank and academic publications have fed these state-centred
imaginaries of environmental danger on the basis of disputed natural and social scientific scenarios (e.g. Klare 2008; Brown and Crawford
2009; Chellaney 2011). In apparent opposition to statist representations of security are non-territorial notions of ‘human security’, which
profess a universal concern for the protection of individuals or groups from serious threats to wellbeing. Constructions of human
security have identified environmental dangers as potential threats to human welfare; for example,
‘water security’ and ‘food security’ mark out areas of practical application for international
development and humanitarian organizations (Matthew et al. 2010; Cook and Bakker 2012). Interest in the territorial/post-
territorial duality of environmental security served as the initial impetus for convening a conference session – at the 2011 Royal Geographical
Society (with IBG) (RGS-IBG) Annual Conference – featuring early versions of three of the papers in this themed section. Co-sponsored by The
Geographical Journal and the RGS-IBG Planning and Environment Research Group, the session was designed to highlight recent geographical
research critically interrogating the justification and application of environmental security ideas in selected political-policy domains. As Philo
(2012, 2) notes,
placing ‘security’ under critical scrutiny means working to prevent it becoming ‘a tool
wielded thoughtlessly or instrumentally by sectional or partisan interests of any description’.
Environmental security promotes militarization of the environment and a racist

discourse of privilege.
Maria Julia Trombetta. 26 January 2009. Delft University of Technology, Economics of Infrastructures,
Faculty Membe. Environmental security and climate change: analysing the discourse. Cambridge Review
of International Affairs
Environmental security initially appeared to be a good idea, as it was ‘meant to alarm traditional security
analysts about the issues that “really” matter’ (de Wilde 2001, 2) and to increase the relevance of environmental
problems in the political agenda. Buzan emphasized that ‘[e] environmental security concerns the maintenance of the local and the
planetary biosphere as the essential support system on which all other human enterprises depend’ (1991, 19–20). Others welcomed the
concept since it ‘plays down the values traditionally associated with the nation-state—identity, territoriality, sovereignty—and implies a
different set of values associated with environmental change—ecology, globality, and governance’ (Dyer 2001, 68). Yet others argued that
‘environmental security ... is all about solidarity’ (Thompson 1999, 137). On analytical grounds, it seemed a way to provide a better account of
new typologies of vulnerability as well as the potential for conflict and violence with which these vulnerabilities could be associated. Opponents
were quick to warn that the term ‘security’ evokes a set of confrontational practices associated with the state
and the military which should be kept apart from the environmental debate (Deudney 1990). Concerns
included the possibilities of creating new competencies for the military—militarizing the environment
rather than greening security (Kakonen 1994)—or the rise of nationalistic attitudes in order to protect the
national environment (Deudney 1999, 466–468). Deudney argued that not only are practices and institutions associated with national
security inadequate to deal with environmental problems, but security can also introduce a zero-sum rationality to the
environmental debate that can create winners and losers, and undermine the cooperative efforts
required by environmental problems. Similar objections came from a southern perspective: environmental security was
perceived as a discourse about the security of northern countries, their access to resources and the
protection of their patterns of consumption.
Link – Ocean Diseases

The affirmative’s discourse of disease securitizes the alien body of the infected –
justifies ethnic cleansing in pursuit of the “perfect human”
Elana Gomel, English department head at Tel Aviv University, Winter 2000, published in Twentieth
Century Literature Volume 46,
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0403/is_4_46/ai_75141042)
In the secular apocalyptic visions that have proliferated wildly in the last 200 years, the world has been destroyed by nuclear wars, alien
invasions, climatic changes, social upheavals, meteor strikes, and technological shutdowns. These baroque scenarios are shaped by the
eroticism of disaster. The apocalyptic desire that finds satisfaction in elaborating fictions of the End is double-edged. On the one hand, its
ultimate object is some version of the crystalline New Jerusalem, an image of purity so absolute that it denies the organic messiness of life. [1]
On the other hand, apocalyptic fictions typically linger on pain and suffering. The end result of apocalyptic
purification often seems of less importance than the narrative pleasure derived from the bizarre and opulent tribulations of the bodies being
burnt by fire and brimstone, tormented by scorpion stings, trodden like grapes in the winepress. In this interplay between the incorporeal
purity of the ends and the violent corporeality of the means the
apocalyptic body is born. It is a body whose mortal
sickness is a precondition of ultimate health, whose grotesque and excessive sexuality issues in angelic sexlessness, and whose
torture underpins a painless--and lifeless--millennium.The apocalyptic body is perverse, points out Tina Pippin, unstable and mutating from
maleness to femaleness and back again, purified by the sadomasochistic "bloodletting on the cross," trembling in abject terror while awaiting
an unearthly consummation (122). But most of all it is a suffering body, a text written in the script of stigmata, scars, wounds, and sores. Any
apocalypse strikes the body politic like a disease, progressing from the first symptoms of a large-scale disaster through the crisis of the
tribulation to the recovery of the millennium. But of all the Four Horsemen, the one whose ride begins most intimately, in the private travails of
individual flesh, and ends in the devastation of the entire community, is the last one, Pestilence. The contagious body is the most
characteristic modality of apocalyptic corporeality.
Using global health as a justification for intervention causes violence against the
developing world
Aline Leboeuf, PhD in political science, researcher at Institut Francais des Relations Internationales
since 2003, security and development researcher, and Emma Broughton, jr. research fellow at the
IFRI, coordinates the “Migrations and employers” program and a research program on migration
patterns and policies), “Securitization of Health and Environmental Issues: Process and Effects. A
Research Outline." (2008) for the IFRI, accessible <http://www.ifri.org/?page=contribution-
detail&id=5037&id_provenance=97
Discourses on global health issues have also hinged, since the 1990’s, on a conceptualisation of health as a
limited resource to be defended. Drawing on historical examples elucidating the use of contagious diseases as
weapons of war, or the deathly potential of epidemics,14 researchers have shown the importance of
protecting the health of military institutions but also of populations more generally, as a way of
protecting states from the destabilising potential of contagious diseases.15 A number of researchers from this
school of thought focused at the end of the Cold War on the threat posed by biological weapons, as new knowledge on Soviet
programmes (Biopreparat) was made available, as well as bioterrorism and poor safety measures on scientific sites.16
Infectious diseases, whether emerging or re-emerging, also stimulated strong interest, especially in the United States
during the Clinton era. At the end of the XXth century, HIV/AIDS came to be fully securitized.17 Infectious diseases were
then perceived as a threat not so much because of their usefulness as weapons or their weakening
potential for western militaries, but because of their destabilising potential at the social, economic, and
political levels that threatened to spread anarchy within societies. By causing the death of key individuals
within the state apparatus, epidemics would weaken those states and their security structures, move
power balances in non-linear and unforeseeable ways, and call for stabilisation means far beyond the
limited resources of international peacekeeping operations, already weakened by the epidemics.
Link – Climate Change

Predictions of climate disaster shut down rational debate about the violence that has
already happened
Julie Cupples, Department of Geography at University of Canterbury, New Zealand. 2012. “Wild
Globalization: The Biopolitics of Climate Change and Global Capitalism on Nicaragua’s Mosquito Coast”.
Antipode 44:1. Pages 12-13.
In the first world, in both everyday and scientific discourse, climate change is frequently posited as a
transcendent and teleological megahazard, caused by the prime movers greenhouse gases, which have the potential to wreak
havoc and undermine our way of life. While both scientists and ordinary people also talk about climate change in a range of tenses, it is often
described in first world contexts as a future-oriented problem, as one which will affect future generations if we fail to
act. For example, Giddens (2009:1) starts his recent book on climate change by describing it as something which has “potentially devastating
consequences for the future”. A recent Bolivian blog states that Oxfam America made a serious mistake in its recent report on indigenous
peoples and climate change by “tensing its warnings in the future tense” (duderino 2009). It is apparent that the biophysical realities which we
socially construct as climate change—rising sea levels, drought and flooding, intensified hurricanes, disappearing ice—are of course affecting
millions of humans and nonhumans right now, in Bangladesh, the Sunderbans Islands, Tuvalu, Papua New Guinea and Central America. The
repeated positing of climate change as a future-oriented problem constitutes an insidious erasure of
those killed and displaced by climate-related disasters at the present time. Dominant approaches to
climate change are clearly a key part of the neocolonial global order, in which the deaths of third world
inhabitants in disasters are more acceptable, more justifiable, than the future potential deaths of first
world people who haven’t been born yet.4 However, such biopower, like global war, as discussed by Hardt and Negri (2004:20), “must not
only bring death but must also produce and regulate life”. Flusty (2004:7), who works his argument about globalization around the concept of
de-coca-colonization, urges us to shift: our focus away from an external “sovereign” globalization-as-object to be grasped and wielded. Rather
we must imagine a “nonsovereign” production of the global that is as increasingly immanent in, and emergent through our day-to-day
thoughts and actions as it is in the mass movement of capital, information and populations. According to Flusty, we don’t need to
think of globalization as an abstraction because it is embedded in everyday practices.

Climate change scholarship has been constantly framed as a securable threat to civil
society, expanding statist violence
Shirley Scott, Author and Senior Lecturer in International Law @ Univ. of New South Wales, 2012, “The
Securitization of Climate Change in World Politics: How Close have We Come and would Full
Securitization Enhance the Efficacy of Global Climate Change Policy?”, Review of European Community
& International Environmental Law, 21:3, November 2012. Pgs 220-230.
The first step in the process of securitization is referred to as a ‘securitizing move’. In the case of climate
change, this means climate security being introduced into the discourse of international policy making
and the framing of climate change as a threat to human, national and international security. This move can
be dated from 2006 when British Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett assumed a leadership role in promoting the association of climate change
with international security in global policy discourse. During the United Kingdom Presidency,
the G8 in 2006 accepted the
fundamental links between energy, security, climate change and sustainable development, and in October
2006 Beckett emphasized the importance of ‘climate security’ in a major foreign policy speech in Berlin.11 After considerable lobbying, the
United Kingdom chaired the first UN Security Council debate on climate change on 17 April 2007. A
common theme in the debate
was that of climate change as a ‘threat multiplier’. 12 It is not that increasing temperatures as such
threaten human security, although they may well do so in certain situations, but rather that the physical
effects triggered by the increased temperatures could be expected in many instances to exacerbate
existing tensions. A considerable literature emerged at about this time through scholarly writing and
reports of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). Writing in the Washington Quarterly in 2007, for example, Podesta and Ogden
emphasized the extent to which all the threats and risks are interrelated, and hence, from a policy
perspective, why it is important to prevent any one from manifesting. Their fear is that the onset of one
problem may lead to a downward spiral in which it is increasingly difficult to prevent the next problem
and the result may be instability, a failed State and/or new safe havens for terrorists.
Link – Energy Security

Energy security pervades every aspect of life meaning there are an infinite number of
interventions that produce harmful consequences
Felix Ciuta, 4-10-2010, Senior Lecturer in International Relations, UCL. “Conceptual Notes on Energy
Security: Total or Banal Security?” International Peace Research Institute.
At first glance, to state that energy ‘pervades every aspect of life’ (Ocheltree, 2008: 1) is
commonsensical and seems unproblematic in security terms. On closer investigation, however, this view
of energy has significant consequences. In the most immediate sense, energy modulates security by
taking it everywhere, simply because energy is everywhere. This assertion alone – ‘security is
everywhere’ – will startle students and practitioners of security, because it challenges one of their most
fundamental assumptions: that security has precise boundaries that make it a domain reservé of
specialist knowledge and practice (Bigo, 1998; Ciuta˘, 2009). But, what precisely does it mean that
energy security is everywhere? To quote one proponent of this view, ‘energy security needs to be
extended to the safety of the whole infrastructure and supply chain – recognizing the vulnerabilities that
come from terrorism, war, brigandage, and natural disasters’ (Yergin, 2006b: 1). In conceptual terms,
this statement identifies an ‘infinite number of targets’ (Kain, 2007) that are subject to an infinite
number of vulnerabilities. Energy security means the security of everything: resources, production
plants, transportation networks, distribution outlets and even consumption patterns; everywhere:
oilfields, pipelines, power plants, gas stations, homes; against everything: resource depletion, global
warming, terrorism, ‘them’ and ourselves. At its maximum, this logic invests every single object of any
kind with and in security. At least potentially, the result is a panoptic view of security that legitimates
panoptic security policies (see Bigo, 1998).
Energy insecurity discourse locks in nationalist views of energy politics ensuring state
violence
Environment first emerged as a security issue as part of a Malthusian interpretation of global issues. If the
Club de Rome’s The Limits To Growth, published in 1972, focused predominantly on economic issues, the conceptualisation of
environmental resources (land, water, air, wood, raw materials, etc.) as both necessary to human life and in limited
access and availability gave those ressources a strategic dimension: having them or not could be of
national interest.6 Conflicts and divisions could thus be expected to arise among the many countries and
groups competing for access, and environmental scarcity could potentially be used strategically to
weaken one’s enemy, through the targeting of environmental resources during a conflict, for example.
According to this approach, which does not differ greatly from traditional strategic or realist international school
thinking, environment is a security issue because environmental resources are strategic: they have to be
protected and are worth fighting for. With the end of the Cold War, this approach, which had emerged more
than a decade previously, became highly visible. As some conflicts in the South, which were “read” until then using the “West vs. East”
lens, survived the fall of the Soviet Union, it became necessary to find a way to explain their persistence outside the framework of the Cold
War. The “resource conflicts” thesis emerged as an interesting and attractive replacement, and led to the development of a popular
and influential research program, spearheaded by researchers like Thomas Homer-Dixon or Nils Petter Gleditsch.7
Link – State Reform

State reform is a trap – progress cannot be permanent if linked to the state – the
ruling class will win in the end if we utilize government structures
Steve Leigh, 1-30-2014, “Will the rich reform themselves?” Socialist Worker,
http://socialistworker.org/2014/01/30/will-the-rich-reform-themselves
Instead, the governments were always capitalist--dominated by, and pursuing the interests of, the
capitalist system and the super-rich in particular. Especially in northern, economically advanced countries, it was the struggles of
the '30s and '40s that changed the balance of class forces. The "welfare state" reforms were the product of struggle. In
order to maintain the stability of the system, the rich and their governments granted concessions. Right away, the
super-rich fought against the new-found organized power of the workers and poor. When they felt they had
weakened the unions enough, and when faced with a crisis of profitability on an international scale in the '70s, they shifted
policies. They groped their way toward neoliberalism from the mid-'70s to early '80s, when the new policies were firmly in
place across the Global North. They then spread these policies to the Global South and former "Communist" countries, in part through the
Washington Consensus. The second point reinforces the first. We cannot get better policies by appealing to the rich. We
also won't get fundamental equality by electing "better" officials. Governments under capitalism are inevitably capitalist
governments. We can, from time to time, use electoral campaigns to make temporary changes and
especially to help build movements. But the bias of governments under capitalism will always be toward capitalist
interests: profit over humanity. We will only get substantial equality by eliminating the capitalist system
and its governments. Progress toward equality under capitalism will come from fighting against the rich
and their governments--not from appealing to them. Appealing to the rich to act for equality is like
asking a tiger to be a vegetarian.
Link – Law
The law co-constitutes a global regime of power and violence
Frank Edwards, an organizer, researcher and media maker, 2-24-2011, “Law and racism: legitimation
and co-constitution of social structure,” Broken Fence,
http://brokenfence.wordpress.com/2011/02/24/law-and-racism-legitimation-and-co-constitution-of-
social-structure/
Derek Gregory suggests that spaces of exception and colonial occupations are characterized not so
much by the suspension of law but through an elaborate legal performance. He suggests that we can’t
see law in this context as merely offering the cover of legitimacy for the necropolitical (Mbembe 2003)
regimes these spaces contain, but that these legal performances themselves render spaces as both
interior to sovereignty and exterior to it simultaneously (2006:414). The law co-constitutes this social
structure of extreme racial domination in partnership (and perhaps inseparably bound with) imperialism
and biopolitical governance. Indeed the constitution of the space of exception and its governance is by
necessity legal and by necessity racist (Foucault 2003:258; Mbembe 2003). The law here does far more
than offer legitimation, it actively builds social structure.
Impact – Security Bad

Security undermines democratic decision making and applies the logic of war to policy
discourse.
However, for the Copenhagen School, securitization has problematic consequences. The label security brings with it a
set of practices and a way of dealing with a problem that characterizes an issue as a security issue. The
word security entails a specific logic or rationality, independent of the context or the intentions of the
speakers. Security is about survival, urgency and emergency. It allows for exceptional measures, the
breaking of otherwise binding rules and governance by decrees rather than by democratic decisions.
Moreover security implies a ‘decisionist’ attitude which emphasizes the importance of reactive,
emergency measures. This set of practices is not necessarily codified nor can it be identified by specific rules. Instead it is more a form of rationality, a
way of framing and dealing with an issue, or ‘a generic structure of meaning which organizes dispositions, social relations, and politics according to a rationality of
security’ (Huysmans 2006, 24–25). This mindset, once activated, is not open to negotiation. Although it is possible to decide whether or not to securitize an issue—
and securitization, as a social process, is determined by a political community rather than by individuals—once an issue is securitized the logic of security necessarily
follows. This logic is borrowed from the Schmittian understanding of the political.5 For Carl Schmitt (1996 [1932], 37) the political is about the friend-enemy
distinction and successfully evoking security brings about that distinction. The logic of security is the logic of war; this suggests an
extreme form of antagonism and a zero-sum understanding of security. With the codification and institutionalization of a
national security discourse this rationality has been narrowed down to a specific context. Attempts to broaden the security agenda result
in the spreading 5 See Williams (2003) and Huysmans (1999). f this rationality to other contexts from
which it had been excluded (Buzan and Waever 1998). The Copenhagen School warns about the risk of securitization and distinguishes between
securitization—‘meaning the issue is presented as an existential threat, requiring emergency measures and justifying actions outside the normal bounds of political
procedure’—and politicization—‘meaning the issue is part of public policy, requiring government decision and resource allocations’ (Buzan et al 1998, 23–24). The
School warns that ‘when
considering securitizing moves such as “environmental security” ... one has to weigh
the always problematic side effects of applying a mind-set of security against the possible advantages of
focus, attention, and mobilization’ (29) and Waever’s normative suggestion is: ‘less security, more politics!’ (Waever 1995, 56)

Their securitization frame skews public deliberation and turns case
David L. Altheide, Emeritus Regents' Professor in the School of Justice and Social Inquiry at Arizona State
University, 2006, "Terrorism and the Politics of Fear", Cultural Studies, Critical Methodologies 6:415,
page 423, http://csc.sagepub.com/content/6/4/415
A politics of fear rests on the discourse of fear. The politics of fear serves as a conceptual linkage for
power, propaganda, news and popular culture, and an array of intimidating symbols and experiences,
such as crime and terrorism. The politics of fear resides not in an immediate threat froman individual
leader (e.g., Senator Joseph McCarthy [Griffith, 1987]) but in the public discourse that characterizes social life as dangerous, fearful, and filled
with actual or potential victims. This symbolic order invites protection, policing, and intervention to prevent further
victimization. A public discourse of fear invites the politics of fear. It is not fear per se that is important in social life but rather
how fear is defined and realized in everyday social interaction that is important. The role of the newsmedia is very important in carrying selective news sources’
messages. News sources are claims makers, and studies of crime news show that government and police
officials dominate how crime is framed (Ericson, Baranek, & Chan, 1987, 1989; Surette, 1992). Numerous public opinion
polls indicated that audiences were influenced by news media reports about the attacks as well as the interpretations of
the causes, the culprits, and ultimately the support for various U.S. military actions. For example, one study of the perceptions and
knowledge of audiences and their primary source of news found that gross misperceptions of key facts
were related to support of the war with Iraq. Misperceptions were operationalized as stating that clear evidence was found linking Iraq
to Al-Qaeda, that weapons of mass destruction had been found, and that world opinion favored the Iraq War. Many of these misperceptions were consistent with
From the perspective of democratic process, the
news reports, particularly with the Fox News. The authors conclude the following:
findings of this study are cause for concern. . . . What is worrisome is that it appears that the President
has the capacity to lead members of the public to assume false beliefs in support of his position
Impact – Turns Environment

The affirmatives claims of helping the environment are simply efforts to mask the
system's aim to profit from planetary destruction
John Bellamy Foster, editor of the monthly review, prof. of sociology at Univ. of Oregon, author; Brett
Clark, assis. prof. of sociology at North Carolina State Univ., author; "The Paradox of Wealth: Capitalism
and Ecological Destruction," Monthly Review 61:6 page 1 November 2009.
Today orthodox economics is reputedly being harnessed to an entirely new end: saving the planet from the
ecological destruction wrought by capitalist expansion. It promises to accomplish this through the
further expansion of capitalism itself, cleared of its excesses and excrescences. A growing army of self-styled “sustainable
developers” argues that there is no contradiction between the unlimited accumulation of capital — the credo of economic liberalism from
Adam Smith to the present — and the preservation of the earth. The system can continue to expand by creating a new
“sustainable capitalism,” bringing the efficiency of the market to bear on nature and its reproduction . In reality, these
visions amount to little more than a renewed strategy for profiting on planetary destruction . Behind
this tragedy-cum-farce is a distorted accounting deeply rooted in the workings of the system that sees
wealth entirely in terms of value generated through exchange. In such a system, only commodities for
sale on the market really count. External nature — water, air, living species — outside this system of exchange is
viewed as a “free gift.” Once such blinders have been put on, it is possible to speak, as the leading U.S. climate
economist William Nordhaus has, of the relatively unhindered growth of the economy a century or so from now, under
conditions of business as usual — despite the fact that leading climate scientists see following the
identical path over the same time span as absolutely catastrophic both for human civilization and life on the planet
as a whole.
The discourse of security makes all attempts to save the environment unworkable
Paul Roe, Phd from University of Wales, Aberystwyth, Associate Professor at Central Eastern University,
Department of International Relations and European Studies, 2008, “Is securitization a ‘negative’
concept? Revisiting the normative debate over normal versus extraordinary politics”, Security Dialogue
43:249
For the Copenhagen School, and particularly for Wæver, desecuritization (politicization) might be ‘more effective than
securitizing problems’ (Wæver, 1995: 57; emphasis added). This is not just a matter of the context within which problems are dealt
with, but also has to do with the long-term thinking that normal politics arguably brings with it. Although Wæver
is by no means categorical in the claim that securitization is invariably worse than politicization, his thinking nevertheless suggests that
securitizing problems may not always result in better outcomes.5 For example, Wæver (1995: 65) restates Barry Buzan’s assertion that some
environmental issues might be tackled more effectively ‘by the process-type remedies of economics,
than by the statist solutions of security logic’. Similarly, Daniel Deudney (1990: 465–7) has warned of the logic of security being
appropriated to create a sense of urgency in relation to the need to address ecological problems: how some environmentalists endeavour to
find a ‘moral equivalence to war’. In particular, Deudney draws attention to how national security’s
propensity for short-term
strategizing – the desire that affairs are quickly returned to normal – ‘is not likely to make much of a
contribution to establishing patterns of environmentally sound behaviour’. Because ‘conventional
national security organizations have short-term horizons’, the tendency not to operate on the basis of
long-term thinking represents a ‘poor model for environmental problem solving’. Stefan Elbe has also raised
questions over the efficacy of securitizing certain public health concerns.6 In Elbe’s treatment of (the more specific) normative debate over the
linking of HIV/AIDS and security, he notes how framing
the issue of HIV/AIDS as security ‘pushes responses to the
disease away from civil society toward the much less transparent workings of military and intelligence
organizations, which also possess the power to override human rights and civil liberties’ (Elbe, 2006: 128).
Impact – Violence
Security leads to authoritarian control and biopolitical violence.
Mark Neocleous, a Professor of the Critique of Political Economy, 2006, Politics and History. Security,
Liberty and the Myth of Balance: Towards a Critique of Security Politics Contemporary Political Theory
(2007) 6, 131–149. doi:10.1057/palgrave.cpt.9300301
Calling anything a security issue plays into the hands of the state, and the only way the state knows how
to deal with threats to security is to tighten its grip on civil society and ratchet-up its restrictions on
human freedoms. 'Speaking and writing about security is never innocent', Jef Huysmans comments. 'It always risks contributing to
the opening of a window of opportunity for a "fascist mobilization" or an "internal security ideology"' (2002, 43). This is because the
logic of 'security' is the logic of an anti-politics (Jayasuriya, 2004) in which the state uses 'security' to
marginalize all else, most notably the constructive conflicts, the debates and discussions that animate
political life, suppressing all before it and dominating political discourse in an entirely reactionary way.
This is precisely the point alluded to by Marx in 1843 when he suggested that security was the supreme
concept of bourgeois society: it's a concept that legitimizes any action by the state whatsoever, so long
as the action is conducted in the name of security. And this explains why virtually every authoritarian
measure since has been conducted in the name of security, from the reordering of international capital
under the guise of national security (Neocleous, 2006b), to the reassertion of loyalty and consensus as
the foundation of domestic order (Neocleous, 2006c), all the way down to the extermination camps of
the holocaust, the first stage of which was to be taken into 'security confinement' by the security police.
Securitization creates zones of death across the globe.

