1AC: Inherency 1/2

Our capacity to observe earth is diminishing now: current budget increases are insufficient to maintain and expand the development of environmental monitoring.

Committee on Earth Science and Applications from Space 2007 (National Research Council, Earth Science and
Applications from Space: National Imperatives for the Next Decade and Beyond http://www.nap.edu/catalog/11820.html) The extensive scientific and societal contributions of the NOAA-NASA-USGS satellite observing capabilities are evidenced by the thousands of scientific publications and applications of the data for environmental forecasts, a record of accomplishment mentioned in Chapter 1 and detailed with numer- ous examples in Part III of this report. As noted in Chapter 1, perhaps

the largest impact of space-based observations to date has been improved weather forecasting and the many societal benefits stemming from that capability (Hollingsworth et al., 2005). The National
Weather Services current practice of providing 10-day weather forecasts is a familiar reminder of the scientific gains made in the past decade. Space-based observations have also figured prominently in climate research (NRC, 2004). Factors that drive climate change are usefully separated into forcings and feedbacks. A climate forcing is an energy imbalance imposed on the climate system externally or by human activities. Examples include changes in solar energy output, volcanic emissions, deliberate land modification, and anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases, aerosols, and their precursors. A climate feedback is an internal climate process that amplifies or dampens the climate response to a specific forcing. An example is the increase in atmospheric water vapor that is triggered by warming due to rising carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations, which acts to further amplify the warming because of the greenhouse properties of water vapor. Observations of key climate forcings and feedbacks, diagnostics (e.g., temperature, sea level), and the consequences of climate change (e.g., sea ice decrease) have helped to identify potentially dangerous changes in Earths climate. These observations have catalyzed climate research and enabled substantial improvements in climate models. In fact, these improvements have brought into existence a class of Earth system models1 that couple atmosphere, ocean, land, and cryosphere systems. These models not only provide better estimates of spatially and temporally resolved patterns of climate change but also provide a basis for addressing other environmental challenges, such as

Despite these advances, the extraordinary foundation of global observations is in decline. Between 2006 and the end of the decade, the number of operating sensors and instruments will likely decrease by around 40 percent, given that most satellites in NASAs current fleet are well past their nominal life- times. Furthermore, the replacement sensors on the National Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite System (NPOESS), when they exist, are generally less capable than their EOS counterparts. This decreased quantity of space-borne assets will persist into the early part of the next decade (see Figures 2.3 and 2.4). Partly causing and certainly amplifying the observational collapse of space-based measurements is the decline in NASAs Earth science budget. From 2000 to 2006, this part of NASAs budget decreased by more than 30 percent when adjusted for inflation (Figure 2.6). This reduction, if it persists, translates to approximately $4 billion less to develop Earth science missions over the next decade. That decrease could mean, for example, some 8 to 12 fewer space-based research missions and perhaps $1 billion less for associated research and analysis. The NASA-NOAA EOS satellite system, launched beginning in the late 1990s, is aging, and the existing plan for the future is entirely inadequate to meet the coming challenges. The NOAA budget has been growing (see Figure 2.7), but this growth is now swamped by the large cost overruns in the NPOESS program. It also appears likely that the GOES-R program will experience cost growth.2 Completing even the descoped NPOESS program will require several billion dollars beyond the
changes in biogeochemical cycles of carbon and nitrogen and the effects of these changes now and in the future (Figure 2.5). funding planned as recently as December 2005.3 Thus, NPOESS represents a major lien on future budgets, one that is so great that the agencys ability to provide observations in support of climate research or other noncore missions will be severely compromised. Among the many missions expected to cease over the next few years, the committee has identified several in NOAA and NASA that are providing critical information now and that need to be sustained into the next decadeboth to continue important time series and to provide the foundation necessary for the recommended future observations. In NOAA, many observational capabilities need to be restored to NPOESS, but this topic must be considered as part of a reexamination of the logic, costs, and benefits of the current (September 2006) NPOESS and GOES-R plan. The reexamination of NPOESS and GOES-R will be conducted by a fast-track NRC study to be conducted and concluded in 2007. The present committees analysis of the implications of NPOESS instrument descopes and cancellations is hampered by the absence of information about changes in key sensors. In particular, the Conical-Scanning Microwave Imager/Sounder (CMIS) instrument on NPOESS, which was to have provided continuity of records of seasurface temperature and sea icetime series critical to global climate studieshas been canceled, and the specifications for its replacement, the Microwave Imager/Sounder (MIS), are not yet known.4 Similarly, the mitigation plan for the now-demanifested altimeter, ALT, is not yet known. The