Kathy E. Ferguson, Ph.D. in political science, with supporting programs in philosophy and history, at
the University of Minnesota (2009) Article: The Sublime Object of Militarism, Journal: New Political
Science, Volume 31:4, 475-486 [http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/07393140903322554]
Militarization’s younger cousin is securitization, also an ongoing process of making order, this time focused more
tightly on the control of flows of meaning and bodies in space. Securitization happens when pre-9/11 militarization
interbreeds with the inward-looking gaze implied by the image of “homeland security,” birthing an endlessly self-repeating web of command
and control practices. Securitization includes militarization while going beyond it to include the intense
border-policing, information-controlling, Other-erasing practices of post-9/11 America. Securitizing
practices extend through civil society, erasing distinctions between civilians and enemies, terrorists and
criminals, weapons and civilian technologies (a.k.a. “dual-use technologies”), domestic and foreign, war and peace, leaving
us in a permanent in-between space that James Der Derian and others have called the “interwar.”4 The particular kind of militarism
both producing and being produced by contemporary militarization/securitization is part and parcel of globalization. While analyses of
globalization often sideline war as an artifact of nation states rather than extra-national global flows, wars and their accompanying/enabling
flows of weapons, soldiers, commodities, refugees, technologies, and ideologies are themselves manifestations of global interconnections.
Militarization/securitization is global in its economic arrangements, connecting private security firms
such as Blackwater or CACI to state militaries in opaque yet highly lucrative private contracts. It is global in
its technologies, inventing and employing sophisticated electronic communications, control, and robotics technologies to fight net-centric wars.
It is even global in its state arrangements, connecting national governments in international treaties and organizations such as NATO or the
“Coalition of the Willing.”
Impact – War
War has become a permanent form of relations in the nature of politics- retrenching
the state makes it impossible to solve war
Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri, Ph.D Professor of Literature @ Duke University, Ph.D, Multitude:
War and democracy in the age of empire. Penguin 2005
What is distinctive and new about the claim that politics is the continuation of war is that it refers to
power in its normal functioning, everywhere and always, outside and within each society. Michel
Foucault goes so far as to say that the socially pacifying function of political power involves constantly
reinscribing this fundamental relationship of force in a sort of silent war and reinscribing it too in the
social institutions, systems of economic inequality, and even the spheres of personal and sexual rela tions.I? War, in
other words, becomes the general matrix for all relations of power and techniques of domination, whether
or not bloodshed is in volved. War has become a regime of biopower, that is, a form of rule aimed not only at
controlling the population but producing and reproducing all aspects of social life.18 This war brings
death but also, paradoxically, must produce life. This does not mean that war has been domesticated or its violence
attenuated, but rather that daily life and the normal functioning of power has been permeated with the threat
and violence of warfare.
AT: Security Inevitable

Conflicts appear inevitable because we allow security to constitute our world.
Anthony Burke, Senior Lecturer @ School of Politics & IR @ Univ. of New South Wales, 2007, Beyond
Security, Ethics and Violence, p. 68-9
This chapter is thus an exercise in thinking, which challenges the continuing power of political ontologies (forms of
truth and being) that connect security, sovereignty, belonging, othemess and violence in ways that for many appear
like enduring political facts , inevitable and irrefutable. Conflict, violence and alienation then arise not merely
from individual or collective acts whose conditions might be understood and policed; they condition politics as such,
forming a permanent ground, a dark substrata underpinning the very possibility of the present .
Conflict and alienation seem inevitable because of the way in which the modem political imagination
has conceived and thought security , sovereignty and ethics. Israel/ Palestine is chosen here as a particularly urgent and complex
example of this problem, but it is a problem with much wider significance.
Critical engagement can prevent fear spirals

While I hold out the hope that security can be re-visioned away from a permanent dependence on insecurity, exclusion and violence, and I
believe it retains normative promise, this analysis takes a deliberate step backward to examine the very real barriers faced by such a project.
Security cannot properly be rethought without a deeper understanding of, and challenge to, the political forms
and structures it claims to enable and protect. If Ken Booth argues that the state should be a means rather than an end of security, my
objective here is to place the continuing power and depth of its status as an end of security, and a fundamental source for political identity,
under critical interrogation.' If the state is to become a means of security (one among many) it will have to be fundamentally transformed.
The chapter pursues this inquiry in two stages. The first outlines the historic strength and effective redundancy of such an exciusivist vision of
security in Israel, wherein Israel not only confronts military and political antagonists with an 'iron wall' of armed force but maps this onto a
profound clash of existential narratives, a problem with resonances in the West's confrontation with radical Islamism in the war on terror. The
second, taking up the remainder of the chapter, then explores a series of potential resources in continental philosophy and political theory that
might help us to think our way out of a security grounded in violence and alienation. Through
a critical engagement with this
thought, I aim to construct a political ethics based not in relations between insecure and separated identities
mapped solely onto nation-states, but in relations of responsibility and interconnection that can negotiate and recognise
both distinct and intertwined histories, identities and needs; an ethics that might underpin a vision of
interdependent (national and non-national) existence proper to an integrated world traversed by endless flows
of people, commerce, ideas, violence and future potential.
AT: Heg/Realism Key to Peace

Western powers have turned the world into a desert and called it peace – hegemony
and realist politics are nihilistic and refuse to evaluate the massive human suffering
the international system creates
Richard Falk, Albert G. Milbank Professor of International Law and Practice at Princeton, 2000, Human
Rights Horizons: The Pursuit of Justice in a Globalizing World, p. 173-175
Yet, as Ken Booth observes in an influential essay, there has been a systematic refusal on the part of academic specialists and
diplomats to acknowledge moral failure with respect to the organization of international political life , that domain of
political behavior called international relations or world order.1 With some notable exceptions, world order has been analyzed for cen-
turies as if human suffering were irrelevant, and as if the only fate that mattered was either the destiny of a particular
nation or the more general rise and fall of great powers, the latter being regarded as an inevitable consequence of the eternal,
natural rivalry of self-serving states competing for territory, wealth, influence, and status.2 Even such an egoistic moral aperture is generally
misleadingly large, as it is rare indeed that the whole of a given people share in power and authority sufficiently to be regarded as effectively
included in the self; that is, “self-serving.” The struggle in constitutional democracies to extend tolerance and suffrage to minorities and women
reminds us that even in societies committed in principle to equality of rights, the representation of the self by the state is partial, at best, and
by no means complete. In fact, one impact of globalization seems to have been to marginalize the participation of those
victimized by the discipline of regional and global capital, as well as to undermine the capacity of the electoral process to serve the
interests of society as a whole and of territorial interests in particular. At most, international morality is reduced to lame “realist”
claims that peace is a public good achieved mainly through the rational calculations of the privileged , reflecting the
dynamics of political will and relative power, and given direction by a set of predatory assumptions about human nature. This realist mode
of perceiving morality is rarely turned inward, and is quite comfortable with a hypocritical but politically
convenient division between the benevolent sense of self and a malevolent vision of the other. This radical
dichotomy between the general assessment of world order and the specific enactments of foreign policy has been
particularly pronounced in this century—perhaps most brazenly in the mythic self-image of the United States, which sees itself as
a world leader in unflagging pursuit of noble ideals.
Yes Global Violence

Global violence increasing – absolute number of conflicts is going up
Mark Harrison and Nikolaus Wolf, Department of Economics, University of Warwick, 12-14-2009,
“The Frequency of Wars,” Warwick Economic Research Papers.
Using a slightly different measure, we trace the origin of the upward trend in the frequency of bilateral conflicts
as far back as 1870. We show that it has proceeded with surprisingly little interruption through two World Wars
nearly to the present day. Befitting a phenomenon that is older than the oldest person alive today, we suggest that deep causes are at
work. Figure 1 charts the number of pairs of countries that have disputed with each other in each year from 1870 to 2001. This is a greater
number than the number of wars for two reasons: first, it accounts for the number of countries involved in each conflict, rather than the
number of conflicts; second, it has wider coverage than formal states of war, because it includes displays as well as uses of military force. The
chart measures the number of pairwise disputes on a logarithmic scale, partly to give a clear picture of what has happened at the lower
frequencies. Viewed in this way, the chart demonstrates the existence of a clear log-linear trend; the
frequency of bilateral
conflicts has been rising for over a century at a steady 2¼ percent per year. To be sure, there was a good deal of
disturbance around the two world wars. But the surprising character of this disturbance is as follows: between 1914 and 1945, the conflicts that
would normally have been distributed across the three decades were either brought forward (to World War I) or postponed (to World War II).
After 1945, the frequency of conflict snapped back to the trend it had followed up to 1914. In principle, the absolute number of pairwise
conflicts per time period, or the absolute frequency, is the product of two underlying variables into which it can therefore be decomposed. One
component is the number of country pairs, which has increased enormously since the nineteenth century. In 1870 the world contained fewer
than 50 independent states. By the end of the twentieth century, there were more than 180. This was associated with the breakup of empires
(Austro-Hungarian, German, Ottoman, Russian, French, British, Dutch, Belgian, Portuguese, and Soviet) and federations (Czechoslovak and
Yugoslav). As a result the total number of possible country pairs in the world between whom relations of peace or war could exist grew from
around one thousand to over 17,000. After the increase in the number of possible pairs is stripped out of the data, we are left with the other
component, the relative frequency of conflicts, that is, the absolute frequency of pairwise conflict normalized for the number of pairs. The
number of countries since 1870 and the relative frequency of conflicts among them are shown together in Chart 2. As the chart shows, in the
first 80 years the number of countries did not change much, but the relative frequency of disputes tended to rise. Then, over the next 40 or so
years, the relative frequency of disputes fell back to the level of the 1870s, but the number of countries increased dramatically, and it was this
that took over as the main driver of the continued rise in the absolute frequency of conflicts. This gives us two possible angles on what has been
going on. Normalized for the number of country pairs, the relative frequency of war does not show a trend and is no higher today than in the
1870s. This might seem to reassure, but should not do so. For, normalized
for the number of planets that all countries
must share – that is one, exactly – the absolute frequency of conflict today is similar to what it was
during World War I.
Alternative – Rejection
Rejection is necessary to solve the regimes of violence that permeate our existence
Simon Dalby, Department of Geography and Environmental Studies, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel
By Drive, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. “Recontextualising violence, power and nature: The next twenty
years of critical geopolitics?” Political Geography 29 (2010)
In diverting attention from the political purpose of critique to the practical lived experiences of people in
bureacracies and the non-representational aspects of text and identity production, Thrift also facilitiates the
traditional modes of doing geography, field work, ethnography, interviews and giving voice to many who are not usually heard. But in
doing so the engagement with the rationalizations of military power and the practices of mapping
that legitimize military action, are abandoned . This may be an engagement with geopolitics very loosely understood, but it is not
the ‘‘tactical’’ form of knowledge that challenges and deconstructs the imperial justifications of violence
that Gerard Toal discusses in the epigraph to this paper. While Thrift (2000) may have no interest in tackling the conceptual infrastructure of military violence, in
abandoning this critical edge his suggested agenda eviscerates the political purpose of critical geopolitics precisely as Macdonald
(in press) suggests by leaving out the ‘‘big things’’. Violence, war, critique But it was a ‘‘big thing’’ that got much of this discussion started
in the first place in the 1980s. War and the cultures of imperialism that legitimated foreign ‘‘interventions’’ were Gerard Toal’s starting point (O ́ Tuathail, 1986), and
a theme that Megoran (2008) has raised again in terms of the relationships of geographical critique to the morality of warfare. In the process he has issued what
amounts to an invitation to discuss much more explicitly the crucial question of violence and how those of us who write critical geopolitics situate ourselves in this
regard. Focusing on Gerard Toal’s discussion of Iraq (O ́ Tuathail, 2003) and Bosnia (O ́ Tuathail, 2005) he effectively poses the question of whether Toal is, to use
the phrasing from his first paper (O ́ Tuathail, 1986), ‘‘practicing geopolitics’’ rather than ‘‘exposing’’ its violence. The suggestion Megoran (2008) makes is that Toal
effectively operates within the categories of just war theory and as such falls prey to the logics of state violence implicit in the theory. But if
one is to
venture into practical politics and take stands on particular instances of state violence these pitfalls await
all practitioners. In so far as the world is divided into spatial entities competing for power, and willing to
use violence or the threat thereof to gain their ends, such logics play out. Of course as Megoran makes clear, spatial
entities don’t compete. Functionaries and politicians within bureaucracies do and the reification of their actions in spatial tropes remains a powerful geographical
sleight of hand that requires continuous critical commentary from us all.
Framework
Ecological degradation is inevitable under the existing legal system
Greta Claire Gaard, Associate Professor of Humanities, Fairhaven College at Western Washington
University, 1993, Ecofeminism: Women, Animals, Nature. Pg. 14, Accessed 5-26-2014.
Radical green philosophy is premised on the conviction that the sources of the environmental crisis are
deeply rooted, in modern culture, and therefore fundamental social transformation is necessary if we
are to preserve life on earth in any meaningful sense. This follows from the realization that we cannot
rely on patchwork reforms through more appropriate economics, technology, and regulation, or better
policies gained through green electoral politics. Our public choice mechanisms and technocratic
methods are inherently biased against environmental preservation and conflict prevention. 1 Therefore,
the gradual attrition, degradation, and biological impoverishment of the natural environment are
inevitable under the existing system. To save a wilderness area is to hold a finger in a bursting dam: it
only buys time.
Policy-making leads to the destruction of the environment for the sake of economic
growth
The other superficial ground for optimism is the burgeoning number of environmental professionals
whose role is to advise government and industry. Environmental specialists are multiplying in all
professions, and we now have “environmental” economists, scientists, administrators, lawyers, and
planners promoting marginal reforms. The decision-making methodologies these professions use,
however, are heavily influenced by concepts derived from the mainstream liberal paradigm and are
biased against the preservation of species and ecosystems. For example, because they are geared to
analyzing the costs and benefits of development alternatives, they balance off public needs to meet
private wants over the long term. Even more fundamentally, an instrumentalist and anthropocentric
ethic – whereby human and natural “resources” are construed to have value to the extent that they can
be used for human purposes – is endemic to the technocratic methodologies, decision-making
processes, and regulatory schemes. This ethic is a natural outgrowth of a “power complex” that is so
deeply ingrained in the modern psyche that planners and decision makers who consider themselves
environmentally aware continue to make decisions that facilitate the exponential destruction of the
nonhuman environment by incremental trade-offs of environmental quality for economic growth.
Framework
Our conception of nature is not neutral or natural – the way we speak and perform
has political effects
Gayil Talshir, philosopher, 2004, “The role of environmentalism: From The Silent Spring to The Silent
Revolution,” Liberal Democracy and Environmentalism: The End of Environmentalism?” Marcel
Wissenburg & Yoram Levy, 2004. Pg. 23, Accessed 5-26-2014.
Furthermore, the environment was instrumental in challenging the boundary of the political as the
environment was, par excellence, the non-political issue. The Enlightenment ethos of progress,
dependent on the exploitation of nature and advancement of science and technology, was rarely
challenged before on these grounds. Nature was never a subject in the moral or political sense. The
realization that natural problems are political, that economic growth - advocated by left and right alike
- encroaches upon Earth's limited resources, and that national systems can hardly address ecological
issues, challenged the underlying assumption concerning the political arena.
We need to re-conceptualize our relationship to nature before we can create effective

political solutions
The third option I want to pursue here is the linkage between environmentalism and 'new politics' - the
argument that environmental politics is not merely about the preservation of nature, but entails a
different conception of what politics is, and how political research should be conducted. For
environmental exploitation has always been an integral aspect of human activities in the world, a
natural part, as it were, of people's way of life. Indeed, the radical transformations in demographic,
geographical and socio-economic patterns, maturing in the late nineteenth century, led the western
industrialized nations to rely heavily on global natural resources for their rapid growth. World
resources were gradually incorporated into one central pool of capital, managed largely through
international market mechanisms, resulting in a rapid depletion of resources on a world-wide scale. It
took recovery from two world wars for relatively affluent and stable advanced industrial democracies
to settle into the bipolarity of the cold war, a balance of power which set in motion environmental
problems, leading to their introduction onto the political agenda. By far the most profound experience
that led environmental awareness to take root in western societies was the real prospect for a global
destruction through nuclear war. The current fear of the use of weapons of mass destruction being
used on innocent populations is the most recent appearance of the same basic worries. The culmination
of global threat and personal anxiety in the name of national interest led to a popular realization that
a thorough assessment of environmental issues is fundamental for a humane future. Nuclear war, the
disposal of nuclear waste, atomic, biological and chemical (ABC) weapons, an accelerated arms race
and the threat of the development of weapons of mass destruction comprise, however, only the tip of
the iceberg of environmental problems threatening to overwhelm the global village.
Framework
Subject formation is what we are trying to accomplish in debate on an everyday level,
we form better subjects by attuning our ethical sensibilities to the violence of
colonialism – comparatively more effective than a hubristic fantasy that we can
change the world
David Chandler, Professor of IR at Westminster, 2013, “The World of Attachment? The Post-humanist
Challenge to Freedom and Necessity,” Millenium: Journal of International Studies, 41(3), 516– 534.
The world of becoming thereby is an ontologically flat world without the traditional hierarchies of existence and a more shared conception of
agency. For Bennett, therefore, ‘to begin to experience the relationship between persons and other materialities more horizontally, is to take a
step toward a more ecological sensibility’.78 Here there is room for human agency but this agency involves a deeper understanding of and
receptivity to the world of objects and object relations. Rather
than the hubristic focus on transforming the external
world, the ethico-political tasks are those of work on the self to erase hubristic liberal traces of subject-
centric understandings, understood to merely create the dangers of existential resentment. Work on
the self is the only route to changing the world . As Connolly states: ‘To embrace without deep resentment a world of
becoming is to work to “become who you are”, so that the word “become” now modifies “are” more than the other way around.’ Becoming
who you are involves the ‘microtactics of the self’, and work on the self can then extend into
‘micropolitics’ of more conscious and reflective choices and decisions and lifestyle choices leading to
potentially higher levels of ethical self-reflectivity and responsibility. Bennett argues that against the ‘narcissism’ of
anthropomorphic understandings of domination of the external world, we need ‘some tactics for cultivating the experience of our selves as
vibrant matter’. Rather
than hubristically imagining that we can shape the world we live in, Bennett argues that:
‘Perhaps the ethical
responsibility of an individual human now resides in one’s response to the
assemblages in which one finds oneself participating. Such ethical tactics include reflecting more on our relationship to
what we eat and considering the agentic powers of what we consume and enter into an assemblage with. In doing so, if ‘an image of inert
matter helps animate our current practice of aggressively wasteful and planet-endangering consumption, then a materiality experienced as a
lively force with agentic capacity could animate a more ecologically sustainable public’. For new materialists, the
object to be changed
or transformed is the human – the human mindset. By changing the way we think about the world and the
way we relate to it by including broader, more non-human or inorganic matter in our considerations, we will have overcome
our modernist ‘attachment disorders’ and have more ethically aware approaches to our planet. In
cultivating these new ethical sensibilities, the human can be remade with a new self and a ‘new self-
interest’.
AT: Perm
Working within the system only feeds the existing system marginalizing other forms of
politics
Thus, while it is important to work for electoral success, environmental consciousness, better policies,
and more scientific research, these cannot change the deeply rooted behavior patterns and structural
relationships that led to the environmental crisis in the first place. Nor can these change the nature of
the decision-making methods and processes that support business as usual. If we value life, then we
must transform the cultural and institutional infrastructure 3_— our frameworks of thinking, relating,
and acting. The question is, how do we get from here to there? This is where green philosophies divide.
High risk of cooption

There is another problem with political "success." Pressure politics is a matter of power, and while
power attracts new talent, it also can divide and corrupt. We are beginning to see this in the green
movement in Australia. Many "nouveau greens" seeking positions in the public arena lack a deep
analysis or an ethical commitment sufficient to prevent the compromise of principles or a latent agenda
of personal power. The process of cooptation has begun: a pluralist environmental movement is
gradually being transformed into a structure of corporatist representation and mediation. 2 The
legitimation of environmental interests by incorporation into existing decisionmaking structures, as has
happened with the labor movement, cannot resolve the underlying psychological and behavioral causes
of environmental or social conflict.
Total rejection is necessary – the perm cannot solve

James Der Derian, Director of the Global security Program and Research Professor of International
Studies at the Watson Institute for International Studies at Brown University, Prof. of IR @ UMass –
Amherst and Brown University, 1999, “A Virtual Theory of Global Politics, Mimetic War and the Spectral
State,” Proceedings of the Annual Meeting (American Society of International Law), Vol. 93 (MARCH 24-
27, 1999), pp. 163-176, JSTOR
The spatialist, materialist, that is, realist, bias of thinking in international theory renders it inadequate
for a critical inquiry into the temporal, representational, deterritorial and potentially dangerous powers
of virtual technologies. Semiotic, critical and discourse theories offer a better perspective, having led the
way in tracing the reconfiguration of power into new representational,
immaterial forms. They have helped us to understand how acts of inscription and the production of
information can reify consciousness, float signifiers and render concepts undecidable. However, as the
realities of international politics increasingly are generated, mediated and simulated by successive
technical means of reproduction, there is not so much a distancing from some original, truth-bearing
source as there is an implosion, in which meaning disappears into a media black hole of insignificance.
As the globalization and virtualization of new media sunder meaning from conventional moorings, and
set information adrift as it moves with alacrity and celerity from phenomenal to virtual forms, one
searches for new modes of understanding.
AT: Perm
Fear based politics takes over the advocacy – they cannot sever the links we isolate
Claes Wrangel, PhD Candidate in Peace and Development Research @ Univ. of Gothenburg & MA in
PoliSci @ Stockholm Univ. 2012, “Reading the Future through Fear and Hope? Problematizing Affective
Binaries as Analytical Categories,” Paper presented at Swedish National Conference on Peace and
Conflict Research, 14-15 June 2012, Gothenburg University.
<http://www.globalstudies.gu.se/digitalAssets/1373/1373809_claes-wrangel-reading-the-future-
through-fear-and-hope--updated-version.pdf
Importantly, in accounts such as those listed above, fear plays an active role in the containment of history to the
present. As Ahmed claims, “fear works to secure the relationships between […] bodies” (2004: 63) operating as
to preserve the subject in its present identity. As such, it “involves shrinking the body” (2004: 69), restricting “its
mobility precisely insofar as it seems to prepare the body for fight” (Ibid.). As may be evident, this fear does not
operate on an individual level, rather it is a strictly social logic of affect – it collects nations together, it assembles
bodies into formation, be it those that are perceived as insecure or those that may cause harm (Ibid.: 64,
77). As such, it has been claimed that fear both unites and divides, uniting the nation against a common enemy,
following a Schmittian logic of sovereign power, and dividing the nation by consolidating internal
stratification (Robin, 2004: 162), arguably providing the rational for internal surveillance so present in today’s
world (Lewis, 2009). This combination of unity and division has been taken as to make fear into a “rational moral
emotion” (Ibid.) invested in power, as well as to serve as a particular description of US politics (Ibid.).
Importantly, fear is also sticky, Ahmed claims, in the sense that it can move from body to body, from one threatening
object to another, seemingly without logic, sticking words like “’terrorist’ and ‘Islam’ together” (Ibid.: 76),
associations that stick not despite their arbitrary relations but because of them; because their
interrelation is feared rather than known (Ibid.). The representations of this feeling, it is said, is now heard and
seen every-where, “in real time, all the time” (Der Derian, 2005: 26), produced and channelled by the security
discourse of the US post 9/11 (Debrix, 2005; Bleikner & Hutchinson, 2008; Loseke, 2009), indeed even our very geography
is now coloured by the level of fear one is supposed to feel at specific places (Massumi, 2005).
AT: Perm
The fear they isolate is pre-rational – it create the ground work for their consciousness
making any attempt to sever it impossible
Living fearfully in the future, so described, is hence to be arrested in the moment. It is to be paralyzed (Massumi,
2005: 36), yet not so by being caught in the present confined by actual language previously discussed as the
definition of power, but by its very opposite, by never being able to appear in actuality, by being arrested in a
moment of immobility, thereby circumscribing action. Elsewhere, Massumi has described this mode of being
as the very opposite of bare life (Agamben, 1998) – a fully present life, “stripped of its human content, its
vitality reduced to the physical minimum” (Massumi, 2011) – rather this life is “bare activity” (Ibid., original emphasis),
a life caught in the instant, in the affective moment “without determinable content”. Framed as such, this paralysis
makes the future impossible, yet not by dictating its content to be the same as the present, but precisely by reducing its
capacity to take shape, to appear with a given content. This begs the question: When the present is the
future, what possibility is there for another futurity to arise?
Predictions Fail
The more precise their prediction, the more skeptical you should be
Tim Richards, market analyst, 7-4-2012, “Clueless: Meet the Overprecise Pundits,” The Psy-Fi Blog,
http://www.psyfitec.com/2012/07/clueless-meet-overprecise-pundits.html
Most short-term opinions on markets or any system that includes human beings as part of the
machinery are generally worthless in a financial sense. Mostly we can’t predict what side of the bed
our children will emerge from in the morning so why anyone should expect to be able to accurately
forecast the outcome of the interactions of millions of people remains an abiding mystery. Despite this
reams of words are written each day by pundits safe in the knowledge that today’s news is forgotten
tomorrow and that expressing unwarranted certainty is the way to succeed. They’ve learned that
extreme, albeit incorrect, precision will fool most of the people most of the time, and no one ever
checks. Pundit Marketplaces We’re especially attracted to people who express certainty about the
future. Since the future is virtually unforeseeable these gurus are, at best, deluding themselves but
they’re tapping into our desire to believe that the world isn’t the nasty, brutish and unpredictable place
it really is. The counter to this is that forecasters who are precisely wrong will, eventually, be uncovered
and revealed to be the fraudulent charlatans they really are. This should be the effect of the
marketplace on ideas but unfortunately it turns out that we tend to disregard feedback, which
presumably is why there are thousands of media pundits out there pushing their unsubstantiated
opinions onto a gullible public, safe in the knowledge that they can write or say pretty much anything
they want, because no one will ever hold it against them. When Joseph Radzevick and Don Moore
analysed peoples’ responses to overconfident investment judgements in Competing to be Certain (But
Wrong) they noted that the preferred advisors were the ones that expressed the most confidence that
they were right – even though they were frequently wrong – yet they didn’t suffer any reputational
damage. This aligns with Philip Tetlock’s famous research on political pundits that suggests the more
famous the procrastinator the worse their prediction accuracy (see: Expert Political Judgment: How
Good Is It? How Can We Know?).
Eco Security Kritik

This file is a critique of environmental securitization. With this file you should be able to put for a vast
array of distinct arguments to tailor your position to respond to your opponents’ arguments. The basic
thesis behind this position is that attempts to manage the ocean construct a larger regime of truth that
both legitimizes expertise and other forms of control. This approach to nature reduces nature to its
component parts which enables flawed policy making. The alternative is to reject this approach to
managing the environment.
1NC Eco Security K

The affirmative’s securitization of the oceans naturalizes a scientific rationalist
approach to the nature – that instrumental approach removes decision making from
public control and reduces the oceans as a resource to be secured.
Emily Martens, University of Miami, 2011, "The Discourses of Energy and Environmental Security in
the Debate Over Offshore Oil Drilling Policy in Florida" (2011). Open Access Theses.Paper 254, Accessed
5-26-2014.
For Foucault, discourse becomes a tool for power, whereby standards of social conduct can be articulated and
institutionalized through the implementation of economic and political structures. Discourse is a
portrayer of knowledge, where “knowledge is a tool of power” (Foucault 1976; Leiss 1994: 106). In the
juxtaposition of the US energy and environmental security discourses, the assumptions, or truths upon
which the discourse is built are the sources of a power struggle in which each side believes it correctly
portrays reality and an acceptable human response to that reality. The use of the term security, therefore,
becomes a discursive tool wherein legitimacy can be harvested, particularly by the State and political leaders
who have access to the media, by playing on certain fears about the future. To combine this with Dalby’s notion of
security as the expression of a desire to insulate from a perceived threat, it can be surmised that security as a discourse, is
wielded by the powerful to produce sentiment that would legitimize certain policies and actions that
may not necessary be considered necessary by the citizenry. Security, therefore, can be a means through
which to gain consent by articulating threats to the objects of security in terms of how their continued
insecurity threatens society and the livelihoods of the population; for instance, access to safe and cheap
energy resources (energy security) or a clean ocean in which to swim and harvest food (environmental security).
However divergent the energy and environmental security discourses may seem to be they operate
under similar assumptions derived from the Enlightenment, promoting scientific rationality as the
means through which society’s mastery over nature is the means to secure mankind from external
threat.
1NC Eco Security K

Domination over nature is linked to exploitations of humans – difference is used a
justification for extermination
Val Plumwood, Australian Research Council Fellow at the Australian National University, 1993, Feminism
and the Mastery of Nature. Pg. 4. Accessed 5-26-2014.
Thus it is also exclusion from the master category of reason which in liberation struggles provides and
explains the conceptual links between different categories of domination, and links the domination of
humans to the domination of nature. The category of nature is a field of multiple exclusion and control,
not only of nonhumans, but of various groups of humans and aspects of human life which are cast as
nature. Thus racism, colonialism and sexism have drawn their conceptual strength from casting sexual,
racial and ethnic difference as closer to the animal and the body construed as a sphere of inferiority, as
a lesser form of humanity lacking the full measure of rationality or culture. As Vandana Shiva points out (1989,
1991). It Is not only women's labour which traditionally gets subsumed 'by definition' into nature, but the
labour of colonised non-western, non-white people also. The connections between these forms of
domination in the west are thus partly the result of chance and of specific historical evolution, and
partly formed from a necessity inherent in the dynamic and logic of domination between self and other,
reason and nature. To be defined as 'nature' in this context is to be defined as passive, as non-agent and
non-subject, as the 'environment' or invisible background conditions against which the 'foreground'
achievements of reason or culture (provided typically by the white, western, male expert or entrepreneur) take place. It is to
be defined as a terra nullius, a resource empty of its own purposes or meanings, and hence available to be
annexed for the purposes of those supposedly identified with reason or intellect, and to be conceived
and moulded in relation to these purposes. It means being seen as part of a sharply separate, even alien
lower realm, whose domination is simply 'natural', flowing from nature itself and the nature(s) of things.
Such treatment, standard in the west for nature since at least the Enlightenment, has since that time been opposed and officially condemned
for humans (while all the while normalised for marginalised groups such as women and the colonised).
Alternative – reject their securitized managerial approach to nature

Our alternative creates a new form of politics for movements to work from.
Marcel Wissenburg and Yoram Levy, 2004, Liberal Democracy and Environmentalism: The End of
Environmentalism?” Wissenburg & Yoram, 2004. Pg. 4, Accessed 5-26-2014.
Environmentalism is traditionally not only concerned with the capability of existing political
arrangements and institutions to successfully address the environmental challenge. It also entails or
suggests a different conception of the good society. In addition to solving environmental problems,
environmentalism is also, maybe even primarily, concerned with an analysis of the nature of such
problems. In addition to a concern with acting effectively within a given political institutional context,
environmentalism is also engaged in redefining and reshaping that context. And in addition to its
concern with institutional design, environmentalism is also engaged in specifying and defining the
environmental goals those institutions should promote, goals like the preservation of a self-sustaining
nature or natural biodiversity. In other words, prior to its instrumental dimension environmentalism
has a normative and moral dimension determining the way in which the whole environmental issue
makes sense to us - if at all. It is with regard to this dimension that we ask whether environmentalism
has come to an end. The empirical approach cannot answer this question, since, by its very nature, it
treats the normative and moral dimension as a given.
Link – Ocean Resources

Their discourse of “resource conflicts” is a militarized justification for unending liberal
violence and intervention
Philippe Le Billon, a geographer, author and Associate Professor at the University of British Columbia,
and a researcher at the Liu Institute for Global Issues, PhD from Oxford, 2004, “The Geopolitical
Economy of 'Resource Wars,” http://www.neiu.edu/~dgrammen/2004LEBILLON.pdf
While much attention had been previously devoted to the risk of armed conflicts resulting from the vulnerability of supply of
'strategic resources* for major powers or environmental scarcity in poor countries, most resource-related wars in the 1990s have
opposed domestic or regional politico-military entrepreneurs over locally abundant and internationally valuable resources, such as oil, timber,
or diamonds. In this light, some interventions by regional powers have been tainted by the 'lust' for valuable
resources, as with the Ugandan or Zimbabwean military deployment in the Democratic Republic of Congo.' Speaking of the 'poisonous mix*
of diamonds and greed fuelling the war in Sierra Leone, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan even suggested that 'when a whole Guincan battalion
[of peacekeepers] on its way to Sierra Leone — 900 men with Armoured Personal Carriers — said they were disarmed [by rebels], you wonder
... Did they sell them?*2 This introductory essay examines the
geopolitical economy of so-called 'resource wars', that is,
armed conflicts revolving 'to a significant degree, over the pursuit or possession of critical materials'.* The
term 'resource war' itself
emerged in the US in the early 1980s in reference to perceived Soviet threats over US access to Middle Eastern oil and
African minerals.' Beyond this conventional geopolitical and strategic perspective on resource competition, this essay argues that the
significance of resources in wars is largely rooted in the political and economic vulnerabilities of resource dependent states. This essay stresses
the links between (mis(governance, conflicts, and the historical legacy of the social construction and exploitation of 'resources' by
imperial powers, as well as the current multiscalar practices of the global political economy in which commodity and financial (lows arc rarely
matched with informational and 'ethical' ones. Resources have specific historic, geographic, and social qualities participating
in shaping
the patterns of conflicts and violences. The discursive construction and materiality of oil and diamonds, for
example, entail distinct social practices, stakes, and potential conflicts associated with their territorial control, exploitation,
commercialization, and consumption. Among these qualities, their territorialization as well as physical, economic and discursive
characteristics come to define resources both materially and socially in dialectic relationships with institutions and practices. As pointed out by
Kevin Dunn in the case of Central Africa, 'the
material aspects of a war economy are intrinsically linked to its
discursive production'; whereby perceptions of threats, sectarian identity politics and spaces of (insecurity inform and
reflect the so-called 'greedy' dimensions of (violent) resource extraction and trade.
Link – Biodiversity
Environmentalist approaches are coercive and destroy indigenous knowledge
Macip and Valencia 12 Ricardo F., professor at Beneme´rita Universidad Autońoma de Puebla,
Puebla, Mexico. C.Z., professor Universidad de Las Ame´ricas-Puebla, Puebla, Mexico. “‘If we work in
conservation, money will flow our way’: hegemony and duplicity on the Coast of Oaxaca, Mexico,”
Dialect Anthropol 36. pp. 82-83, 85
All these efforts to intervene, regulate, and educate the organized population within civil society as
‘‘conservationist brothers and sisters’’ have not been enough to stop the main predatory practices it
targeted, nor to reduce the intensity of poverty in the region. Turtle eggs are thoroughly harvested for a
profitable black market and turtle meat is sold on a shadowy regional market. Certain flag species have
turned into an eco-fetish for conservation, but the efforts to halt the extinction of some species
(Dermochelys coriacea, Eretmochelys imbricata,Chelonia agassizii) cannot be considered successful,
whereas the recovery of another (Lepidochelys olivacea) cannot be credited to the ban (Early 2011).
Even more problematic is the fact that the very same villagers who are the subjects of conservation are
also active poachers and dealers (Early 2010: 133). This dual role as conservationists and poachers is not
only an open secret in the villages, but also something from which the scientific teams in charge of
conservation programs benefit. One such instance involves having poachers on payroll who are able to
recognize nests of specific endangered species in the sand (Early 2010: 129). Clearly, local knowledge is
used in constant bargaining and deception over meaningful conservation practices, but underpaid field
researchers and poachers do not control the process, they merely contribute to its confusion day after
day by simply trying to get by. The Mexican state’s relationship to international conservationist
discourses, organizations, and governments has thus produced a clientele of organized double-crossing
individuals who deceive the conservationists projects that they have been coerced into.
Link – Eco Managerialism

Environmental apocalypticism causes eco-authoritarianism and mass violence against
those deemed environmental threats – also causes political apathy which turns case
Frederick Buell, cultural critic on the environmental crisis and a Professor of English at Queens College
and the author of five books; 2003, “From Apocalypse To Way of Life,” pg. 185-186)
Looked at critically, then, crisis
discourse thus suffers from a number of liabilities. First, it seems to have
become a political liability almost as much as an asset. It calls up a fierce and effective opposition with
its predictions; worse, its more specific predictions are all too vulnerable to refutation by events. It also
exposes environmentalists to being called grim doomsters and antilife Puritan extremists. Further,
concern with crisis has all too often tempted people to try to find a “total solution” to the problems
involved— a phrase that, as an astute analyst of the limitations of crisis discourse, John Barry, puts it, is
all too reminiscent of the Third Reich’s infamous “final solution.”55 A total crisis of society—
environmental crisis at its gravest—threatens to translate despair into inhumanist authoritarianism;
more often, however, it helps keep merely dysfunctional authority in place. It thus leads, Barry
suggests, to the belief that only elite- and expert-led solutions are possible.56 At the same time it
depoliticizes people, inducing them to accept their impotence as individuals; this is something that has made many people today feel,
ironically and/or passively, that since it makes no difference at all what any individual does on his or her own, one might as well go along with
it.
Environmental alarmism is unfounded and not a justification for taking action

Amy Kaleita, PHD, Assistant Professor Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering, 2007, “Hysteria’s
History” Environmental Alarmism in Context”,
http://www.pacificresearch.org/docLib/20070920_Hysteria_History.pdf
Alarmism is given more weight than it deserves, as policy makers attempt to appease their constituency
and the media. It polarizes the debaters into groups of “believers” and “skeptics,” so that reasoned, fact-
based compromise is difficult to achieve. Neither of these aspects of alarmism is healthy for the development of appropriate
policy. Further, alarmist responses to valid problems risk foreclosing potentially useful responses based on ingenuity and progress. There are
many examples from the energy sector where, in the presence of economic, efficiency, or societal demands, the marketplace has responded by
developing better alternatives. That is not to say that we should blissfully squander our energy resources; on the contrary, we should be careful
to utilize them wisely. But energy-resource hysteria should not lead us to circumvent scientific advancement by cherry-picking and favoring one
particular replacement technology at the expense of other promising technologies. Environmental
alarmism should be taken
for what it is—a natural tendency of some portion of the public to latch onto the worst, and most
unlikely, potential outcome. Alarmism should not be used as the basis for policy. Where a real problem exists,
solutions should be based on reality, not hysteria.
Ecological protection legitimizes violent interventionism
issue, pgs 30-48.
Inventively, Eckersley seeks to transform what she terms the negative sovereignty of non-intervention
so that states, especially those in the South, can invoke it to protect ecosystems. She does this by
arguing that ecological protection could be linked to a state’s protection of its territorial integrity (which
includes ecosystems) and political independence, which includes the capacity and right to determine
standards for, and to maintain, the quality of its natural environment in accordance with international
law. Additionally, environmental hazards caused by other states and entering into the victim state—such
as toxins, radiation, waste, or acid rain—may be condemned and resisted on the basis of human rights
norms, including the rights to life, health, and to an adequate environment. Eckersley even maintains
that some of these damaging environmental intrusions amount to attacks on the victim state and are
thus prohibited under Article 2(4) of the UN Charter. However, Eckersley’s interpretation of “attack” is
not yet part of international law and the analogy between armed attack and environmental intrusions
will sometimes be strained given the difference in intention between one state’s armed attack and
another state’s recklessness or negligence causing environmental harm. But this will not always be the
case: conceivably a state could intend to cause harm to the environment of another state.
Environmental protection is linked to the military industrial complex

issue, pgs 30-48.
For example, states might cause such harm as
part of a “scorched earth” strategy of warfare, with or without the
use of biological or chemical weapons (one thinks of Iraq’s destruction of oil wells and the USA’s use of
Agent Orange and napalm in the Vietnam War).42 By universalizing the principles reinforcing this
sovereign “green shield,” a state benefiting from the invocation of self-determination, sovereignty, and
non-intervention would itself be required not to use its territory in ways that harm the ecosystems and
human and non-human species in other states. In particular, its economic activities would be duly
restrained by this norm. Although Eckersley does not herself make the argument, one might extrapolate that just as the “democratic
peace thesis” supposes that the best way to achieve global peace is for as many states as possible to democratize, since such states are thought
not to wage war against each other,43 the more
states employ the principle of non-intervention to protect their
own environments—the greener they become—the more likely it is that environmental degradation will
be prevented or at least retarded. Eckersley imagines that states might internalize a general norm of
environmental stewardship as part of their very being, much as they now exercise proprietary,
exploitative dominion over their territories. Indeed, according to Eckersley, stewardship should replace
proprietorship as the ruling global value. One obstacle to the needed process of socialization, however, is that many states,
especially in the South, will jealously guard their economic sovereignty, preferring it to any environmental benefit a green shield might bring.
Difficult questions can also be raised about the framing of these issues in terms of ecosystems within states, given that ecosystems will
sometimes straddle a number of state borders as some river systems do.
Environmental security allows state governments to expand sovereign power and lash
out at others under the name of ecological protection.
Michael Mason, Prof. at Department of Geography and Environment, London School of Economics and
Political Science, 2013, Zeitoun, part of the Water Security Research Centre, School of International
Development, University of East Anglia, “Questioning environmental security”, The Geographical Journal
pp. 1475-4959
From a geographical perspective, environmental security straddles uneasily across a territorial/postterritorial axis, where tensions are
immediately apparent between competing spatial performances of security. This expresses contrasting claims over the political subjectivity
being secured. It is not surprising that state actors have invoked environmental security practices and discourses according to territorial
doctrines of national security, whereby environmental risks supplement traditional threats to the state. Thus, ‘climate security’, ‘biosecurity’
and ‘energy security’ are employed to refer to the protection of state interests with regard to the projected and perceived consequences of
environmental change, biotechnologies and fossil fuels scarcity. Numerous think-tank and academic publications have fed these state-centred
imaginaries of environmental danger on the basis of disputed natural and social scientific scenarios (e.g. Klare 2008; Brown and Crawford
2009; Chellaney 2011). In apparent opposition to statist representations of security are non-territorial notions of ‘human security’, which
profess a universal concern for the protection of individuals or groups from serious threats to wellbeing. Constructions of human
security have identified environmental dangers as potential threats to human welfare; for example,
‘water security’ and ‘food security’ mark out areas of practical application for international
development and humanitarian organizations (Matthew et al. 2010; Cook and Bakker 2012). Interest in the territorial/post-
territorial duality of environmental security served as the initial impetus for convening a conference session – at the 2011 Royal Geographical
Society (with IBG) (RGS-IBG) Annual Conference – featuring early versions of three of the papers in this themed section. Co-sponsored by The
Geographical Journal and the RGS-IBG Planning and Environment Research Group, the session was designed to highlight recent geographical
research critically interrogating the justification and application of environmental security ideas in selected political-policy domains. As Philo
(2012, 2) notes,
placing ‘security’ under critical scrutiny means working to prevent it becoming ‘a tool
wielded thoughtlessly or instrumentally by sectional or partisan interests of any description’.
Environmental security promotes militarization of the environment and a racist

discourse of privilege.
Environmental security initially appeared to be a good idea, as it was ‘meant to alarm traditional security
analysts about the issues that “really” matter’ (de Wilde 2001, 2) and to increase the relevance of environmental
problems in the political agenda. Buzan emphasized that ‘[e] environmental security concerns the maintenance of the local and the
planetary biosphere as the essential support system on which all other human enterprises depend’ (1991, 19–20). Others welcomed the
concept since it ‘plays down the values traditionally associated with the nation-state—identity, territoriality, sovereignty—and implies a
different set of values associated with environmental change—ecology, globality, and governance’ (Dyer 2001, 68). Yet others argued that
‘environmental security ... is all about solidarity’ (Thompson 1999, 137). On analytical grounds, it seemed a way to provide a better account of
new typologies of vulnerability as well as the potential for conflict and violence with which these vulnerabilities could be associated. Opponents
were quick to warn that the term ‘security’ evokes a set of confrontational practices associated with the state
and the military which should be kept apart from the environmental debate (Deudney 1990). Concerns
included the possibilities of creating new competencies for the military—militarizing the environment
rather than greening security (Kakonen 1994)—or the rise of nationalistic attitudes in order to protect the
national environment (Deudney 1999, 466–468). Deudney argued that not only are practices and institutions associated with national
security inadequate to deal with environmental problems, but security can also introduce a zero-sum rationality to the
environmental debate that can create winners and losers, and undermine the cooperative efforts
required by environmental problems. Similar objections came from a southern perspective: environmental security was
perceived as a discourse about the security of northern countries, their access to resources and the
protection of their patterns of consumption.
Link – Ocean Diseases