continuity of several measurements is of sufficient importance to climate research, ozone monitoring, or operational weather systems to deserve immediate attention. Those for climate include total solar irradiance and Earth radiation; for ozone, ozone
limb sounding capability and total solar irradiance; and for weather, sea-surface vector winds and temperature and water vapor soundings from geostationary and polar orbits. As detailed in the committees interim report (NRC, 2005), the substitution of passive microwave sensor data for active scatterometry data would worsen El Nio and hurricane forecasts and weather forecasts in coastal areas.5 Nevertheless, given the precarious status of existing surface wind measurements,6 it is imperative that a measurement capability, such as the one on MetOp, be available to prevent a data gap when the NASA QuikSCAT mission terminates.

1AC: Inherency 2/2

GEOSS can address climate change data needs, but more US support is critically lacking.

Lewis et. Al. 2010 (James A., senior fellow and director of the Technology and Public Policy Program at CSIS;
GCOS, GEO, CEOS, and GEOSS

Sarah O. Ladislaw, CSIS Senior Fellow, Energy and National Security Program; and Denise E. Zheng, CSIS; Earth Observation for Climate Change: A Report of the CSIS Technology and Public Policy Program, csis.org/files/publication/100608_Lewis_EarthObservation_WEB.pdf)

have made valuable contributions to improving our ability to monitor climate change, but they do not add up to a comprehensive approach for responding to climate challenges. In April 2009,
the WMO released the Progress Report on the Implementation of the Global Observing System for Climate in Support of the UNFCCC 20042008.12 The report concludes that while

implementation of observation systems in support of the UNFCCC has progressed significantly over the last five years, sustaining the funding of many important systems is fragile, there has been only limited progress in filling observing system gaps in developing countries, and there is still a long way to go to achieve a fully implemented global observing system for climate [p. ii]. The future of the GCOS is important, given the lack of progress in other
areas of global coop- eration on climate issues. The UN negotiations in Copenhagen did not yield global agreement, and reaching global agreement (especially one that actually has any effect) will be a long, drawn-out process. In the interim, American

leadership in creating an expanded multilateral system for sharing, analyzing, and operationalizing climate data will strengthen global understanding of climate issues and help build a collaborative approach and common understandings that will support future negotiation. Even if nations are unable to agree upon a coordinated approach to mitigation, the need to address climate change will still exist, and understanding the effect of inaction on the future course of climate change remains essential.

1AC: Plan Text 1/1

Plan text: The United States Congress should provide all necessary funding for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to fulfill developmental requirements for the United States component of the Global Earth Observation System of Systems.

1AC: Climate Advantage 1/6

Advantage __ is Global Climate Change:
The earth continues to warm as an increasing rate: newest science confirms. Associated Press June 29 (2011, World still warming up, researchers warn) WASHINGTON The worlds climate is not only continuing to warm, its adding heat-trapping greenhouse gases faster, researchers said yesterday. The global temperature has been warmer than the 20th century average every month for more than 25 years, they said at a teleconference. The indicators show unequivocally that the world continues to warm, Thomas R. Karl, director of the National Climatic Data Center , said in releasing the annual State of the Climate report for 2010. There is a clear and unmistakable signal from the top of the atmosphere to the depths of the oceans, added Peter Thorne of the Cooperative Institute for Climate and Satellites, North Carolina State University. Carbon dioxide increased by 2.60 parts per million in the atmosphere in 2010, which is more than the average annual increase seen from 19802010, Karl added. Carbon dioxide is the major greenhouse gas accumulating in the air that atmospheric scientists blame for warming the climate. The warmer conditions are consistent with events such as heat waves and extreme rainfall, Karl said at a teleconference. However, it is more difficult to make a direct
connection with events such as tornado outbreaks, he said. Any single weather event is driven by a number of factors, from local conditions to global climate patterns and trends. Climate change is one of these, he said. It is very likely that large-scale changes in climate, such as increased moisture in the atmosphere and warming temperatures, have influenced . . . many different types of extreme events, such as heavy rainfall, flooding, heat

The report, being published by the American Meteorological Society, lists 2010 as tied with 2005 for the warmest year on record, according to studies by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and NASA.
waves and droughts.

Warming is happening Sea ice, Glaciers, Ice Sheets, and Tropical Regions. Kills coral reefs and phytoplankton Hansen 2009, heads the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies and adjunct professor in the Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences at Columbia
University (James, December, Storms of My Grandchildren, 164-166) In addition to paleoclimate data, my talk covered ongoing observations of five phenomena, all of which imply that an appropriate initial target should be no higher than 350 ppm. In brief, here are the five observations.(1) The area of Arctic sea ice has been declining faster than models predicted. The end-of-summer sea ice area was 40 percent less in 2007 than in the late 1970s when accurate satellite measurements began. Continued growth of atmospheric carbon dioxide surely will result in an ice-free end-of-summerArctic within several decades, with detrimental effects on wildlife and indigenous people. It is difficult to imagine how the Greenland ice sheet could survive if Arctic sea ice is lost entirely in the warm season. Retention of warm season sea ice
likely requiresrestoration of the planet's energy balance. At present our best estimate is there is about 0.5 watt per square meter more energy coming into the planet than is being emitted to space as heat radiation. A reduction

(2) Mountain glaciers are disappearing all over the world. If business-as-usual greenhouse gas emissions continue, most of the glaciers will be gone within fifty years. Rivers originating in glacier regions provide fresh water for billions of people. If the glaciers disappear, there will be heavy snowmelt and
of carbon dioxide amount from the current 387 ppm to 350 ppm, all other things being unchanged, would increase outgoing radiation by 0.5 watt, restoring planetary energy balance .

floods in the spring, but many dry rivers in the late summer and fall. The melting of glaciers is proceeding rapidly at current atmospheric composition. Probably the best we can hope is that the restoration of the planet's energy balance may halt glacier recession.(3) The

Greenland and West Antarctic ice

sheets are each losing mass at more than 100 cubic kilometers per year, and sea level is rising at more than 3 centimeters per
decade. Clearly the ice sheets are unstable with the present climate forcing. Ice shelves around Antarctica are melting rapidly. It is difficult to say how far carbon dioxide must be reduced to stabilize the ice sheets, but clearly 387 ppm is too much.(4) Data show that subtropical regions have expanded poleward by 4 degrees of latitude on average. Such expansion is an expected effect of global warming, but the change has been faster than predicted. Dry regions have expandedin the southern United States, the Mediterranean, and Australia. Fire frequency and area in the western United States have increased by 300 percent over the past several decades. Lake Powell and Lake Mead are now only half full. Climate change is a major cause of these regional shifts, althoughforest management practices and increased usage of freshwater aggravate the resulting problems.(5) Coral reefs, where a quarter of all marine biological species are located, are suffering from multiple stresses, with two of the most important stresses,

ocean acidification and warming surface water, caused by increasing carbon dioxide. As carbon dioxide in the air
increases, the ocean dissolves some of the carbon dioxide, becoming more acidic. This makes it more difficult for animals with carbonate shells or skeletons to surviveindeed, sufficiently acidic water dissolves carbonates. Ongoing studies suggest that coral reefs would have a better chance of surviving modern stresses if
carbon dioxide were reduced to less than 350 ppm.I am often asked: If we want to maintain Holocene-like climate, why should the target carbon dioxide not be close to the preindustrial amount, say 300 ppm or 280 ppm? The reason, in part, is that there are other climate forcings besides carbon dioxide, and we do not expect those to return to preindustrial levels. There is no plan to remove all roadways, buildings, and other human-made effects on

Until we know all forcings and understand their net effect, it is premature to be more specific than "less than 350 ppm," and it is unnecessary for policy purposes. It will take time to turn carbon dioxide around and for it to begin to approach 350 ppm. By then, if we have been making appropriate measurements, our knowledge should be much improved and we will have extensive empirical evidence on real-world changes. Also our best current estimate for the planet's mean energy imbalance over the past decade, thus averaged over the solar cycle, is about
the planet's surface. Nor will we prevent all activities that produce aerosols. +0.5 watt per square meter. Reducing carbon dioxide to 350 ppm would increase emission to space 0.5 watt per square meter, restoring the planet's energy balance, to first approximation.

1AC: Climate Advantage 2/6

And, warming is anthropogenic; the scientific consensus is steadily growing to unanimity.
Lichter, Ph.D. in Government from Harvard University and President of the Center for Media and Public Affairs, 2008
[Dr. S. Robert Lichter, April 24 2008, Statistical Assessment Service, Climate Scientists Agree on Warming, Disagree on Dangers, and Dont Trust the Medias Coverage of Climate Change, <http://stats.org/stories/2008/global_warming_survey_apr23_08.html>]