The affirmative’s discourse of disease securitizes the alien body of the infected –
justifies ethnic cleansing in pursuit of the “perfect human”
Elana Gomel, English department head at Tel Aviv University, Winter 2000, published in Twentieth
Century Literature Volume 46,
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0403/is_4_46/ai_75141042)
In the secular apocalyptic visions that have proliferated wildly in the last 200 years, the world has been destroyed by nuclear wars, alien
invasions, climatic changes, social upheavals, meteor strikes, and technological shutdowns. These baroque scenarios are shaped by the
eroticism of disaster. The apocalyptic desire that finds satisfaction in elaborating fictions of the End is double-edged. On the one hand, its
ultimate object is some version of the crystalline New Jerusalem, an image of purity so absolute that it denies the organic messiness of life. [1]
On the other hand, apocalyptic fictions typically linger on pain and suffering. The end result of apocalyptic
purification often seems of less importance than the narrative pleasure derived from the bizarre and opulent tribulations of the bodies being
burnt by fire and brimstone, tormented by scorpion stings, trodden like grapes in the winepress. In this interplay between the incorporeal
purity of the ends and the violent corporeality of the means the
apocalyptic body is born. It is a body whose mortal
sickness is a precondition of ultimate health, whose grotesque and excessive sexuality issues in angelic sexlessness, and whose
torture underpins a painless--and lifeless--millennium.The apocalyptic body is perverse, points out Tina Pippin, unstable and mutating from
maleness to femaleness and back again, purified by the sadomasochistic "bloodletting on the cross," trembling in abject terror while awaiting
an unearthly consummation (122). But most of all it is a suffering body, a text written in the script of stigmata, scars, wounds, and sores. Any
apocalypse strikes the body politic like a disease, progressing from the first symptoms of a large-scale disaster through the crisis of the
tribulation to the recovery of the millennium. But of all the Four Horsemen, the one whose ride begins most intimately, in the private travails of
individual flesh, and ends in the devastation of the entire community, is the last one, Pestilence. The contagious body is the most
characteristic modality of apocalyptic corporeality.
Using global health as a justification for intervention causes violence against the
developing world
Discourses on global health issues have also hinged, since the 1990’s, on a conceptualisation of health as a
limited resource to be defended. Drawing on historical examples elucidating the use of contagious diseases as
weapons of war, or the deathly potential of epidemics,14 researchers have shown the importance of
protecting the health of military institutions but also of populations more generally, as a way of
protecting states from the destabilising potential of contagious diseases.15 A number of researchers from this
school of thought focused at the end of the Cold War on the threat posed by biological weapons, as new knowledge on Soviet
programmes (Biopreparat) was made available, as well as bioterrorism and poor safety measures on scientific sites.16
Infectious diseases, whether emerging or re-emerging, also stimulated strong interest, especially in the United States
during the Clinton era. At the end of the XXth century, HIV/AIDS came to be fully securitized.17 Infectious diseases were
then perceived as a threat not so much because of their usefulness as weapons or their weakening
potential for western militaries, but because of their destabilising potential at the social, economic, and
political levels that threatened to spread anarchy within societies. By causing the death of key individuals
within the state apparatus, epidemics would weaken those states and their security structures, move
power balances in non-linear and unforeseeable ways, and call for stabilisation means far beyond the
limited resources of international peacekeeping operations, already weakened by the epidemics.

Predictions of climate disaster shut down rational debate about the violence that has
already happened
Julie Cupples, Department of Geography at University of Canterbury, New Zealand. 2012. “Wild
Globalization: The Biopolitics of Climate Change and Global Capitalism on Nicaragua’s Mosquito Coast”.
Antipode 44:1. Pages 12-13.
In the first world, in both everyday and scientific discourse, climate change is frequently posited as a
transcendent and teleological megahazard, caused by the prime movers greenhouse gases, which have the potential to wreak
havoc and undermine our way of life. While both scientists and ordinary people also talk about climate change in a range of tenses, it is often
described in first world contexts as a future-oriented problem, as one which will affect future generations if we fail to
act. For example, Giddens (2009:1) starts his recent book on climate change by describing it as something which has “potentially devastating
consequences for the future”. A recent Bolivian blog states that Oxfam America made a serious mistake in its recent report on indigenous
peoples and climate change by “tensing its warnings in the future tense” (duderino 2009). It is apparent that the biophysical realities which we
socially construct as climate change—rising sea levels, drought and flooding, intensified hurricanes, disappearing ice—are of course affecting
millions of humans and nonhumans right now, in Bangladesh, the Sunderbans Islands, Tuvalu, Papua New Guinea and Central America. The
repeated positing of climate change as a future-oriented problem constitutes an insidious erasure of
those killed and displaced by climate-related disasters at the present time. Dominant approaches to
climate change are clearly a key part of the neocolonial global order, in which the deaths of third world
inhabitants in disasters are more acceptable, more justifiable, than the future potential deaths of first
world people who haven’t been born yet.4 However, such biopower, like global war, as discussed by Hardt and Negri (2004:20), “must not
only bring death but must also produce and regulate life”. Flusty (2004:7), who works his argument about globalization around the concept of
de-coca-colonization, urges us to shift: our focus away from an external “sovereign” globalization-as-object to be grasped and wielded. Rather
we must imagine a “nonsovereign” production of the global that is as increasingly immanent in, and emergent through our day-to-day
thoughts and actions as it is in the mass movement of capital, information and populations. According to Flusty, we don’t need to
think of globalization as an abstraction because it is embedded in everyday practices.

Climate change scholarship has been constantly framed as a securable threat to civil
society, expanding statist violence
Shirley Scott, Author and Senior Lecturer in International Law @ Univ. of New South Wales, 2012, “The
Securitization of Climate Change in World Politics: How Close have We Come and would Full
Securitization Enhance the Efficacy of Global Climate Change Policy?”, Review of European Community
& International Environmental Law, 21:3, November 2012. Pgs 220-230.
The first step in the process of securitization is referred to as a ‘securitizing move’. In the case of climate
change, this means climate security being introduced into the discourse of international policy making
and the framing of climate change as a threat to human, national and international security. This move can
be dated from 2006 when British Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett assumed a leadership role in promoting the association of climate change
with international security in global policy discourse. During the United Kingdom Presidency,
the G8 in 2006 accepted the
fundamental links between energy, security, climate change and sustainable development, and in October
2006 Beckett emphasized the importance of ‘climate security’ in a major foreign policy speech in Berlin.11 After considerable lobbying, the
United Kingdom chaired the first UN Security Council debate on climate change on 17 April 2007. A
common theme in the debate
was that of climate change as a ‘threat multiplier’. 12 It is not that increasing temperatures as such
threaten human security, although they may well do so in certain situations, but rather that the physical
effects triggered by the increased temperatures could be expected in many instances to exacerbate
existing tensions. A considerable literature emerged at about this time through scholarly writing and
reports of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). Writing in the Washington Quarterly in 2007, for example, Podesta and Ogden
emphasized the extent to which all the threats and risks are interrelated, and hence, from a policy
perspective, why it is important to prevent any one from manifesting. Their fear is that the onset of one
problem may lead to a downward spiral in which it is increasingly difficult to prevent the next problem
and the result may be instability, a failed State and/or new safe havens for terrorists.
Link – Energy Security

Energy security pervades every aspect of life meaning there are an infinite number of
interventions that produce harmful consequences
Felix Ciuta, 4-10-2010, Senior Lecturer in International Relations, UCL. “Conceptual Notes on Energy
Security: Total or Banal Security?” International Peace Research Institute.
At first glance, to state that energy ‘pervades every aspect of life’ (Ocheltree, 2008: 1) is
commonsensical and seems unproblematic in security terms. On closer investigation, however, this view
of energy has significant consequences. In the most immediate sense, energy modulates security by
taking it everywhere, simply because energy is everywhere. This assertion alone – ‘security is
everywhere’ – will startle students and practitioners of security, because it challenges one of their most
fundamental assumptions: that security has precise boundaries that make it a domain reservé of
specialist knowledge and practice (Bigo, 1998; Ciuta˘, 2009). But, what precisely does it mean that
energy security is everywhere? To quote one proponent of this view, ‘energy security needs to be
extended to the safety of the whole infrastructure and supply chain – recognizing the vulnerabilities that
come from terrorism, war, brigandage, and natural disasters’ (Yergin, 2006b: 1). In conceptual terms,
this statement identifies an ‘infinite number of targets’ (Kain, 2007) that are subject to an infinite
number of vulnerabilities. Energy security means the security of everything: resources, production
plants, transportation networks, distribution outlets and even consumption patterns; everywhere:
oilfields, pipelines, power plants, gas stations, homes; against everything: resource depletion, global
warming, terrorism, ‘them’ and ourselves. At its maximum, this logic invests every single object of any
kind with and in security. At least potentially, the result is a panoptic view of security that legitimates
panoptic security policies (see Bigo, 1998).
Energy insecurity discourse locks in nationalist views of energy politics ensuring state
violence
Environment first emerged as a security issue as part of a Malthusian interpretation of global issues. If the
Club de Rome’s The Limits To Growth, published in 1972, focused predominantly on economic issues, the conceptualisation of
environmental resources (land, water, air, wood, raw materials, etc.) as both necessary to human life and in limited
access and availability gave those ressources a strategic dimension: having them or not could be of
national interest.6 Conflicts and divisions could thus be expected to arise among the many countries and
groups competing for access, and environmental scarcity could potentially be used strategically to
weaken one’s enemy, through the targeting of environmental resources during a conflict, for example.
According to this approach, which does not differ greatly from traditional strategic or realist international school
thinking, environment is a security issue because environmental resources are strategic: they have to be
protected and are worth fighting for. With the end of the Cold War, this approach, which had emerged more
than a decade previously, became highly visible. As some conflicts in the South, which were “read” until then using the “West vs. East”
lens, survived the fall of the Soviet Union, it became necessary to find a way to explain their persistence outside the framework of the Cold
War. The “resource conflicts” thesis emerged as an interesting and attractive replacement, and led to the development of a popular
and influential research program, spearheaded by researchers like Thomas Homer-Dixon or Nils Petter Gleditsch.7
Link – State Reform

State reform is a trap – progress cannot be permanent if linked to the state – the
ruling class will win in the end if we utilize government structures
Steve Leigh, 1-30-2014, “Will the rich reform themselves?” Socialist Worker,
http://socialistworker.org/2014/01/30/will-the-rich-reform-themselves
Instead, the governments were always capitalist--dominated by, and pursuing the interests of, the
capitalist system and the super-rich in particular. Especially in northern, economically advanced countries, it was the struggles of
the '30s and '40s that changed the balance of class forces. The "welfare state" reforms were the product of struggle. In
order to maintain the stability of the system, the rich and their governments granted concessions. Right away, the
super-rich fought against the new-found organized power of the workers and poor. When they felt they had
weakened the unions enough, and when faced with a crisis of profitability on an international scale in the '70s, they shifted
policies. They groped their way toward neoliberalism from the mid-'70s to early '80s, when the new policies were firmly in
place across the Global North. They then spread these policies to the Global South and former "Communist" countries, in part through the
Washington Consensus. The second point reinforces the first. We cannot get better policies by appealing to the rich. We
also won't get fundamental equality by electing "better" officials. Governments under capitalism are inevitably capitalist
governments. We can, from time to time, use electoral campaigns to make temporary changes and
especially to help build movements. But the bias of governments under capitalism will always be toward capitalist
interests: profit over humanity. We will only get substantial equality by eliminating the capitalist system
and its governments. Progress toward equality under capitalism will come from fighting against the rich
and their governments--not from appealing to them. Appealing to the rich to act for equality is like
asking a tiger to be a vegetarian.
Link – Law
The law co-constitutes a global regime of power and violence
Frank Edwards, an organizer, researcher and media maker, 2-24-2011, “Law and racism: legitimation
and co-constitution of social structure,” Broken Fence,
http://brokenfence.wordpress.com/2011/02/24/law-and-racism-legitimation-and-co-constitution-of-
social-structure/
Derek Gregory suggests that spaces of exception and colonial occupations are characterized not so
much by the suspension of law but through an elaborate legal performance. He suggests that we can’t
see law in this context as merely offering the cover of legitimacy for the necropolitical (Mbembe 2003)
regimes these spaces contain, but that these legal performances themselves render spaces as both
interior to sovereignty and exterior to it simultaneously (2006:414). The law co-constitutes this social
structure of extreme racial domination in partnership (and perhaps inseparably bound with) imperialism
and biopolitical governance. Indeed the constitution of the space of exception and its governance is by
necessity legal and by necessity racist (Foucault 2003:258; Mbembe 2003). The law here does far more
than offer legitimation, it actively builds social structure.

Security undermines democratic decision making and applies the logic of war to policy
discourse.
However, for the Copenhagen School, securitization has problematic consequences. The label security brings with it a
set of practices and a way of dealing with a problem that characterizes an issue as a security issue. The
word security entails a specific logic or rationality, independent of the context or the intentions of the
speakers. Security is about survival, urgency and emergency. It allows for exceptional measures, the
breaking of otherwise binding rules and governance by decrees rather than by democratic decisions.
Moreover security implies a ‘decisionist’ attitude which emphasizes the importance of reactive,
emergency measures. This set of practices is not necessarily codified nor can it be identified by specific rules. Instead it is more a form of rationality, a
way of framing and dealing with an issue, or ‘a generic structure of meaning which organizes dispositions, social relations, and politics according to a rationality of
security’ (Huysmans 2006, 24–25). This mindset, once activated, is not open to negotiation. Although it is possible to decide whether or not to securitize an issue—
and securitization, as a social process, is determined by a political community rather than by individuals—once an issue is securitized the logic of security necessarily
follows. This logic is borrowed from the Schmittian understanding of the political.5 For Carl Schmitt (1996 [1932], 37) the political is about the friend-enemy
distinction and successfully evoking security brings about that distinction. The logic of security is the logic of war; this suggests an
extreme form of antagonism and a zero-sum understanding of security. With the codification and institutionalization of a
national security discourse this rationality has been narrowed down to a specific context. Attempts to broaden the security agenda result
in the spreading 5 See Williams (2003) and Huysmans (1999). f this rationality to other contexts from
which it had been excluded (Buzan and Waever 1998). The Copenhagen School warns about the risk of securitization and distinguishes between
securitization—‘meaning the issue is presented as an existential threat, requiring emergency measures and justifying actions outside the normal bounds of political
procedure’—and politicization—‘meaning the issue is part of public policy, requiring government decision and resource allocations’ (Buzan et al 1998, 23–24). The
School warns that ‘when
considering securitizing moves such as “environmental security” ... one has to weigh
the always problematic side effects of applying a mind-set of security against the possible advantages of
focus, attention, and mobilization’ (29) and Waever’s normative suggestion is: ‘less security, more politics!’ (Waever 1995, 56)

Their securitization frame skews public deliberation and turns case
David L. Altheide, Emeritus Regents' Professor in the School of Justice and Social Inquiry at Arizona State
University, 2006, "Terrorism and the Politics of Fear", Cultural Studies, Critical Methodologies 6:415,
page 423, http://csc.sagepub.com/content/6/4/415
A politics of fear rests on the discourse of fear. The politics of fear serves as a conceptual linkage for
power, propaganda, news and popular culture, and an array of intimidating symbols and experiences,
such as crime and terrorism. The politics of fear resides not in an immediate threat froman individual
leader (e.g., Senator Joseph McCarthy [Griffith, 1987]) but in the public discourse that characterizes social life as dangerous, fearful, and filled
with actual or potential victims. This symbolic order invites protection, policing, and intervention to prevent further
victimization. A public discourse of fear invites the politics of fear. It is not fear per se that is important in social life but rather
how fear is defined and realized in everyday social interaction that is important. The role of the newsmedia is very important in carrying selective news sources’
messages. News sources are claims makers, and studies of crime news show that government and police
officials dominate how crime is framed (Ericson, Baranek, & Chan, 1987, 1989; Surette, 1992). Numerous public opinion
polls indicated that audiences were influenced by news media reports about the attacks as well as the interpretations of
the causes, the culprits, and ultimately the support for various U.S. military actions. For example, one study of the perceptions and
knowledge of audiences and their primary source of news found that gross misperceptions of key facts
were related to support of the war with Iraq. Misperceptions were operationalized as stating that clear evidence was found linking Iraq
to Al-Qaeda, that weapons of mass destruction had been found, and that world opinion favored the Iraq War. Many of these misperceptions were consistent with
From the perspective of democratic process, the
news reports, particularly with the Fox News. The authors conclude the following:
findings of this study are cause for concern. . . . What is worrisome is that it appears that the President
has the capacity to lead members of the public to assume false beliefs in support of his position
Impact – Turns Environment

The affirmatives claims of helping the environment are simply efforts to mask the
system's aim to profit from planetary destruction
John Bellamy Foster, editor of the monthly review, prof. of sociology at Univ. of Oregon, author; Brett
Clark, assis. prof. of sociology at North Carolina State Univ., author; "The Paradox of Wealth: Capitalism
and Ecological Destruction," Monthly Review 61:6 page 1 November 2009.
Today orthodox economics is reputedly being harnessed to an entirely new end: saving the planet from the
ecological destruction wrought by capitalist expansion. It promises to accomplish this through the
further expansion of capitalism itself, cleared of its excesses and excrescences. A growing army of self-styled “sustainable
developers” argues that there is no contradiction between the unlimited accumulation of capital — the credo of economic liberalism from
Adam Smith to the present — and the preservation of the earth. The system can continue to expand by creating a new
“sustainable capitalism,” bringing the efficiency of the market to bear on nature and its reproduction . In reality, these
visions amount to little more than a renewed strategy for profiting on planetary destruction . Behind
this tragedy-cum-farce is a distorted accounting deeply rooted in the workings of the system that sees
wealth entirely in terms of value generated through exchange. In such a system, only commodities for
sale on the market really count. External nature — water, air, living species — outside this system of exchange is
viewed as a “free gift.” Once such blinders have been put on, it is possible to speak, as the leading U.S. climate
economist William Nordhaus has, of the relatively unhindered growth of the economy a century or so from now, under
conditions of business as usual — despite the fact that leading climate scientists see following the
identical path over the same time span as absolutely catastrophic both for human civilization and life on the planet
as a whole.
The discourse of security makes all attempts to save the environment unworkable
Paul Roe, Phd from University of Wales, Aberystwyth, Associate Professor at Central Eastern University,
Department of International Relations and European Studies, 2008, “Is securitization a ‘negative’
concept? Revisiting the normative debate over normal versus extraordinary politics”, Security Dialogue
43:249
For the Copenhagen School, and particularly for Wæver, desecuritization (politicization) might be ‘more effective than
securitizing problems’ (Wæver, 1995: 57; emphasis added). This is not just a matter of the context within which problems are dealt
with, but also has to do with the long-term thinking that normal politics arguably brings with it. Although Wæver
is by no means categorical in the claim that securitization is invariably worse than politicization, his thinking nevertheless suggests that
securitizing problems may not always result in better outcomes.5 For example, Wæver (1995: 65) restates Barry Buzan’s assertion that some
environmental issues might be tackled more effectively ‘by the process-type remedies of economics,
than by the statist solutions of security logic’. Similarly, Daniel Deudney (1990: 465–7) has warned of the logic of security being
appropriated to create a sense of urgency in relation to the need to address ecological problems: how some environmentalists endeavour to
find a ‘moral equivalence to war’. In particular, Deudney draws attention to how national security’s
propensity for short-term
strategizing – the desire that affairs are quickly returned to normal – ‘is not likely to make much of a
contribution to establishing patterns of environmentally sound behaviour’. Because ‘conventional
national security organizations have short-term horizons’, the tendency not to operate on the basis of
long-term thinking represents a ‘poor model for environmental problem solving’. Stefan Elbe has also raised
questions over the efficacy of securitizing certain public health concerns.6 In Elbe’s treatment of (the more specific) normative debate over the
linking of HIV/AIDS and security, he notes how framing
the issue of HIV/AIDS as security ‘pushes responses to the
disease away from civil society toward the much less transparent workings of military and intelligence
organizations, which also possess the power to override human rights and civil liberties’ (Elbe, 2006: 128).
Impact – Violence
Security leads to authoritarian control and biopolitical violence.
Mark Neocleous, a Professor of the Critique of Political Economy, 2006, Politics and History. Security,
Liberty and the Myth of Balance: Towards a Critique of Security Politics Contemporary Political Theory
(2007) 6, 131–149. doi:10.1057/palgrave.cpt.9300301
Calling anything a security issue plays into the hands of the state, and the only way the state knows how
to deal with threats to security is to tighten its grip on civil society and ratchet-up its restrictions on
human freedoms. 'Speaking and writing about security is never innocent', Jef Huysmans comments. 'It always risks contributing to
the opening of a window of opportunity for a "fascist mobilization" or an "internal security ideology"' (2002, 43). This is because the
logic of 'security' is the logic of an anti-politics (Jayasuriya, 2004) in which the state uses 'security' to
marginalize all else, most notably the constructive conflicts, the debates and discussions that animate
political life, suppressing all before it and dominating political discourse in an entirely reactionary way.
This is precisely the point alluded to by Marx in 1843 when he suggested that security was the supreme
concept of bourgeois society: it's a concept that legitimizes any action by the state whatsoever, so long
as the action is conducted in the name of security. And this explains why virtually every authoritarian
measure since has been conducted in the name of security, from the reordering of international capital
under the guise of national security (Neocleous, 2006b), to the reassertion of loyalty and consensus as
the foundation of domestic order (Neocleous, 2006c), all the way down to the extermination camps of
the holocaust, the first stage of which was to be taken into 'security confinement' by the security police.
Securitization creates zones of death across the globe.