Over eight out of ten American climate scientists believe that human activity contributes to global warming, according to a new survey released by the Statistical Assessment Service (STATS) at George Mason University. The researchers also report that belief in human-induced warming has more than doubled since the last major survey of American climate scientists in 1991 .
However, the survey finds that scientists are still debating the dynamics and dangers of global warming, and only three percent trust newspaper or television coverage of climate change. The survey, which was conducted for STATS by Harris Interactive, also found increased concern among climate scientists since the Gallup organization asked them many of the same questions in 1991. Between March 19 through May 28, 2007 Harris Interactive conducted a mail survey of a random sample of 489 self-identified members of either the American Meteorological Society or the American Geophysical Union who are listed in the current edition of American Men and Women of Science. A random sample of this size carries a theoretical sampling error of +/- four percentage points. A detailed description of the studys methodology as well as that of the earlier Gallup survey is available on request. Major Findings Scientists agree that humans cause global warming

Ninety-seven percent of the climate scientists surveyed believe global average temperatures have increased during
the past century. Eighty-four percent say they personally believe human-induced warming is occurring, and 74% agree that currently available scientific evidence substantiates its occurrence. Only 5% believe that that human activity does not contribute to greenhouse warming; the rest are unsure. Scientists still debate the dangers A slight majority (54%) believe the warming measured over the last 100 years is not
within the range of natural temperature fluctuation. A slight majority (56%) see at least a 50-50 chance that global temperatures will rise two degrees Celsius or more during the next 50 to 100 years. (The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change cites this increase as the point beyond which additional warming would produce major environmental disruptions.) Based on current trends, 41% of scientists believe global climate change will pose a very great danger to the earth in the next 50 to 100 years, compared to 13% who see relatively little danger. Another 44% rate climate change as moderately dangerous. Seventy percent see

climate change as very difficult to manage over the next 50 to 100 years, compared to only 5% who see it as not very difficult to manage. Another 23% see moderate difficulty in managing these changes. A need to know more Overall, only 5% describe the study of global climate change as a
fully mature science, but 51% describe it as fairly mature, while 40% see it as still an emerging science. However, over two out of three (69%) believe there is at least a 50-50 chance that the debate over the role of human activity in global warming will be settled in the next 10 to 20 years. Only 29% express a great deal of confidence that scientists understand the size and extent of anthropogenic [human] sources of greenhouse gases, and only 32% are confident about our understanding of the archeological climate evidence. Climate scientists are skeptical of the media Only 1% of climate scientists rate either broadcast or cable television news about climate change as very reliable. Another 31% say broadcast news is somewhat reliable, compared to 25% for cable news. (The remainder rate TV news as not very or not at all reliable.) Local newspapers are rated as very reliable by 3% and somewhat reliable by 33% of scientists. Even the national press (New York Times, Wall St. Journal etc) is rated as very reliable by only 11%, although another 56% say it is at least somewhat reliable. Former Vice President Al Gores documentary film An Inconvenient Truth rates better than any traditional news source, with 26% finding it very reliable and 38% as somewhat reliable. Other nontraditional information sources fare poorly: No more than 1% of climate experts rate the doomsday movie The Day After Tomorrow or Michael Crichtons novel

Five percent of climate scientists say they have been pressured by public officials or government agencies to deny, minimize or discount evidence of humaninduced global warming, Three percent say they have been pressured by funders, and two percent perceived pressure from supervisors at work. Just three percent report that they were pressured by public officials or government agencies to embellish, play up or overstate evidence of global warming: Two percent report such pressure from funders, and two percent from supervisors. Changing scientific opinion In 1991 the Gallup organization conducted a telephone survey on global climate change among 400 scientists drawn from membership lists of the American Meteorological Association and the American Geophysical Union. We repeated several of their questions verbatim, in order to measure changes in scientific opinion over time. On a variety of questions, opinion has consistently shifted toward increased belief in and concern about global warming. A mong the changes: In 1991 only 60% of climate scientists believed that average global temperatures were up, compared to 97% today. In 1991 only a minority (41%) of climate scientists agreed that then-current scientific evidence substantiates the occurrence of human-induced warming, compared tothree out of four (74%) today. The proportion of
State of Fear as very reliable. Are climate scientists being pressured to deny or advance global warming? those who see at least a 50-50 chance that global temperatures will rise two degrees Celsius has increased from 47% to 56% since 1991. The proportion of scientists who have a great deal of confidence in our understanding of the human-induced sources of global climate change rose from 22% in 1991 to 29% in 2007. Similarly, the proportion voicing confidence in our understanding of the archeological climate evidence rose from20% to 32%. Despite these expressions of uncertainty, however, the proportion which rating the chances at 50-50 or better that the role of human behavior will be settled in the near future rose from 47% in 1991 to 69% in 2007.