Kathy E. Ferguson, Ph.D. in political science, with supporting programs in philosophy and history, at
the University of Minnesota (2009) Article: The Sublime Object of Militarism, Journal: New Political
Science, Volume 31:4, 475-486 [http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/07393140903322554]
Militarization’s younger cousin is securitization, also an ongoing process of making order, this time focused more
tightly on the control of flows of meaning and bodies in space. Securitization happens when pre-9/11 militarization
interbreeds with the inward-looking gaze implied by the image of “homeland security,” birthing an endlessly self-repeating web of command
and control practices. Securitization includes militarization while going beyond it to include the intense
border-policing, information-controlling, Other-erasing practices of post-9/11 America. Securitizing
practices extend through civil society, erasing distinctions between civilians and enemies, terrorists and
criminals, weapons and civilian technologies (a.k.a. “dual-use technologies”), domestic and foreign, war and peace, leaving
us in a permanent in-between space that James Der Derian and others have called the “interwar.”4 The particular kind of militarism
both producing and being produced by contemporary militarization/securitization is part and parcel of globalization. While analyses of
globalization often sideline war as an artifact of nation states rather than extra-national global flows, wars and their accompanying/enabling
flows of weapons, soldiers, commodities, refugees, technologies, and ideologies are themselves manifestations of global interconnections.
Militarization/securitization is global in its economic arrangements, connecting private security firms
such as Blackwater or CACI to state militaries in opaque yet highly lucrative private contracts. It is global in
its technologies, inventing and employing sophisticated electronic communications, control, and robotics technologies to fight net-centric wars.
It is even global in its state arrangements, connecting national governments in international treaties and organizations such as NATO or the
“Coalition of the Willing.”
Impact – War
War has become a permanent form of relations in the nature of politics- retrenching
the state makes it impossible to solve war
Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri, Ph.D Professor of Literature @ Duke University, Ph.D, Multitude:
War and democracy in the age of empire. Penguin 2005
What is distinctive and new about the claim that politics is the continuation of war is that it refers to
power in its normal functioning, everywhere and always, outside and within each society. Michel
Foucault goes so far as to say that the socially pacifying function of political power involves constantly
reinscribing this fundamental relationship of force in a sort of silent war and reinscribing it too in the
social institutions, systems of economic inequality, and even the spheres of personal and sexual rela tions.I? War, in
other words, becomes the general matrix for all relations of power and techniques of domination, whether
or not bloodshed is in volved. War has become a regime of biopower, that is, a form of rule aimed not only at
controlling the population but producing and reproducing all aspects of social life.18 This war brings
death but also, paradoxically, must produce life. This does not mean that war has been domesticated or its violence
attenuated, but rather that daily life and the normal functioning of power has been permeated with the threat
and violence of warfare.
AT: Security Inevitable

Conflicts appear inevitable because we allow security to constitute our world.
This chapter is thus an exercise in thinking, which challenges the continuing power of political ontologies (forms of
truth and being) that connect security, sovereignty, belonging, othemess and violence in ways that for many appear
like enduring political facts , inevitable and irrefutable. Conflict, violence and alienation then arise not merely
from individual or collective acts whose conditions might be understood and policed; they condition politics as such,
forming a permanent ground, a dark substrata underpinning the very possibility of the present .
Conflict and alienation seem inevitable because of the way in which the modem political imagination
has conceived and thought security , sovereignty and ethics. Israel/ Palestine is chosen here as a particularly urgent and complex
example of this problem, but it is a problem with much wider significance.
Critical engagement can prevent fear spirals

While I hold out the hope that security can be re-visioned away from a permanent dependence on insecurity, exclusion and violence, and I
believe it retains normative promise, this analysis takes a deliberate step backward to examine the very real barriers faced by such a project.
Security cannot properly be rethought without a deeper understanding of, and challenge to, the political forms
and structures it claims to enable and protect. If Ken Booth argues that the state should be a means rather than an end of security, my
objective here is to place the continuing power and depth of its status as an end of security, and a fundamental source for political identity,
under critical interrogation.' If the state is to become a means of security (one among many) it will have to be fundamentally transformed.
The chapter pursues this inquiry in two stages. The first outlines the historic strength and effective redundancy of such an exciusivist vision of
security in Israel, wherein Israel not only confronts military and political antagonists with an 'iron wall' of armed force but maps this onto a
profound clash of existential narratives, a problem with resonances in the West's confrontation with radical Islamism in the war on terror. The
second, taking up the remainder of the chapter, then explores a series of potential resources in continental philosophy and political theory that
might help us to think our way out of a security grounded in violence and alienation. Through
a critical engagement with this
thought, I aim to construct a political ethics based not in relations between insecure and separated identities
mapped solely onto nation-states, but in relations of responsibility and interconnection that can negotiate and recognise
both distinct and intertwined histories, identities and needs; an ethics that might underpin a vision of
interdependent (national and non-national) existence proper to an integrated world traversed by endless flows
of people, commerce, ideas, violence and future potential.
AT: Heg/Realism Key to Peace

Western powers have turned the world into a desert and called it peace – hegemony
and realist politics are nihilistic and refuse to evaluate the massive human suffering
the international system creates
Richard Falk, Albert G. Milbank Professor of International Law and Practice at Princeton, 2000, Human
Rights Horizons: The Pursuit of Justice in a Globalizing World, p. 173-175
Yet, as Ken Booth observes in an influential essay, there has been a systematic refusal on the part of academic specialists and
diplomats to acknowledge moral failure with respect to the organization of international political life , that domain of
political behavior called international relations or world order.1 With some notable exceptions, world order has been analyzed for cen-
turies as if human suffering were irrelevant, and as if the only fate that mattered was either the destiny of a particular
nation or the more general rise and fall of great powers, the latter being regarded as an inevitable consequence of the eternal,
natural rivalry of self-serving states competing for territory, wealth, influence, and status.2 Even such an egoistic moral aperture is generally
misleadingly large, as it is rare indeed that the whole of a given people share in power and authority sufficiently to be regarded as effectively
included in the self; that is, “self-serving.” The struggle in constitutional democracies to extend tolerance and suffrage to minorities and women
reminds us that even in societies committed in principle to equality of rights, the representation of the self by the state is partial, at best, and
by no means complete. In fact, one impact of globalization seems to have been to marginalize the participation of those
victimized by the discipline of regional and global capital, as well as to undermine the capacity of the electoral process to serve the
interests of society as a whole and of territorial interests in particular. At most, international morality is reduced to lame “realist”
claims that peace is a public good achieved mainly through the rational calculations of the privileged , reflecting the
dynamics of political will and relative power, and given direction by a set of predatory assumptions about human nature. This realist mode
of perceiving morality is rarely turned inward, and is quite comfortable with a hypocritical but politically
convenient division between the benevolent sense of self and a malevolent vision of the other. This radical
dichotomy between the general assessment of world order and the specific enactments of foreign policy has been
particularly pronounced in this century—perhaps most brazenly in the mythic self-image of the United States, which sees itself as
a world leader in unflagging pursuit of noble ideals.
Yes Global Violence

Global violence increasing – absolute number of conflicts is going up
Mark Harrison and Nikolaus Wolf, Department of Economics, University of Warwick, 12-14-2009,
“The Frequency of Wars,” Warwick Economic Research Papers.
Using a slightly different measure, we trace the origin of the upward trend in the frequency of bilateral conflicts
as far back as 1870. We show that it has proceeded with surprisingly little interruption through two World Wars
nearly to the present day. Befitting a phenomenon that is older than the oldest person alive today, we suggest that deep causes are at
work. Figure 1 charts the number of pairs of countries that have disputed with each other in each year from 1870 to 2001. This is a greater
number than the number of wars for two reasons: first, it accounts for the number of countries involved in each conflict, rather than the
number of conflicts; second, it has wider coverage than formal states of war, because it includes displays as well as uses of military force. The
chart measures the number of pairwise disputes on a logarithmic scale, partly to give a clear picture of what has happened at the lower
frequencies. Viewed in this way, the chart demonstrates the existence of a clear log-linear trend; the
frequency of bilateral
conflicts has been rising for over a century at a steady 2¼ percent per year. To be sure, there was a good deal of
disturbance around the two world wars. But the surprising character of this disturbance is as follows: between 1914 and 1945, the conflicts that
would normally have been distributed across the three decades were either brought forward (to World War I) or postponed (to World War II).
After 1945, the frequency of conflict snapped back to the trend it had followed up to 1914. In principle, the absolute number of pairwise
conflicts per time period, or the absolute frequency, is the product of two underlying variables into which it can therefore be decomposed. One
component is the number of country pairs, which has increased enormously since the nineteenth century. In 1870 the world contained fewer
than 50 independent states. By the end of the twentieth century, there were more than 180. This was associated with the breakup of empires
(Austro-Hungarian, German, Ottoman, Russian, French, British, Dutch, Belgian, Portuguese, and Soviet) and federations (Czechoslovak and
Yugoslav). As a result the total number of possible country pairs in the world between whom relations of peace or war could exist grew from
around one thousand to over 17,000. After the increase in the number of possible pairs is stripped out of the data, we are left with the other
component, the relative frequency of conflicts, that is, the absolute frequency of pairwise conflict normalized for the number of pairs. The
number of countries since 1870 and the relative frequency of conflicts among them are shown together in Chart 2. As the chart shows, in the
first 80 years the number of countries did not change much, but the relative frequency of disputes tended to rise. Then, over the next 40 or so
years, the relative frequency of disputes fell back to the level of the 1870s, but the number of countries increased dramatically, and it was this
that took over as the main driver of the continued rise in the absolute frequency of conflicts. This gives us two possible angles on what has been
going on. Normalized for the number of country pairs, the relative frequency of war does not show a trend and is no higher today than in the
1870s. This might seem to reassure, but should not do so. For, normalized
for the number of planets that all countries
must share – that is one, exactly – the absolute frequency of conflict today is similar to what it was
during World War I.
Alternative – Rejection
Rejection is necessary to solve the regimes of violence that permeate our existence
Simon Dalby, Department of Geography and Environmental Studies, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel
By Drive, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. “Recontextualising violence, power and nature: The next twenty
years of critical geopolitics?” Political Geography 29 (2010)
In diverting attention from the political purpose of critique to the practical lived experiences of people in
bureacracies and the non-representational aspects of text and identity production, Thrift also facilitiates the
traditional modes of doing geography, field work, ethnography, interviews and giving voice to many who are not usually heard. But in
doing so the engagement with the rationalizations of military power and the practices of mapping
that legitimize military action, are abandoned . This may be an engagement with geopolitics very loosely understood, but it is not
the ‘‘tactical’’ form of knowledge that challenges and deconstructs the imperial justifications of violence
that Gerard Toal discusses in the epigraph to this paper. While Thrift (2000) may have no interest in tackling the conceptual infrastructure of military violence, in
abandoning this critical edge his suggested agenda eviscerates the political purpose of critical geopolitics precisely as Macdonald
(in press) suggests by leaving out the ‘‘big things’’. Violence, war, critique But it was a ‘‘big thing’’ that got much of this discussion started
in the first place in the 1980s. War and the cultures of imperialism that legitimated foreign ‘‘interventions’’ were Gerard Toal’s starting point (O ́ Tuathail, 1986), and
a theme that Megoran (2008) has raised again in terms of the relationships of geographical critique to the morality of warfare. In the process he has issued what
amounts to an invitation to discuss much more explicitly the crucial question of violence and how those of us who write critical geopolitics situate ourselves in this
regard. Focusing on Gerard Toal’s discussion of Iraq (O ́ Tuathail, 2003) and Bosnia (O ́ Tuathail, 2005) he effectively poses the question of whether Toal is, to use
the phrasing from his first paper (O ́ Tuathail, 1986), ‘‘practicing geopolitics’’ rather than ‘‘exposing’’ its violence. The suggestion Megoran (2008) makes is that Toal
effectively operates within the categories of just war theory and as such falls prey to the logics of state violence implicit in the theory. But if
one is to
venture into practical politics and take stands on particular instances of state violence these pitfalls await
all practitioners. In so far as the world is divided into spatial entities competing for power, and willing to
use violence or the threat thereof to gain their ends, such logics play out. Of course as Megoran makes clear, spatial
entities don’t compete. Functionaries and politicians within bureaucracies do and the reification of their actions in spatial tropes remains a powerful geographical
sleight of hand that requires continuous critical commentary from us all.
Framework
Ecological degradation is inevitable under the existing legal system
Radical green philosophy is premised on the conviction that the sources of the environmental crisis are
deeply rooted, in modern culture, and therefore fundamental social transformation is necessary if we
are to preserve life on earth in any meaningful sense. This follows from the realization that we cannot
rely on patchwork reforms through more appropriate economics, technology, and regulation, or better
policies gained through green electoral politics. Our public choice mechanisms and technocratic
methods are inherently biased against environmental preservation and conflict prevention. 1 Therefore,
the gradual attrition, degradation, and biological impoverishment of the natural environment are
inevitable under the existing system. To save a wilderness area is to hold a finger in a bursting dam: it
only buys time.
Policy-making leads to the destruction of the environment for the sake of economic
growth
The other superficial ground for optimism is the burgeoning number of environmental professionals
whose role is to advise government and industry. Environmental specialists are multiplying in all
professions, and we now have “environmental” economists, scientists, administrators, lawyers, and
planners promoting marginal reforms. The decision-making methodologies these professions use,
however, are heavily influenced by concepts derived from the mainstream liberal paradigm and are
biased against the preservation of species and ecosystems. For example, because they are geared to
analyzing the costs and benefits of development alternatives, they balance off public needs to meet
private wants over the long term. Even more fundamentally, an instrumentalist and anthropocentric
ethic – whereby human and natural “resources” are construed to have value to the extent that they can
be used for human purposes – is endemic to the technocratic methodologies, decision-making
processes, and regulatory schemes. This ethic is a natural outgrowth of a “power complex” that is so
deeply ingrained in the modern psyche that planners and decision makers who consider themselves
environmentally aware continue to make decisions that facilitate the exponential destruction of the
nonhuman environment by incremental trade-offs of environmental quality for economic growth.
Framework
Our conception of nature is not neutral or natural – the way we speak and perform
has political effects
Furthermore, the environment was instrumental in challenging the boundary of the political as the
environment was, par excellence, the non-political issue. The Enlightenment ethos of progress,
dependent on the exploitation of nature and advancement of science and technology, was rarely
challenged before on these grounds. Nature was never a subject in the moral or political sense. The
realization that natural problems are political, that economic growth - advocated by left and right alike
- encroaches upon Earth's limited resources, and that national systems can hardly address ecological
issues, challenged the underlying assumption concerning the political arena.
We need to re-conceptualize our relationship to nature before we can create effective

political solutions
The third option I want to pursue here is the linkage between environmentalism and 'new politics' - the
argument that environmental politics is not merely about the preservation of nature, but entails a
different conception of what politics is, and how political research should be conducted. For
environmental exploitation has always been an integral aspect of human activities in the world, a
natural part, as it were, of people's way of life. Indeed, the radical transformations in demographic,
geographical and socio-economic patterns, maturing in the late nineteenth century, led the western
industrialized nations to rely heavily on global natural resources for their rapid growth. World
resources were gradually incorporated into one central pool of capital, managed largely through
international market mechanisms, resulting in a rapid depletion of resources on a world-wide scale. It
took recovery from two world wars for relatively affluent and stable advanced industrial democracies
to settle into the bipolarity of the cold war, a balance of power which set in motion environmental
problems, leading to their introduction onto the political agenda. By far the most profound experience
that led environmental awareness to take root in western societies was the real prospect for a global
destruction through nuclear war. The current fear of the use of weapons of mass destruction being
used on innocent populations is the most recent appearance of the same basic worries. The culmination
of global threat and personal anxiety in the name of national interest led to a popular realization that
a thorough assessment of environmental issues is fundamental for a humane future. Nuclear war, the
disposal of nuclear waste, atomic, biological and chemical (ABC) weapons, an accelerated arms race
and the threat of the development of weapons of mass destruction comprise, however, only the tip of
the iceberg of environmental problems threatening to overwhelm the global village.
Framework
Subject formation is what we are trying to accomplish in debate on an everyday level,
we form better subjects by attuning our ethical sensibilities to the violence of
colonialism – comparatively more effective than a hubristic fantasy that we can
change the world
David Chandler, Professor of IR at Westminster, 2013, “The World of Attachment? The Post-humanist
Challenge to Freedom and Necessity,” Millenium: Journal of International Studies, 41(3), 516– 534.
The world of becoming thereby is an ontologically flat world without the traditional hierarchies of existence and a more shared conception of
agency. For Bennett, therefore, ‘to begin to experience the relationship between persons and other materialities more horizontally, is to take a
step toward a more ecological sensibility’.78 Here there is room for human agency but this agency involves a deeper understanding of and
receptivity to the world of objects and object relations. Rather
than the hubristic focus on transforming the external
world, the ethico-political tasks are those of work on the self to erase hubristic liberal traces of subject-
centric understandings, understood to merely create the dangers of existential resentment. Work on
the self is the only route to changing the world . As Connolly states: ‘To embrace without deep resentment a world of
becoming is to work to “become who you are”, so that the word “become” now modifies “are” more than the other way around.’ Becoming
who you are involves the ‘microtactics of the self’, and work on the self can then extend into
‘micropolitics’ of more conscious and reflective choices and decisions and lifestyle choices leading to
potentially higher levels of ethical self-reflectivity and responsibility. Bennett argues that against the ‘narcissism’ of
anthropomorphic understandings of domination of the external world, we need ‘some tactics for cultivating the experience of our selves as
vibrant matter’. Rather
than hubristically imagining that we can shape the world we live in, Bennett argues that:
‘Perhaps the ethical
responsibility of an individual human now resides in one’s response to the
assemblages in which one finds oneself participating. Such ethical tactics include reflecting more on our relationship to
what we eat and considering the agentic powers of what we consume and enter into an assemblage with. In doing so, if ‘an image of inert
matter helps animate our current practice of aggressively wasteful and planet-endangering consumption, then a materiality experienced as a
lively force with agentic capacity could animate a more ecologically sustainable public’. For new materialists, the
object to be changed
or transformed is the human – the human mindset. By changing the way we think about the world and the
way we relate to it by including broader, more non-human or inorganic matter in our considerations, we will have overcome
our modernist ‘attachment disorders’ and have more ethically aware approaches to our planet. In
cultivating these new ethical sensibilities, the human can be remade with a new self and a ‘new self-
interest’.
AT: Perm
Working within the system only feeds the existing system marginalizing other forms of
politics
Thus, while it is important to work for electoral success, environmental consciousness, better policies,
and more scientific research, these cannot change the deeply rooted behavior patterns and structural
relationships that led to the environmental crisis in the first place. Nor can these change the nature of
the decision-making methods and processes that support business as usual. If we value life, then we
must transform the cultural and institutional infrastructure 3_— our frameworks of thinking, relating,
and acting. The question is, how do we get from here to there? This is where green philosophies divide.
High risk of cooption

There is another problem with political "success." Pressure politics is a matter of power, and while
power attracts new talent, it also can divide and corrupt. We are beginning to see this in the green
movement in Australia. Many "nouveau greens" seeking positions in the public arena lack a deep
analysis or an ethical commitment sufficient to prevent the compromise of principles or a latent agenda
of personal power. The process of cooptation has begun: a pluralist environmental movement is
gradually being transformed into a structure of corporatist representation and mediation. 2 The
legitimation of environmental interests by incorporation into existing decisionmaking structures, as has
happened with the labor movement, cannot resolve the underlying psychological and behavioral causes
of environmental or social conflict.
Total rejection is necessary – the perm cannot solve

James Der Derian, Director of the Global security Program and Research Professor of International
Studies at the Watson Institute for International Studies at Brown University, Prof. of IR @ UMass –
Amherst and Brown University, 1999, “A Virtual Theory of Global Politics, Mimetic War and the Spectral
State,” Proceedings of the Annual Meeting (American Society of International Law), Vol. 93 (MARCH 24-
27, 1999), pp. 163-176, JSTOR
The spatialist, materialist, that is, realist, bias of thinking in international theory renders it inadequate
for a critical inquiry into the temporal, representational, deterritorial and potentially dangerous powers
of virtual technologies. Semiotic, critical and discourse theories offer a better perspective, having led the
way in tracing the reconfiguration of power into new representational,
immaterial forms. They have helped us to understand how acts of inscription and the production of
information can reify consciousness, float signifiers and render concepts undecidable. However, as the
realities of international politics increasingly are generated, mediated and simulated by successive
technical means of reproduction, there is not so much a distancing from some original, truth-bearing
source as there is an implosion, in which meaning disappears into a media black hole of insignificance.
As the globalization and virtualization of new media sunder meaning from conventional moorings, and
set information adrift as it moves with alacrity and celerity from phenomenal to virtual forms, one
searches for new modes of understanding.
AT: Perm
Fear based politics takes over the advocacy – they cannot sever the links we isolate
Importantly, in accounts such as those listed above, fear plays an active role in the containment of history to the
present. As Ahmed claims, “fear works to secure the relationships between […] bodies” (2004: 63) operating as
to preserve the subject in its present identity. As such, it “involves shrinking the body” (2004: 69), restricting “its
mobility precisely insofar as it seems to prepare the body for fight” (Ibid.). As may be evident, this fear does not
operate on an individual level, rather it is a strictly social logic of affect – it collects nations together, it assembles
bodies into formation, be it those that are perceived as insecure or those that may cause harm (Ibid.: 64,
77). As such, it has been claimed that fear both unites and divides, uniting the nation against a common enemy,
following a Schmittian logic of sovereign power, and dividing the nation by consolidating internal
stratification (Robin, 2004: 162), arguably providing the rational for internal surveillance so present in today’s
world (Lewis, 2009). This combination of unity and division has been taken as to make fear into a “rational moral
emotion” (Ibid.) invested in power, as well as to serve as a particular description of US politics (Ibid.).
Importantly, fear is also sticky, Ahmed claims, in the sense that it can move from body to body, from one threatening
object to another, seemingly without logic, sticking words like “’terrorist’ and ‘Islam’ together” (Ibid.: 76),
associations that stick not despite their arbitrary relations but because of them; because their
interrelation is feared rather than known (Ibid.). The representations of this feeling, it is said, is now heard and
seen every-where, “in real time, all the time” (Der Derian, 2005: 26), produced and channelled by the security
discourse of the US post 9/11 (Debrix, 2005; Bleikner & Hutchinson, 2008; Loseke, 2009), indeed even our very geography
is now coloured by the level of fear one is supposed to feel at specific places (Massumi, 2005).
AT: Perm
The fear they isolate is pre-rational – it create the ground work for their consciousness
making any attempt to sever it impossible
Living fearfully in the future, so described, is hence to be arrested in the moment. It is to be paralyzed (Massumi,
2005: 36), yet not so by being caught in the present confined by actual language previously discussed as the
definition of power, but by its very opposite, by never being able to appear in actuality, by being arrested in a
moment of immobility, thereby circumscribing action. Elsewhere, Massumi has described this mode of being
as the very opposite of bare life (Agamben, 1998) – a fully present life, “stripped of its human content, its
vitality reduced to the physical minimum” (Massumi, 2011) – rather this life is “bare activity” (Ibid., original emphasis),
a life caught in the instant, in the affective moment “without determinable content”. Framed as such, this paralysis
makes the future impossible, yet not by dictating its content to be the same as the present, but precisely by reducing its
capacity to take shape, to appear with a given content. This begs the question: When the present is the
future, what possibility is there for another futurity to arise?
Predictions Fail
The more precise their prediction, the more skeptical you should be
Tim Richards, market analyst, 7-4-2012, “Clueless: Meet the Overprecise Pundits,” The Psy-Fi Blog,
http://www.psyfitec.com/2012/07/clueless-meet-overprecise-pundits.html
Most short-term opinions on markets or any system that includes human beings as part of the
machinery are generally worthless in a financial sense. Mostly we can’t predict what side of the bed
our children will emerge from in the morning so why anyone should expect to be able to accurately
forecast the outcome of the interactions of millions of people remains an abiding mystery. Despite this
reams of words are written each day by pundits safe in the knowledge that today’s news is forgotten
tomorrow and that expressing unwarranted certainty is the way to succeed. They’ve learned that
extreme, albeit incorrect, precision will fool most of the people most of the time, and no one ever
checks. Pundit Marketplaces We’re especially attracted to people who express certainty about the
future. Since the future is virtually unforeseeable these gurus are, at best, deluding themselves but
they’re tapping into our desire to believe that the world isn’t the nasty, brutish and unpredictable place
it really is. The counter to this is that forecasters who are precisely wrong will, eventually, be uncovered
and revealed to be the fraudulent charlatans they really are. This should be the effect of the
marketplace on ideas but unfortunately it turns out that we tend to disregard feedback, which
presumably is why there are thousands of media pundits out there pushing their unsubstantiated
opinions onto a gullible public, safe in the knowledge that they can write or say pretty much anything
they want, because no one will ever hold it against them. When Joseph Radzevick and Don Moore
analysed peoples’ responses to overconfident investment judgements in Competing to be Certain (But
Wrong) they noted that the preferred advisors were the ones that expressed the most confidence that
they were right – even though they were frequently wrong – yet they didn’t suffer any reputational
damage. This aligns with Philip Tetlock’s famous research on political pundits that suggests the more
famous the procrastinator the worse their prediction accuracy (see: Expert Political Judgment: How
Good Is It? How Can We Know?).
Ocean Management Kritik
1NC Shell
THESIS: The vast oceans of the planet are home to many things humans see as “resources”. We extract
those “resources” at escalating rates. Then we realize we’ve gone too far. Management schemes are
implemented to secure our resources and development new sources. This takes many forms but
generally treat oceans as a “standing reserve” for human exploitation. Managerialist thinking toward
the environment means we enact biopolitical regulations informed by purely scientific perspectives that
enframe Being. Under such a framework, all the Affirmative impacts become inevitable. Instead, we
should “do nothing”, or refuse to act in the face of the plan.
A. Human use and manipulation of the oceans represents the apex of capital mobility
and exploitation, where marine biodiversity gets transformed into biotechnology
products
Stefan Helmreich, Associate Professor in Anthropology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
2007, “Blue-green Capital, Biotechnological Circulation and an Oceanic Imaginary: A Critique of
Biopolitical Economy,” BioSocieties, 2, pp. 287–302
The ‘globe’ imagined in ‘globalization’ is a closed system, a finite sphere crisscrossed by flows of people,
goods and media. Such an encircling topology coalesced from circuits of mercantilism, capitalism and
colonialism. With the Cold War and the rise of environmentalism, the globe acquired a scientific icon in
the image of Earth from space, a blue-green orb of mostly oceans. At the millennium’s turn, the Pacific,
once the westward limit of the American frontier, morphed into a futuristic force field holding together
the Pacific Rim, host to new currents of transoceanic market and telecommunication processes. For
believers in the end of history, West spiraled around to meet East, fulfilling a market manifest destiny.
The ocean has been a key stage for this tale since, as Philip Steinberg argues in The social construction of
the ocean, the West has developed an ‘idealization of the deep sea as a great void of distance, suitable
for annihilation by an ever-expanding tendency toward capital mobility’ . ‘The ocean’, writes Chris
Connery, ‘has long functioned as capital’s myth element’ , a zone of unencumbered capital circulation,
most evident, perhaps, in oceanic vectors of conquest and commerce, from the triangular trade to the
transnational traffic of container ships. But the ocean has been more than a channel for trade; it has also
been a resource. Nowadays, it is being inspected for a new kind of wealth that might travel into global
markets: marine biodiversity transmogrified into biotechnology.
B. Environmental management generates new regimes of biopolitical control that

jeopardizes all life
Timothy W. Luke, Program Chair of the Government and International Affairs Program, School of Public
and International Affairs at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 1997, Ecocritique, p.90-
91
This meaning for sustainable development in Worldwatch discourse reframes it in the practices of
technoscientific power/ knowledge. One can argue that the modern regime of biopower formation
described by Foucault in early modern states was not especially attentive to the role of Nature in the
equations of biopolitic. The controlled tactics of inserting human bodies into the machineries of
industrial and agricultural production as part and parcel of strategically adjusting the growth of human
populations to the development of industrial capitalism, however, did generate systems of biopower.
Under such regimes, power/ knowledge systems bring "life and its mechanisms into the realm of explicit
calculations," making the manifold disciplines of knowledge and discourses of power into a new sort of
productive agency as part of the "transformation of human life. " Once this threshold was crossed, some
observers began to recognize how the environmental interactions of human economics, politics, and
technologies continually placed all human beings' existence as living beings into question.
C. Their reliance on technological thinking represents a will to order the world and
instrumentalize life
Louis E. Wolcher, Professor of Law, University of Washington School of Law, February, 2004, “”The
End of Technology: A Polemic,” Washington Law Review, 79 Wash. L. Rev. 331
From a Heideggerian perspective, today's world has become a standing reserve because technological
thinking allows nature to reveal itself only in the form of what can be continuously computed and
counted on for present or future use by human beings. "Everything is ordered to stand by, to be
immediately at hand, indeed to stand there just so that it may be on call for further ordering." The idea
of "enlightenment" in such conditions becomes the monstrous demand that everything be explained in
terms of grounds that are readily accessible to procedures of domination and control. Thus,
technological thinking is not just a reflection of the will to master things - it is also the compulsion to
master things on the basis of correct procedure: it leads to what Slavoj Zizek calls "the all-pervasive
predominance of "instrumental Reason,' of the bureaucratization and instrumentalization of our life-
world." The chaotic, surprising, and spontaneous in nature and in human relations show themselves as
suspicious and dangerous to technological thinking: "problems" to be overcome by appropriate
administrative solutions.
D. Ocean science claims are not neutral, but shape our understanding and
managerialist failures
Deborah Jane Kennedy, Doctoral Candidate, 2007, Ocean views: an investigation into human-ocean
relations. PhD thesis, Murdoch University, pp. 143-144,
http://researchrepository.murdoch.edu.au/123/, Accessed 4/4/2014
That fisheries science is tied up with certain values and beliefs is an important matter to address
because there is great store attached to the idea that science produces objective knowledge. Ocean
matters are widely perceived as scientific concerns: Government institutions, industry,
environmentalists and other interest groups, the media and the public draw heavily on scientific advice
to interpret marine environmental issues. Scientific assessments are used in shaping regulatory
decisions and other protection initiatives. Thus, science has a profound effect on the way we think of,
and interact with, oceans in Western societies. In recent decades, the failures of fisheries science have
undermined claims to its authority to guide the sustainable human exploitation of oceans. Rather,
uncertainty in the capacity of science to develop theories and make accurate predictions about complex
and dynamic ocean environments has come to the fore. I have contextualised MPA science as a
response to this uncertainty.
E. Vote negative to do nothing in response to the Affirmative. This opens space for a
broader analysis of how power relations shape environmental failures
Timothy Luke, Department of Political Science, Virginia Polytechnic, 2001, “Education, Environment
and Sustainability: What are the issues, where to intervene, what must be done?,” Educational
Philosophy and Theory, Vol. 33, No. 2, pp. 107-202
To create a truly more sustainable society, environmental education must unravel the complicated
cycles of production and consumption, which are interwoven through most technological and economic
practices in contemporary transnational commerce and this unravelling must show how these cycles are
verging upon almost complete chaos. Highly planned programmes for economic growth are creating
many unintended and unplanned outcomes of environmental destruction, boosting society’ s already
high ecological risks to even higher levels. Most steps taken to mitigate these risks will not be executed
with much certainty of successfully gaining their intended ends. Doing anything could make everything
worse, doing nothing might make something better. At this juncture, environmental education must
redefine some shared values for an ecological society. Unfortunately, most academic disciplines, from
ecology to economics, are shackled by a set of disciplinary practices that constrain the imagination to ® t
the approved scope and correct method of normal disciplinary inquiry. When Eugene Odum, for
example, asserts that ecology is a `major interdisciplinary science that links together the biological,
physical, and social sciences’, very few biological, physical, or social scientists accept this broad
interdisciplinary charge. Any ecology worth of its name would concede immediately that the economy
and society are the Earth’ s main environments. This reality is acknowledged by Moscovici in his re-
elections about the question of nature in the contemporary world system. That is, science and
technology have reconstituted humanity as a new material force, working on planetary basis. Ìn 200 T.
W. Luke short’ , he asserts, `the state of nature is not now just an economy of things; it has become at
the same time the work of human beings. The fact is that we are dealing with a new nature’. This fact
and how the work of human beings continuously remediates this new nature are what environmental
education must address to attain sustainability. Without sinking into a green foundationalist stance,
environmental education must weave an analysis of power, politics and the state into an ecology’ s
sense of sustainability, survival and the environment. This kind of interdisciplinary effort could develop a
deeply contextual understanding of nature and society as holistic cluster of interdependent relations.
This view should integrate a clear sense of how ecological constraints must reshape
social/political/economic/cultural practices to move past the technological and environmental failings of
the present global economy. In turn, this critical account of humanity’ s ecological failings, once it came
common in environmental education classes, should open broader dialogues about how individuals, as
both citizens and consumers, can intervene as defenders of their local habitats in many corners of today’
s global economy.
Links
Links – General Topic

Managerial thinking reduces oceans to a standing reserve where the oceans and
forests are commodities for sale. This translates to an ontology that seeks to control
populations and erases alternative modes of Being
Ladelle McWhorter, Assistant Professor of Philosophy, Northeastern Missouri State University, 1992,
Heidegger and the Earth: Essays in Environmental Philosophy, pp. 11-12
The danger of a managerial approach to the world lies not, then, in what it knows - not in its penetration
into the secrets of galactic emergence or nuclear fission - but in what it forgets, what it itself conceals. It
forgets that any other truths are possible, and it forgets that the belonging together of revealing with
concealing is forever beyond the power of human management. We can never have, or know, it all; we
can never manage everything.
What is now especially dangerous about this sense of our own managerial power, born of forgetfulness,
is that it results in our viewing the world as mere resources to be stored or consumed. Managerial or
technological thinkers, Heidegger says, view the earth, the world, all things as mere Bestand, standing-
reserve.
All is here simply for human use. No plant, no animal, no ecosystem has a life of its own, has any
significance, apart from human desire and need. Nothing, we say, other than human beings, has any
intrinsic value. All things are instruments for the working out of human will. Whether we believe that
God gave Man dominion or simply that human might (sometimes called intelligence or rationality) in the
face of ecological fragility makes us always right, we managerial, technological thinkers tend to believe
that the earth is only a stockpile or a set of commodities to be managed, bought, and sold. The forest is
timber; the river, a power source. Even people have become resources, human resources, personnel to
be managed, or populations to be controlled. This managerial, technological mode of revealing,
Heidegger says, is embedded in and constitutive of Western culture and has been gathering strength for
centuries. Now it is well on its way to extinguishing all other modes of revealing, all other ways of being
human and being earth. It will take tremendous effort to think through this danger, to think past it and
beyond, tremendous courage and resolve to allow thought of the mystery to come forth; thought of the
inevitability, along with revealing, of concealment, of loss, of ignorance; thought of the occurring of
things and their passage as events not ultimately under human control. And of course even the call to
allow this thinking - couched as it so often must be in a grammatical imperative appealing to an agent -
is itself a paradox, the first ':uat must be faced and allowed to speak to us and to shatter us as it scatters
thinking in new directions, directions of which we have not yet dreamed, directions of which we may
never dream.
All environmental policies are managerialist

Timothy W. Luke, Program Chair in the Government and International Affairs, School of Public and
International Affairs, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, March 18-22, 1997, “The
(Un)Wise (Ab)Use of Nature: Environmentalism as Globalized Consumerism?,” Presented at the annual
meeting of the International Studies Association, http://www.cddc.vt.edu/tim/tims/Tim528.PDF,
Accessed 4/3/2014
An environmental act, even though the connotations of most contemporary greenspeak suggests
otherwise, is a disciplinary move. Environmentalism in these terms strategically polices space in order to
encircle sites and subjects captured within these enveloping maneuvers, guarding them, standing watch
over them, or even besieging them. And, each of these actions aptly express the terraforming programs
of sustainable development. Seen from the astropanopticon, Earth is enveloped in the managerial
designs of global commerce, which environmentalize once wild Nature as now controllable ecosystems.
Terraforming the wild biophysical excesses and unoptimized geophysical wastes of the Earth
necessitates the mobilization of a worldwatch to maintain nature conservancies and husband the
worldwide funds of wildlife. Of course, Earth must be put first; the fully rational potentials of second
nature's terraformations can be neither fabricated nor administered unless and until earth first is
infrastructuralized.
The drive to “protect” or “restore” nature reflects a managerialist perspective

Eric Katz, associate professor of philosophy and director of the Science, Technology, and Society
Program, New Jersey Institute of Technology, 2000, Nature as Subject: Human Obligation and Natural
Community, p. 95
In this essay I question the environmentalists' concern for the restoration of nature and argue against
the optimistic view that humanity has the obligation and ability to repair or reconstruct damaged
natural systems. This conception of environmental policy and environmental ethics is based on a
misperception of natural reality and a misguided understanding of the human place in the natural
environment. On a simple level, it is the same kind of "technological fix" that has engendered the
environmental crisis. Human science and technology will fix, repair, and improve natural processes.
Links – Alternative / Renewable Energy

The drive to find new energy for human use turn nature into a standing reserve
Tad Beckman, Emeritus Professor of Philosophy, Humanities and Social Sciences at Harvey Mudd
College, 2000, “Martin Heidegger and Environmental Ethics,”
http://www2.hmc.edu/~tbeckman/personal/Heidart.html, Accessed 3/15/2014
Heidegger clearly saw the development of "energy resources" as symbolic of this evolutionary path;
while the transformation into modern technology undoubtedly began early, the first definitive signs of
its new character began with the harnessing of energy resources, as we would say. As a representative
of the old technology, the windmill took energy from the wind but converted it immediately into other
manifestations such as the grinding of grain; the windmill did not unlock energy from the wind in order
to store it for later arbitrary distribution. Modern wind-generators, on the other hand, convert the
energy of wind into electrical power which can be stored in batteries or otherwise. The significance of
storage is that it places the energy at our disposal; and because of this storage the powers of nature can
be turned back upon itself. The storing of energy is, in this sense, the symbol of our over-coming of
nature as a potent object. "...a tract of land is challenged into the putting out of coal and ore. The earth
now reveals itself as a coal mining district, the soil as a mineral deposit." This and other examples that
Heidegger used throughout this essay illustrate the difference between a technology that diverts the
natural course cooperatively and modern technology that achieves the unnatural by force. Not only is
this achieved by force but it is achieved by placing nature in our subjective context, setting aside natural
processes entirely, and conceiving of all revealing as being relevant only to human subjective needs.
The Affirmative’s call for “environmentally friendly” energy is a pretext to manage

environmental affairs that suppresses radical alternatives
David Parker and Barry Larsen, Editors, Well Sharp, January 23, 2008, “An ecosocialist critique of
sustainable development: maintaining growth through sustainable degradation,”
http://wellsharp.wordpress.com/2008/01/23/an-ecosocialist-critique-of-sustainable-development-
maintaining-growth-through-sustainable-degradation/, Accessed 4/7/2014
Luke uses the term ‘ecomanagerialism’ to describe the shift of corporate thinking about environmental
issues into more positive ‘environmentally friendly’ channels. This shift has occurred with the gradual
acceptance of the natural world as one of the necessary pre-conditions of any profitable business
enterprise. For example, environmentalists have worked hard over many years to move the business
approach to resource exploitation away from ‘sustained maximum yield’ and towards sustainability;
successes have been achieved through a combination of activism, resource management legislation,
tradeable quotas, global competition, and bench-marking and eco-labelling. Extensive monitoring is also
part of the picture, as it is a necessary part of maintaining keeping sustainable business practices on
track. Overall, the shifts in attitudes and practices embodied by ecomanagerialism have effectively
blunted calls for more radical green economic alternatives and at the same time have allowed society to
maintain its aspirations for continuing growth and expanding consumption.
Links – Aquaculture (Marine) / Mariculture

Marine fish farming can decimate whole ecosystems and pollute the food chain
John Marra, the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University, July 14, 2005, “When will
we tame the oceans?,” Nature, Vol. 436, pp. 175-176.
As with the rearing of land animals, fish farming can harm the environment in many ways; indeed, some
mariculture operations have caused whole-scale destruction of coastal ecosystems. First, marine
farming can pollute in ways that are aesthetically, chemically and genetically destructive. Coastal
mariculture systems spoil ocean views and affect property values. Chemicals added to fish feed, such as
colourings and hormones, find their way into the seabed, from where they can enter benthic food webs.
And genetic pollution, whereby domesticated species escape their enclosures and infect the gene pool
of wild fish stocks or replace endemic species, is a troubling prospect. Second, crowding in aquaculture
enclosures or ponds can easily amplify disease and cause it to spread more quickly than it would in the
wild. Third, the mariculture of carnivorous species puts additional pressures on fisheries to provide ever
larger quantities of wild fish for feed, exacerbating the decline of wild fish populations. In some fish
farms, the consumption of small pelagics, such as anchovy or sardine, by commercial fish (salmon, for
example), actually exceeds commercial-fish production, in terms of biomass.
Links – “Biodiversity” / “Sustainability” Rhetoric

Their ocean “biodiversity” and “sustainability” rhetoric is a smokescreen for new
modes of capital instrumentalism
Stefan Helmreich, Associate Professor in Anthropology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
2007, “Blue-green Capital, Biotechnological Circulation and an Oceanic Imaginary: A Critique of
Biopolitical Economy,” BioSocieties, 2, pp. 287–302
This enthusiasm for diversity is a key sentiment animating biotech capitalism. Since its coinage,
biodiversity has become infectiously polyvalent. Cori Hayden lists meanings it has accreted: ‘an
ecological workhorse, essential raw material for evolution, a sustainable economic resource, the source
of aesthetic and ecological value, of option and existence value, a global heritage, genetic capital, the
key to the survival of life itself’. For marine biotechnologists in America, marine biodiversity represents a
frontier form of biodiversity: healing waters writ large, full of new genes awaiting amplification,
delivering what marine microbiologist Rita Colwell (director of NSF 1998–2004) early on called ‘entirely
new ‘‘harvests’’ from the sea’. Insofar as humans make use of this new nature by capitalizing it, the
prevailing sentiment goes, they must do so ‘sustainably’ by protecting ‘diversity’, understood as a
positive value. No wonder a biotech company named itself Diversa.
“Biodiversity” is rhetorically constructed to represent a need for management

Chikako Takeshita, Science and Technology Studies at Virginia Polytechnic Institute, 2001,
“Bioprospecting and Its Discontents: Indigenous Resistances as Legitimate Politics,” Alternatives, v. 26,
pp.259-292
This section focuses on the construct of the rhetoric of bioprospecting and the effects of its discursive
powers over indigenous peoples and their affairs, starting from the analysis of the notion of biodiversity.
Although biodiversity has concrete biophysical constructs, it should also be “seen as a discursive
invention of recent origin.” A popular view of “biodiversity” has been produced by dominant
institutions such as the World Bank and the environmental NGOs and supported by G-7 countries,
where “biodiversity” represents the “threatened” habitats of diverse, rare, and useful microorganisms,
plants, and animals. Based on the recognition that these threatened habitats require protection the
discourse of biodiversity conservation also “offers a set of prescriptions for the conservation and
sustainable use of resources at the international, national, and local levels” and “suggests appropriate
mechanisms for biodiversity management.”
“Sustainability” approaches treat Nature as a standing reserve

John Girdwood, School of Accounting, Faculty of Economics and Business, The University of Sydney,
2008, “Rethinking sustainability, neo-liberalism and environmental managerialism in accounting,”
http://sydney.edu.au/business/__data/assets/pdf_file/ 0004/56614/ Rethinking_neoliberalism.pdf,
Accessed 3/24/2014
Hence, sustainability needs to be understood in relation to the historical circumstances of systems of
dispersion and translation, including global governmentality and the political project of governing
international and other hybrid spaces. In this context, sustainability enables the transgression of limits of
dominant political regimes of truth about the desired progress and futures of parts (geopolitical terrains,
the oceans and seas, the atmosphere, etc.) or the whole curved, morphing surface of the earth. Here
the earth is understood to be an historically contingent assembled artifact of a shifting ensemble of
forces without any essential intrinsic nature.
The call to preserve “biodiversity” treats Nature as a standing reserve

Chikako Takeshita, Science and Technology Studies at Virginia Polytechnic Institute, 2001,
“Bioprospecting and Its Discontents: Indigenous Resistances as Legitimate Politics,” Alternatives, v. 26,
pp.259-292
The prevailing idea behind this notion of “biodiversity” is that nature should be preserved and managed
sustainably as if it were resource for capital. To use political economist Martin O’Connor’s terminology,
capital has entered a new “ecological phase”. The supply-side crisis of environmental resources caused
by overexploitation and the rise of social movements against environmental destruction have led to the
modification of the dynamic of capitalism. Because it has become costly to treat nature as “an external
and exploitable domain,” nature is now “redefined as itself a stock of capital,” and the biological milieu
is codified as tradable goods.
Links – Ecological Crisis/Security

The 1AC is ridden with securitizing environmental claims of disaster. Only the
alternative opens space to understand Being and its relation to Empire
Simon Dalby, CIGI chair in the political economy of climate change at the Balsillie School of
International Affairs and professor of geography and environmental studies at Wilfrid Laurier University,
May 2004, “Ecological Politics, Violence, and the Theme of Empire,” Global Environmental Politics, 4:2,
pp. 1-11
Finally, it is important to emphasize that the development of "science" and the knowledge that it
produces is not divorced from social and economic context. Mike Davis shows this, so eloquently and so
tragically, in his analysis of the rise of meteorology and the extension of European empires in the
nineteenth century. In providing preliminary evidence of what was only much later understood to be the
El Nino Southern Oscillation phenomenon, meteorological science charted a picture of a cruel and
unpredictable nature that could easily be blamed for famine in various parts of the world. Nature as
precarious and fickle let European imperial grain merchants off the hook for the disruptions to the
global patterns of food production that were a major contributing cause to the famines. Environmental
science too is tied into the thinking of empire here at the largest of scales; not least when it provides
powerful support for neo-Malthusian arguments about overpopulation, nature and all sorts of disasters
in "far away" places, whether understood as matters of environmental security, or not. Empire directly
challenges how the theme of the global is formulated in environmental politics. The abstractions of
global and local obscure both the histories of environmental change and the contemporary flows across
political boundaries. The immense advantage of studies such as those included in Magnusson and
Shaw's volume on one very particular place, Clayoquot Sound on the West Coast of Canada, is that the
spatial tropes of contemporary administration, and political studies in many disciplines, are revealed as
very inadequate starting points for analysis. Linking environment and empire explicitly allows for
reflection on the taken for granted identities of both protagonists and scholars in the debate about
global environmental politics. Understanding our own roles as urban consumers in the metropoles of
empire is a useful corrective to assumptions of dispassionate scholarly identities. It also allows
appropriate contextualization of the crucial matters of environmental history to be added explicitly into
the discussion of environmental politics. In addition empire constructs matters of violence and the
environment in a way that rejects the alarmist neo-Malthusian temptations of environmental security
discourse. For all these reasons the theme of empire has very considerable potential to advance
scholarship in global environmental politics.
Their rush to act to prevent an ecological crisis is the thinking that led to crisis in the
first place. We must instead question the acting subject
Heidegger and the Earth: Essays in Environmental Philosophy, pp. vii-viii
When we attempt to think ecologically and within Heidegger's discourse (or perhaps better: when we
attempt to think Heideggerly within ecological concerns), the paradoxical unfolds at the site of the
question of human action. Thinking ecologically - that is, thinking the earth in our time - means thinking
death; it means thinking catastrophe; it means thinking the possibility of utter annihilation not just for
human being but for all that lives on this planet and for the living planet itself. Thinking the earth in our
time means thinking what presents itself as that which must not be allowed to go on, as that which must
be controlled, as that which must be stopped. Such thinking seems to call for immediate action. There is
no time to lose. We must work for change, seek solutions, curb appetites, reduce expectations, find
cures now, before the problems become greater than anyone's ability to solve them - if they have not
already done so. However, in the midst of this urgency, thinking ecologically, thinking Heideggerly,
means rethinking the very notion of human action. It means placing in question our typical Western
managerial approach to problems, our propensity for technological intervention, our belief in human
cognitive power, our commitment to a metaphysics that places active human being over against
passive nature. For it is the thoughtless deployment of these approaches and notions that has brought
us to the point of ecological catastrophe in the first place. Thinking with Heidegger, thinking
Heideggerly and ecologically, means, paradoxically, acting to place in question the acting subject, willing
a displacing of our will to action; it means calling ourselves as selves to rethink our very selves, insofar
as selfhood in the West is constituted as agent, as actor, as controlling ego, as knowing consciousness.
Heidegger's work calls us not to rush in with quick solutions, not to act decisively to put an end to
deliberation, but rather to think, to tarry with thinking unfolding itself, to release ourselves to thinking
without provision or predetermined aim.
Representations of global environmental catastrophes justify disciplinary

management schemes global domination from above. This fosters an alienated
subjectivity of exploitation
Accessed 4/3/2014
This is our time's Copernican revolution: the anthropogenic demands of terraforming require a
biocentric worldview in which the alienated objectivity of natural subjectivity resurfaces objectively in
managerial theory and practice as "ecosystem" and "resource base" in "the environment." Terraforming
the Earth environmentalizes a once wild piece of the cosmos, domesticating it as "humanity's home" or
"our environment." From narratives of world pandemics, global warming, or planetary pollution, global
governance from the astropanopticon now runs its risk analyses and threat scenarios to protect Mother
Earth from home-grown and foreign threats, as the latest security panics over asteroid impacts or X-File
extraterrestrials in the United States express in the domains of popular culture. Whether it is space
locusts from Independence Day or space rocks snuffing out Dallas in Asteroid, new security threats are
casting their shadows over our homes, cities, and biomes for those thinking geo-economically in the
astropanopticon.
From such sites of supervision, environmentalists see from above and from without, like the NASA-eyed
view of Earth from Apollo spacecraft, through the enveloping astropanoptic designs of administratively
controllable terraformed systems. Encircled by enclosures of alarm, environments can be disassembled,
recombined, and subjected to expert managers' disciplinary designs. Beset and beleaguered by these all-
encompassing interventions, environments as ecosystems and terraformations can be redirected to
fulfill the ends of new economic scripts, managerial directives or administrative writs. How various
environmentalists might embed different instrumental rationalities into the policing of ecosystems is an
intriguing question, which will be explored below.
Links – Fisheries Management

Fisheries science and industry interests converge to construct the ocean as a standing
reserve
relations. PhD thesis, Murdoch University, p. 143, http://researchrepository.murdoch.edu.au/123/,
Accessed 4/4/2014
Scientific theories and practices, Iike other aspects of human interaction with ocean environments, have
a relationship with particular cultural beliefs and values. I have given sustained attention to the
relationship expressed in conventional fisheries science because of its power and propensity for the
over-exploitation of fisheries and their ecosystems. I have argued that the dominance of short-term
economic goals of industry in conjunction with fisheries science imposes a view of oceans as factories.
The dominance of fishing industry goals in relation to the oceans reduces the possibilities that other
visions for the oceans (environmental, social and cultural) can be adequately expressed. Moreover, the
relationship expressed in conventional fisheries science between science and its objects of study is
monological in character; in the sense that it only pays attention to the agents of so-called rationality
(humans), based on a dualistic understanding that humans are separate from and independent of the
oceans.
Industrial fishing is a prime example of how treating the ocean as a standing reserve
decimates the environment
John Marra, the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University, July 14, 2005, “When will
we tame the oceans?,” Nature, Vol. 436, pp. 175-176.
Since the end of the last ice age, and increasingly since the beginning of the industrial revolution,
humans have affected the evolution of plant species, found uses for animals, and caused losses of
wildlife. In short, we have altered land-based ecosystems to serve our own ends, reaping the benefits
(civilization) and also bearing some of the costs (for example, increases in animal-borne disease). Similar
changes have occurred in the ocean, albeit more slowly because of its size and inhospitable nature. So
far, changes in the ocean mirror what has happened on land: habitat destruction, major shifts in the
communities of plants and animals, and the loss of larger animal species. Fishing, which is essentially
hunting in the ocean, is a direct or indirect cause of many of these changes — from the loss of large
marine mammals to habitat destruction. Incessant hunting, with increasing technological proficiency,
has decimated fish populations worldwide. Catches of large marine species, such as swordfish and tuna,
have declined by 80% over the past 20 years. Northern cod, historically a dietary mainstay, and a species
once thought inexhaustible, is all but commercially extinct in the western North Atlantic. In many areas,
bottom trawls have scoured the seabed clean. These are just a few examples of the “long and miserable
record” of hunting in the ocean.
Policies to regulate fisheries and control fish stocks are rooted in managerial thinking.
Policies like the Affirmative treat ocean life as a standing reserve
Dean Louis Yelwa Bavington, 1997, “An Unhealthy Neighbourhood At An Inauspicious Hour:
Environmental Management During the ‘Ecocrisis’,” a thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate
Studies of York University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master in
Environmental Studies, http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/obj/s4/f2/dsk2/ftp04/mq22844.pdf,
Accessed 3/24/2014
This can be illustrated using several examples from the management of the Newfoundland cod fisheries.
When the fisheries collapsed, many factors were blamed for the near extinction of the Northern cod,
but few questioned the management paradigm itself. Instead, seal population explosions were blamed;
the science behind fisheries management was blamed; stochastic events in nature were blamed, and the
bureaucratic structure of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans was targeted as the underlying cause
of the collapse. However, the assumptions of the management paradigm were never questioned, and
the simple question "Management of what?" was rarely posed or problematized. The assumption of a
world made of resources and the "I-It" relationship between managers and the managed was not
questioned. Since the collapse, policy proposals have been tabled to "professionalize" all fishers; the
culling of seals has been encouraged under the assumption that it will help fish stocks recover,
International transferable quota systems, more advanced stochastic-bad fisheries management
modelling has emerged within DFO, and a restructuring at DFO has shifted its emphasis to reflect more
"community" involvement in fisheries management. In addition, the provincial and federal governments
have expanded the influence of the management paradigm by maintaining marine management
structures aimed at predicting “wild" fish stocks, while encouraging and supporting the development
and expansion of the more "predictable" aquaculture sector. All of these proposals strengthen,
managerial thinking, particularly the move to professionalize the fisheries and to encourage the
development of aquaculture.
Fisheries management policies work to sustain oceans as standing reserves for capital
accumulation
Another important feature of the development of fisheries science—indeed, from its inception at the
turn of the twentieth century—was the conviction that science and technology would make possible
greater understanding and control of the marine environment. It was expected that science and
technology would find the tools to address declining fish stocks, increase others and discover new ones.
This conviction became most intense in the period following World War II. Rozwadowski describes the
prevailing confidence of the era: ‘Post-World War II Europe held a newly abiding faith modem science
and technology would solve the western world's practical problems. Fisheries scientists shared this
optimism for the prospect of effective conservation of fish stocks enlarged by the wartime fishery
closures. The failure to take advantage of the post-World War I opportunity to protect stocks
heightened their resolve. In 1947 one scientist stated with confidence, 'It is now possible to formulate
measures of control which, when aided by continuous scientific supervision, will permit a rational
exploitation of fishing gourds.' This conservation ethos did not by any means imply serious concern
about general declines of oceanic resources, as would emerge in the 1970's. Indeed, post-war scientists
thought themselves well placed to promote dramatic expansion of the amount of fish harvested from
the sea.’ The technological innovations of echo sounding, more efficient fishing gear and long-range
fleets, together with biological investigations into new species for commercial exploitation and new
theoretical tools to predict and advise on yields, supported the deeply held faith in the potential of
science and technology to advance scientific knowledge of fisheries and directly facilitate the fishing
industry to expand and profit to an extent previously unimagined.
Links – Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) / Marine Reserves

Policies for marine protected areas take a managerialist perspective. Despite the
difference between MPA approaches and traditional fisheries management, we
should resist the call to act for criticism
Conventional fisheries science is, of course, contested from within and without the scientific community.
Following on from my discussion of fisheries science, MPA science is contextualised as being, in part, a
strategic response to the overexploitation of oceans that the theories and practices of conventional
fisheries science has legitimated throughout the twentieth century. MPA science is far more inclusive in
the range of factors it utilises and takes into consideration in its approach to the production of
knowledge than is fisheries science. MPA science is not delimited by such a close connection to industry
and a resource management agenda: it is fashioned from a different set of concerns and values.
However, I argue that we need to be wary of attempts to define oceans and MPAs through a protective
and authoritarian approach that has been gathering momentum in some quarters of the scientific
community in recent years. In particular, I am apprehensive of MPA science's advocacy for conceptions
of oceans that focus primarily on the biological aspects of ocean environments and neglect proper
consideration of cultural, social, political and economic dimensions. MPA science's advocacy for
enclosed sanctuaries or marine reserves resonate with wilderness conceptions of oceans (as was
discussed in Chapter 4 on the sublime) as uninhabited regions, void of people and culture—that place
humans outside of ocean environments. This Chapter continues to focus on that part of my thesis
concerned with the major Western discourses that structure contemporary human-ocean relations.
Fisheries science and MPA science demonstrate how the most widely accepted variants of ocean-related
science constrain our understandings of and possibilities for, interacting with oceans in Western society.
The shortfalls of science point to the need to open up assessment, debate and discussion about oceans
through processes that allow a broader range of communities, human and non-human, to contribute.
Marine reserves represent top-down decision making to enforce biodiversity

There is, however, a protective and authoritarian approach afoot to defining oceans and MPAs. There is
a growing scientific consensus in the United States and other developed nations that only the full
protection offered by marine reserves, as opposed to multiple use MPAs, will meet conservation goals.'
Proponents of marine reserves that prioritise marine biodiversity objectives tend to favour 'top-down'
decision making and implementation of marine reserves rather than 'bottom-up', local decision making
processes. There is also growing scientific consensus that a standard target for marine reserves a
minimum of 20 per cent of an ecosystem--must be met to effectively protect ecosystems and natural
resources. The 20 per cent target has been adopted by the United States Coral Reef Task Force and in
other countries including Australia, Canada, Bahamas, Philippines and Galapagos Islands. Prominent
conservation institutions support this trajectory toward marine reserves. In 2003 delegates to the Fifth
World Parks Congress, sponsored by the World Conservation Union, recommended the establishment of
national networks of marine NTZs with a target of 20-30 per cent of habitats by 2012. Greenpeace
International (2006) calls for a target area of 40 per cent.
Marine Protected Area schemes are rooted in a scientific understanding that enframes
oceans in human values
Accessed 4/4/2014
MPA science employs a more inclusive approach to the production of knowledge than fisheries science
because it must account for political, economic and social factors. However, in discussing MPA science, I
draw attention to the current trajectory toward marine reserves and the perpetual propensity to define
oceans in scientific terms. This makes oceans susceptible to conceptions and relations that place
humans outside of them.
Impacts
Impacts – Biopolitics
The 1AC is rooted in biopolitical conceptions of “the environment” that discipline
knowledge and cements the worst forms of governmentality
Timothy W. Luke, Program Chair of the Government and International Affairs Program, School of Public
and International Affairs at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 1997, Ecocritique, p.91-
92
Foucault might be read as dividing the environment into two separate but interpenetrating spheres of
action: the biological and the historical. For most of human history, the biological dimension, or forces
of Nature acting through disease and famine, dominated human existence with the ever-present
menace of death. Developments in agricultural technologies as well as hygiene and health techniques,
however, gradually provided some relief from starvation and plague by the end of the eighteenth
century. As a result, the historical dimension began to grow in importance along with "the development
of the different fields of knowledge concerned with life in general, the improvement of agricultural
techniques, and the observations and measures relative to man's life and survival contributed to this
relaxation: a relative control over life averted some of the imminent risks of death." The work of the
Worldwatch Institute acknowledges how "the historical" then begins to envelope, circumscribe, or
surround "the biological," creating interlocking disciplinary expanses for "the environmental" to be
watched, managed, controlled. And, these environmentalized settings quickly dominate all forms of
concrete human reality: "in the space of movement thus conquered, and broadening and organizing that
space, methods of power and knowledge assumed responsibility for the life processes and undertook to
control and modify them. " Although Foucault does not explicitly define these spaces, methods, and
knowledges as such as being "environmental,"these governmentalizing maneuvers might be seen as the
origin of many disciplinary projects, which all feed into environmentalization. As biological life is
refracted through economic, political, and technological existence, "the facts of life" pass into fields of
controlfor disciplines of ecoknowledge and spheres of intervention for their management as geopower
at various institutional sites, such as the Worldwatch Institute.
Only resisting biopower avoids nuclear annihilation

James W. Bernauer, Professor of Philosophy at Boston College, 1990, Michel Foucault's Force of
Flight: Toward an Ethics for Thought, pp. 141-142.
The very period that proclaimed pride in having overthrown the tyranny of monarchy, that engaged in
an endless clamor for reform, that is confident in the virtues of its humanistic faith--this period's politics
created a landscape dominated by history's bloodiest wars. What comparison is possible between a
sovereign's authority to take a life and a power that, in the interest of protecting a society's quality of
life, can plan, as well as develop the means for its implementation, a policy of mutually assured
destruction? Such a policy is neither an aberration of the fundamental principles of modern politics nor
an abandonment of our age's humanism in favor of a more primitive right to kill; it is but the other side
of a power that is "situated and exercised at the level of life, the species, the race, and the large-scale
phenomena of population. The bio-political project of administering and optimizing life closes its circle
with the production of the Bomb.
Techno-managerial solutions are rooted in biopolitical modes of power and

knowledge production
International Affairs, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 2004, “Ideology and
Globalization: From Globalism and Environmentalism to Ecoglobalism.” Rethinking Globalism, Ed.
Manfred Steger, p. 70-71.Henri Lefebvre has argued that every society produces a space. its own space,
and ‘this will have other Indeed, many societies have come and gone on the Earth, and a globality of
sorts has existed in ocher times Today, however, the transnational corporate capitalist economy and
society produce their own peculiar places in the sites and structures of contemporary globalist and
environmentalist spatiality The generation of these social spaces has resulted in the rapid proliferation
of commodified social labor and its abstract space. The production of globality and ecology in the
particular forms taken by contemporary globalism and environmentalism also represents, as Lefebvre
notes the dissolution of old relations on the one hand and the generation of new relations on the
other” In many ways, the agendas of neoliberal globalization seem to be intent on effacing absolute
spaces of locally consecrated sites for Nature as well as the historical spaces of regionally
territorialized national places22 Over the past generation, advanced study in environmental science on
many university campuses and in most corporations has become a key source of new representations
for "the environment- as well as the home base for the scientific disciplines that generate analyses of
Nature's meanings. These educational practices produce ecomanagers, or professional-technical
workers with specific knowledge (which has been scientifically validated), together with the operational
powers (as they have been institutionally constructed) to cope with "environmental problems" on what
are believed to be sound scientific and technical grounds. Here the dominant globalist discourse spawns
many professional careers. Technical experts working on and off campus create disciplinary articulations
of various kinds of "knowledge" to generate performative techniques of "power" over, but also within
and through, what is worked up as Nature in the managerial structures of modem economies and
societies.
Impacts – Epistemology / Knowledge Production

Their knowledge production is not neutral. Ocean research is strongly aligned with
the military industrial complex
A broad expression of this insight is that specific developments in scientific knowledge can be
interpreted in terms of the economic and social priorities of military agencies, corporations,
governmental bodies and individuals who finance and profit from their creation and application. The link
between science and vested interests undermines claims to objectivity. Historical studies of the ebb and
flow of the development of the ocean sciences in the twentieth century by and large reflects an
alignment with powerful Western military and economic interests. Certainly the two major peaks in
research interest and funding that aided the proper establishment of the ocean sciences have been
aligned with the economic and military interests of Western nations. The first peak transpired in
response to a declining fish catch in the North Atlantic in the late nineteenth and early twentieth
century. This first peak is my major concern in this Chapter, but it is noted that World War II sparked the
second peak.
Technology is never neutral. Managerial thinking enframes logic and reason to

advance a false sense of urgency and material value
Technology in all ages is never merely a means, Heidegger says: it is a way of revealing the real. Men
and women do not just use modern technology - they are also used by it. Working all day in front of a
computer screen, in a factory, or in a store selling things that people may or may not need, the subject
of technology comes home to sit, transfixed, before a television set that constantly bombards its viewers
with carefully constructed advertising images, sound-bytes of "news" and "commentary," and reality
shows full of attractive young men and women willing to humiliate themselves for cash. Like a sponge,
the subject of technology gradually soaks up what the system makes available in the object-world by
way of occupations, news, and entertainment, and in the process undergoes a metamorphosis. Under
these conditions the subject "becomes an object of its object" as the Chilean philosopher Rolando Gaete
puts it, in a dialectical movement that goes from subject to object-world and object-world back to
subject. Although modern social theory specifies that the subject-object dialectic characterizes any and
all human societies, there is something uniquely de-ratiocinating about this one. For this dialectic
transforms the ancient values of logic and critical reason into their modern doppelgangers: logistics and
calculation. A sort of technological philistinism takes hold, according to which all knowledge and
performances must be evaluated exclusively by their immediate utility and their contribution to material
values.
Impacts – Rhetoric
Technological interventions into the environment are violent. Their rhetoric
construction of the advantage is rooted in exploitation
Perhaps it is not difficult to understand the separate paths of the fine arts, craftsmanship, and modern
technology. Each seems to have followed different human intentions and to have addressed different
human skills. However, while the fine arts and craftsmanship remained relatively consistent
with techne in the ancient sense, modern technology withdrew in a radically different direction. As
Heidegger saw it, "the revealing that rules in modern technology is a challenging [Herausfordern], which
puts to nature the unreasonable demand that it supply energy that can be extracted and stored as
such." Modern technology sets-upon nature and challenges-forth its energies, in contrast
to techne which was always a bringing-forth in harmony with nature. The activity of modern technology
lies at a different and more advanced level wherein the natural is not merely decisively re-directed;
nature is actually "set-upon." The rhetoric in which the discussion is couched conveys an atmosphere of
violence and exploitation. To uncover the essence of modern technology is to discover why technology
stands today as the danger. To accomplish this insight, we must understand why modern technology
must be viewed as a "challenging-forth," what affect this has on our relationship with nature, and how
this relationship affects us. Is there really a difference? Has technology really left the domain
of techne in a significant way? In modern technology, has human agency withdrawn in some way
beyond involvement and, instead, acquired an attitude of violence with respect to the other causal
factors?
We must question environmental representations. They have a deterministic effect

on reality and the way we approach the problem
Seung-Kyu Rhee, Professor KAIST Graduate School of Management, Seoul South Korea And Su-Yol Lee,
2003, “Dynamic change of corporate environmental strategy: rhetoric and reality,” Business Strategy
and the Environment, 12:3, pp. 175-190
Although rhetoric involves political and symbolic posture, and does not always accurately represent
reality, it plays an important role in the dynamic change process of environmental strategy. We first
elaborate on the related concepts and develop frameworks to analyze corporate environmental strategy
and its change. We report two case studies of Korean companies using the framework. Longitudinal case
studies also provide additional implications for corporate environmental strategy in developing
countries such as Korea. There is a gap between the rhetoric and reality of environmental strategy and it
constantly changes over time depending on specific internal and external influences.
Impacts – Serial Policy Failure

All knowledge of the oceans is devoid of authentic human relations. Their 1AC claims
are not objective, but mediated by imperfect science that leads to failed policies
Accessed 4/4/2014
The lack of attention afforded to the oceans is partly explained by the fact that the character of the
human physical relationship with water complicates our ability to "get close" to ocean ecosystems and
dwellers in ways that improve understanding and empathy with them, and add depth to relations. Our
knowledge of the oceans is, for the most part, a step removed from direct experience. As Benson,
Rozwadowski and van Kelton (2004, xiii) note, ‘[B]eyond the borders of the tidal zones and continental
shelf shallows, the oceans are a forbidding and alien environment inaccessible to direct human
observation. They force scientist-observers to early their natural environment with them, such as with a
deep-sea submersible.’ This means the type of investigations scientists can make are both restricted
and directed. General knowledge of the oceans is highly dependent on what scientists report and this
influences the balance between community and expert knowledge, policymaking. Yet as marine
scientists have made Germ the very fluidity and interconnectivity, scale and opacity of ocean
environments have complex ramifications for the marine sciences. The physical characteristics of the
ocean environment club scientific insights and capacity to respond effectively to problems and crises,
much more so than for terrestrial environments.
Impacts – Standing Reserve

Managerial thinking represents a will to order all planetary life. Technological
interventions feed a production-consumption feedback loop that treats the
environment as a standing reserve
The essence of modern technology sets upon nature and challenges it to become a constant source of
supply: a "standing reserve" (Bestand), as Heidegger puts it. In this state of affairs the realm of
production never stops: what is produced reenters technology immediately as the means of further
production. Production becomes production for its own sake, with the result that we consume in order
to produce, and live in order to work. This mode of revealing the real is qualitatively different from the
ways of thinking that were associated with pre-modern modes of technology. The essence of modern
technology manifests what Heidegger calls the "will to planetary ordering," and it is unique in the
dimension of its relentlessness and its tendency to colonize everything and everyone: it never rests. We
feel the need to be rational and productive from the cradle to the grave. Even when it is on vacation,
technological thinking is busy organizing the environment to extract the maximum amount of "fun" in
the available time, recording it all on a digital camera for future moments of enjoyment in the carefully
managed free time that it constructs for itself in the interstices of the workday.
Yes, some instrumentalism is inevitable, but treating the ocean as a standing reserve
is distinct
Accessed 4/4/2014
Humans are, amuse, dependent on certain ocean dwellers and their ecosystems and other physical
functions of oceans and thus need to think instrumentally about oceans. Some amount of human use of
oceans must take place. However, as Rogers argues, to describe ocean dwellers as 'resources', 'biomass'
or 'fish stocks' and to conceptualise oceans as 'factories' is indicative of an impoverished perspective
(and I would add imagination), based on a production model world view, about the possibilities for
relationship between humans and the rest of nature. I concur with Rogers view and note that there is a
crucial judgement implicit in this relationship that fish are valuable only to the extent that they satisfy
human ends. It is worth examining in some depth the apparent legitimacy of the value judgement
embedded in fisheries science about fish and the relations between humans and fish because it justifies
It insensitivity to ecological limits, dependencies and connections to ocean dwellers and ecosystems. In
this regard, Plumwood offers a cogent critique of the devaluing of non-human nature in Western
societies and the narrowly defined and highly instrumental conception of ocean dwellers at work here—
fish as "tools for economic gain", as Scarce states.
The eclipse of Being outweighs nuclear war, human extinction, and planetary
destruction
Michael E. Zimmerman, Department of Philosophy, Tulane University, 1993, Contesting Earths
Future: Radical Ecology and Postmodernity, pp. 119-120
Heidegger asserted that human self-assertion, combined with the eclipse of being, threatens the
relation between being and human Dasein. Loss of this relation would be even more dangerous that a
nuclear war might bring about the complete annihilation of humanity and the destruction of the
earth. This controversial claim is comparable to the Christian teaching that it is better to forfeit the
world than to lose ones soul by losing ones relation to God. Heidegger apparently thought along these
lines: it is possible that after a nuclear war, life might once again emerge, but it is far less likely that
there will ever again occur in an ontological clearing through which life could manifest itself. Further,
since modernity’s one dimensional disclosure ot entities virtually denies that any being at all, the loss of
humanity’s openness for being is already occurring. Modernity’s background mood is horror in the face
of nihilism, which is consistent with the aim of providing material happiness for everyone by reducing
nature into pure energy. The unleashing of vast quantities of energy in a nuclear war would be
equivalent to modernity’s slow destruction of nature: unbounded destruction would equal limitless
consumption. If humanity avoided a nuclear war only to survive as contended clever animals, Heidegger
believed we would exist in a state of ontological damnation: hell on earth, masquerading as material
paradise. Deep ecologists might agree that a world of material human comfort purchased at the price of
everything wild would not be a world worth living in, for in killing wild nature, people would be as good
as dead. But most of them could not agree that the loss of humanity’s relation to being would be worse
than nuclear omnicide, for it is wrong to suppose that the lives of millions of extinct and unknown
species are somehow lessened because they were never disclosed by humanity.
Using Nature as a standing reserve leads to infinite human and economic growth. The
plan is a green disciplinary intervention to secure biopower
Accessed 4/3/2014
Mobilizing biological power, then, accelerates exponentially after 1970 along with global fast capitalism.
Ecology becomes one more formalized disciplinary mode of paying systematic "attention to the
processes of life....to invest life through and through" in order to transform all living things into
biological populations to develop transnational commerce. The tremendous explosion of global
economic prosperity, albeit in highly skewed spatial distributions, after the 1973/1974 energy crises
would not have been possible without ecology to guide "the controlled insertion of bodies into the
machinery of production and the adjustment of the phenomena of population to economic processes."
An anantamo-politics for all of Earth's plants and animals now emerges out of ecology as strategic plans
for terraformative management through which environmentalizing resource managerialists acquire "the
methods of power capable of optimizing forces, aptitudes, and life in general without at the same time
making them more difficult to govern.” To move another step past Foucault's vision of human biopower,
these adjustments in the resourcing of Nature as environmentalized plants and animals to that of
transnational capital are helpful to check chaotic systems of unsustainable growth. In becoming an
essential subassembly for transnational economic development, ecological discourses of
power/knowledge rationalize conjoining "the growth of human groups to the expansion of productive
forces and the differential allocation of profit" inasmuch as population ecology, environmental science,
and range management are now, in part, "the exercise of bio-power in its many forms and modes of
application." Indeed, a postmodern condition perhaps is reached when the life of all species are
wagered in each one of humanity's market-centered economic and political strategies. Ecology, which
did emerge out of the traditional life sciences, now circulates within "the space for movement thus
conquered, and broadening and organizing that space, methods of power and knowledge" as green
disciplinary interventions, because the state has "assumed responsibility for the life processes and
undertook to control and modify them."
Impacts – Technological Enframing

Technological enframing outweighs nuclear annihilation
The threat of nuclear annihilation is, currently, the most dramatic and ironic sign of technology's
"success" and of its overwhelming power; mass itself has been grasped as a standing-reserve of
enormous energy. On the one hand we consider ourselves, rightfully, the most advanced humans that
have peopled the earth but, on the other hand, we can see, when we care to, that our way of life has
also become the most profound threat to life that the earth has yet witnessed. Medical science and
technology have even begun to suggest that we may learn enough about disease and the processes of
aging in the human body that we might extend individual human lives indefinitely. In this respect, we
have not only usurped the gods' rights of creation and destruction of species, but we may even usurp
the most sacred and terrifying of the gods' rights, the determination of mortality or immortality. The
gods, it is true, have been set aside in our time; they are merely antiquated conceptions.
Environmental management disciplines knowledge about the environment as a

standing reserve, justifying endless exploitation
International Affairs, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, December 2002, “The Practices
of Adaptive and Collaborative Environmental Management: A Critique,” Capitalism, Nature, Socialism, v.
13, No. 4, p. 12
Ecosystemic managers activate their command over the Earth's spaces and places as well as
operationalize a measure of operational discipline over environmental resources, risks, restorations and
recreationists as they reconstruct contemporary governmentality as environmentality. Like
governmentality, the disciplinary articulations of environmentality now center upon establishing and
enforcing "the right disposition of things" by policing humanity's "conduct of conduct" in Nature and
Society. Nature loses all of its transcendent qualities as its material stuff appears preprocessed in the
adaptive science practices as mere "environments" full of exploitable, but also protectable, "natural
resources," which the right managers can manipulate as they get down to the business of administering
global capitalism's "natural resource systems."
Techonological interventions never truly solve, but merely extend human domination
Eric Katz, associate professor of philosophy and director of the Science, Technology, and Society
Program, New Jersey Institute of Technology, 2000, Nature as Subject: Human Obligation and Natural
Community, pp. 197
After these actions of human restoration and modification, what emerges is a Nature with a different
character than the original. This is an ontological difference, a difference in the essential qualities of
the restored area. A beach that is replenished by human technology possesses a different essence
than a beach created by natural forces such as wind and tides. A savanna replanted from wildflower seeds and
weeds collected by human hands has a different essence than grassland that develops on its own. The source of these new areas is
different—man—made, technological, artificial. The restored Nature is not really Nature at all. A Nature healed by human action is thus
not Nature. As an artifact, it is designed to meet human purposes and needs—perhaps even the need for areas that look like a pristine,
In using our scientific and technological knowledge to restore natural areas, we actually
untouched Nature.
practice another form of domination. We use our power to mold the natural world into a shape that
is more amenable to our desires. We oppress the natural processes that function independent of
human power; we prevent the autonomous development of the natural world. To believe that we
heal or restore the natural world by the exercise of our technological power is, at best, a self-
deception and, at worst, a rationalization for the continued degradation of Nature— for if we can
heal the damage we inflict we will face no limits to our activities.
Alternative Extensions
“Do Nothing” Alternative Extension

We should resist the will to engage in totalizing and colonizing management policies
relations. PhD thesis, Murdoch University, pp. 4-5, http://researchrepository.murdoch.edu.au/123/,
Accessed 4/4/2014
I suggest that the contemporary discourses of oceanic lives I am concerned with have been totalising,
leaving little room for diversity. They have also been colonising, leaving little room for non-human
flourishing. I argue that totalising and colonising practices in relation to oceans need to be resisted in
order to facilitate just existences for oceans. My focus on the facilitation of just existences for oceans
will be elaborated upon further in this dissertation. But to briefly indicate here how just existences for
oceans may be facilitated, I argue for inclusive knowledge production and decision-making processes in
which there is a capacity for a diversity of views to influence outcomes.
Managerialist calls for alternative technologies should be resisted to disrupt capitalist

rationality
Accessed 3/20/2014
In the final analysis, ecologically sustainable development, as Makower observes, boils down to another
expression economic rationality. It is "a search for the lowest-cost method of reducing the greatest
amount of pollution" in the continued turnover of consumer-centered production processes. Almost
magically, sustainable development can become primarily an economic, and not merely an
environmental, calculation. The initiatives taken by some businesses to prevent pollution, reduce waste,
and maximize energy efficiencies are to be supported. Ecology can win, but only if it can reaffirm on a
higher, more perfect register most of fast capitalism's existing premises of technology utilization,
managerial centralization, and profit generation now driving advanced corporate capitalism. These
maneuvers are not taken simply to preserve Nature, mollify green consumers, or respect Mother Earth;
they are done to enhance corporate profits, national productivity, and state power, because "the e-
factor" is not simply ecology--it also is efficiency, excellence, education, empowerment, enforcement,
and economics. As long as realizing ecological changes in business means implementing an alternative
array of instrumentally rational policies, such as finding lower-cost methods of energy use, supply
management, labor utilization, corporate communication, product generation or pollution abatement,
sustainable development also will maintain the economy. Gore's new stewardship through sustainable
development may not be strictly ecological, but his green geopolitics cultivates the image, at least, of
being environmentally responsible. This compromise allows one to work "deliberately and carefully,
with an aim toward long-term cultural change, always with an eye toward the bottom line, lest you get
frustrated and discouraged in the process" so that these "environmentally responsible businesses can be
both possible and profitable."
Our criticism uniquely contributes to environmental scholarship in a break with

current speciesist assumptions
relations. PhD thesis, Murdoch University, pp. 2-3, http://researchrepository.murdoch.edu.au/123/,
Accessed 4/4/2014
A lack of specific concern with ocean-related politics and ethics is no exception to the general lack of
attention afforded oceans, not only in Australia but also across the globe. My dissertation is a
contribution to overcoming the lack of attention given to the oceans, with a particular focus upon
ethical and political issues. Environmental politics and ethics are largely concerned with terrestrial
environments or, at best, conflate notions of 'land' and 'ocean' with common-place conceptions of
`nature', 'earth', 'the planet', 'environment' or 'ecology'. Of the thousands of articles and books written
on environmental philosophy and politics, only a very small proportion of them address the marine
environment. Norton, writing in what he refers to as the first book on marine environmental ethics,
Values at Sea, characterises environmental ethics' disregard for the oceans and ocean dwellers in the
following manner: We may see the day—at least the younger of us may—when terrestrialism is
recognized as an intolerable moral oversight, as grievous as other forms of speciesism. For that is surely
what it is, if we view it objectively, a form of despicably unexamined, massive speciesism that pervades
human attitudes toward species that live below the ocean’s—or, for that matter, any hydrological—
surface. This is not to deny that the political and ethical issues relevant to human relations with
terrestrial and marine environments interconnect in many respects. Certainly, this is an understanding
that is becoming all the greater in the face of growing concern about rising sea levels. However, there
are characteristics and issues particular to ocean ecosystems that need bringing to the surface so that
they can be reflected upon.
Permutation Answers
Permutations Answers
The alternative rejects the 1AC’s call to act. Without questioning thought we only seek
to discipline knowledge
Heidegger and the Earth: Essays in Environmental Philosophy, pp. 1-2
Some might find this unnecessarily harsh. We academicians may wish to contest the accusation. Surely,
in the universities of all places, thinking is going on. But Heidegger had no respect for that or any other
kind of complacency. The thinking he saw as essential is no more likely, perhaps unfortunately, to be
found in universities or among philosophers than anywhere else. For the thinking he saw as essential is
not the simple amassing and digesting of facts or even the mastering of complex relationships or the
producing of ever more powerful and inclusive theories. The thinking Heidegger saw as essential, the
thinking his works call us to, is not a thinking that seeks to master anything, not a thinking that results
from a drive to grasp and know and shape the world; it is a thinking that disciplines itself to allow the
world - the earth, things - to show themselves on their own terms. Heidegger called this kind of thinking
`reflection'. In 1936 he wrote, "Reflection is the courage to make the truth of our own presuppositions
and the realm of our own goals into the things that most deserve to be called in question."' Reflection is
thinking that never rests complacently in the conclusions reached yesterday; it is thinking that continues
to think, that never stops with a satisfied smile and announces: We can cease; we have the right answer
now. On the contrary, it is thinking that loves its own life, its own occurring, that does not quickly put a
stop to itself, as thinking intent on a quick solution always tries to do.
The permutation lacks a radical rejection of managerialism in favor of failed reformism

Leslie Paul Thiele, University of Florida, September 1998, “Review: Ecocritique: Contesting the Politics
of Nature, Economy, and Culture, By Timothy W. Luke,” American Political Science Review, V. 92, No.3,
p. 689
Luke disparages the efforts of those who espouse individual responsibility - organizations such as the
Earth Works For Luke, however, the problem is simply that these approaches are not radical enough.
"Rather than pushing for waste elimination," Luke writes, "the Earth Works Group stands for waste
reduction. Instead of advocating total economic transformation, it accepts weak bureaucratic regulation
of present-day polluting processes. Unable to support the total reconstitution of today's productive
forces, it advocates piecemeal reforms to lessen, but never end, their most environmentally destructive
activities". Luke rejects "weak reformist strategy". He calls instead for a radical social transformation
that would yield bioregionally decentralized communities operating in "equal partnership with Nature"
(p. 208). The ultimate goal is "survivable communitarian ecologies within which people dominate
neither other human beings nor their fellow nonhuman beings" (p. xiii). Presumably these biocentric,
egalitarian, protoanarchistic communities would produce neither waste nor pollution.
The alternative is mutually exclusive with the 1AC’s process of concealment

Heidegger and the Earth: Essays in Environmental Philosophy, p. 5
Now, what does this mean? We know that in order to pay attention to one thing, we must stop paying
close attention to something else. In order to read philosophy we must stop reading cereal boxes. In
order to attend to the needs of students we must sacrifice some of our research time. Allowing for one
thing toreveal itself means allowing for the concealing of something else. All revealing comes at the
price of concomitant concealment. But this is more than just a kind of Kantian acknowledgment of
human limitation. Heidegger is not simply dressing up the obvious, that is, the fact that no individual can
undergo two different experiences simultaneously. His is not a point about human subjectivity at all.
Rather, it is a point about revealing itself. When revealing reveals itself as temporally linear and causally
ordered, for example, it cannot simultaneously reveal itself as ordered by song and unfolding in dream.
Furthermore, in revealing, revealing itself is concealed in order for what is revealed to come forth.
Thus, when revealing occurs concealing occurs as well. The two events are one and cannot be separated
We should not act without questioning Being. Their managerial approach is

incompatible with the alternative
Heidegger and the Earth: Essays in Environmental Philosophy, p. 3
Heidegger frustrates us. At a time when the stakes are so very high and decisive action is so loudly and
urgently called for, Heidegger apparently calls us to do nothing. If we get beyond the revulsion and
anger that such a call initially inspires and actually examine the feasibility of response, we begin to
undergo the frustration attendant upon paradox; how is it possible, we ask, to choose, to will, to do
nothing? The call itself places in a question the bimodal logic of activity and passivity; it points up the
paradoxical nature of our passion for action, of our passion for maintaining control. The call itself
suggests that our drive for acting decisively and forcefully part of what must be thought through, that
the narrow option of will versus surrender is one of the power configurations of current thinking that
must be allowed to dissipate.

11 Oceans Neg 2014

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

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

11 Oceans Neg 2014

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

West Coast Publishing Ocean 2014 NEGATIVE Page 1

West Coast Publishing

Please don’t share this material with anyone

Resolved: The United States federal

WEST COAST DEBATE

Finding Arguments in this File

Using the arguments in this File

Use West Coast Evidence as a Beginning

Copying West Coast Evidence

Ordering West Coast Materials

Copyright 2014. West Coast Publishing. All Rights Reserved.

Visit our web page!

Ocean Topicality Shells ........................................................................................................ 23

Biodiversity of Ocean Fine ................................................................................................... 33

US China No Conflict ............................................................................................................ 47

US Russia No Conflict ........................................................................................................... 52

No Conflict – Ukraine ..........................................................................................................................................53

Aquaculture Neg ................................................................................................................. 58

Marine Reserves Negative ................................................................................................... 75

Ocean Renewables MHK Negative ....................................................................................... 96

Federal support for MHK is high now ...............................................................................................................105

Offshore Wind Negative .................................................................................................... 128

Technology Fails / Too Many Barriers ...............................................................................................................156

UNCLOS NEG ..................................................................................................................... 160

China DA ........................................................................................................................... 189

Impact- Asian Institutions- Economy ................................................................................................................205

China Alternative Energy DA .............................................................................................. 208

Fishing Industry DA............................................................................................................ 232

Ocean Climate Change DA ................................................................................................. 258

Oceans Prevent Human Extinction ...................................................................................................................306

Geoengineering CP ............................................................................................................ 334

Seabasing CP ..................................................................................................................... 345

1NC Eco Security K ............................................................................................................................................355

Eco Security Kritik .............................................................................................................. 383

Ocean Management Kritik ................................................................................................. 413

Debating on the Negative

Domestic actor counterplan, federal government disadvantage

International actor counterplan, domestic disadvantage

Status quo, major disadvantage

Potential negative arguments

United Nations counterplan

Non-military means not involving armed forces

“Military” includes the entire staff of the Department of Defense

Exploration is limited to searching for resources

Exploration is limited to searching for natural resources

Especially true in the context of ocean policy

Development means converting minerals into useable resources

Development requires international cooperation in the context of ocean policy

Seas are distinct – not oceans

Ocean Topicality Shells

B. Violation: the plan funds preliminary small-scale research

1NC Its =/= NGOs

B. Violation: The affirmative increases the exploration and/or development provided

1NC Oceans = All

B. Violation – the affirmative only affects a part of the global ocean

1NC Oceans International

B. Violation: the affirmative exclusively applies to waters under the jurisdiction of a

And, “Military” includes the entire staff of the Department of Defense

B. Violation – the affirmative increases ocean activities using military means

1NC USFG = Not International Treaties

2. Illogical: No American policymaker can make other countries’ policies – forces

3. At best, they are extra-topical – they advocate non-topical action in addition to

1NC International Cooperation