1AC: Climate Advantage 3/6

Were reaching a tipping point action now is critical to prevent positive feedbacks
Hansen 2009, heads the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies and adjunct professor in the Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences at Columbia
University (James, December, Storms of My Grandchildren, 72-74)
Ice sheet response to global warming is quite the contrary. Ice sheet size changes little at first, and thus sea level changes only slowly. As the planet gets warmer, the area on the ice sheet with summer melt increases. And as

ice shelves disappear and the ice sheet is "softened up" by surface warming and meltwater, movement of ice and discharge of giant icebergs via ice "streams" become more rapid, leading to the possibility that large portions of the ice sheet will collapse. If we continue burning fossil fuels at current rates, ice sheet collapse and sea level rise ofat leastseveral meters is a dead certainty. We know this from paleoclimate records showing how large the ice sheets were as a function of global temperature. The only question is how fast ice sheet disintegration will occur.Once ice sheets begin to collapse, sea level can rise rapidly. For example, about 14,000 years ago, as Earth emerged from the last ice age and became warmer, sea level rose at an average rate of 1 meter every 20 or 25 years, a rate that continued for several centuries. The danger today is that we may allow ocean warming and "softening up" of ice sheets to reach a point such that the dynamical process of collapse takes over. And then it would be too latewe cannot tie a rope or build a wall around a mile-thick ice sheet.The third source of inertia is our fossil-fuel-based energy system. The transitions from wood to coal to oil to gas each required several decadesand recently, as oil and gas supplies tightened, we have begun moving back toward more coal use. Indeed, coal is again the largest source of carbon dioxide emissions.The upshot regarding energy system inertia is this: Humanity today is heavily dependent on fossil fuelscoal, oil, and gasfor most of our energy. When we realize that it is necessary to phase out fossil fuels, that transition will not be quickit will take at least several decades to replace our enormous fossil fuel infrastructure. In the meantime more greenhouse gas emissions and more climate change will be occurring. Climate feedbacks interact with
the ocean warms, ice "shelves"tongues of the ice sheet that reach out into the ocean and are grounded on the ocean flooralso begin to melt. As inertia. Feedbacks (as discussed in chapter 3) are responses to climate change that can either amplify or diminish the climate change. There is no inherent reason for our climate to be dominated by amplifying feedbacks.

amplifying feedbacks are dominant on time scales from decades to hundreds of thousands of years. Water (including water vapor, ice, and snow) plays a big role. A colder planet has a brighter surface and absorbs less sunlight, mainly because of the high reflectivity of ice and snow surfaces. A warmer planet has more greenhouse gases in the air,especially water vapor, as well as darker vegetated land areas. Dominance of these two amplifying
Indeed, on very long time scales important diminishing feedbacks come into play (see chapters 8 and 10).However, it turns out that

feedbacks, the planet's surface reflectivity and the amount of greenhouse gases in the air, is the reason climate whipsawed between glacial and interglacial states in response to small insolation changes caused by slight perturbations of Earth's orbit.Amplifying feedbacks that were expected to occur only slowly have

begun to come into play in the past few years. These feedbacks gases from melting permafrost and Arctic continental shelves, and include significant reduction in ice sheets, release of greenhouse movement of climatic zones with resulting changes in vegetation distributions. These feedbacks were not incorporated in most climate simulations, such as those of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Yet these "slow" feedbacks are already beginning to emerge in the real world. Rats! That is a problem. Climate inertia causes more warming to be in the pipeline. Feedbacks will amplify that warming. So "inertia" was a Trojan horseit only seemed like a friend. It lulled us to sleep, and we did not see what was happening. Now we have a situation with big impacts on the horizonpossibly including ice sheet collapse, ecosystem collapse, and species extinction, the dangers of which I will discuss later.What to do? If we run around as if our hair is on fire, flapping our arms, people will not take us seriously. Besides, we are not in a hopeless situation. Rational, feasible actions could avert disastrous consequences, if the actions are prompt and strategic. Feedbacks work in both directionsif a forcing is negative, amplifying feedbacks will increase the cooling effect.If we wish to stabilize Earth's climate, we do not need to return its atmospheric composition to preindustrial levels. What we must do , to first order, is reduce the planet's energy imbalance to near zero . Of course, the climate then would be stabilized at its current state, not at its preindustrial state . Climate may need to be a tad cooler than today, if, for
example, we want ice sheets to be stable. That may require a slight additional adjustment of the human-made climate forcing. But let's not get ahead of the story.

And positive feedbacks cause extinction.

Hansen 2009, heads the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies and adjunct professor in the Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences at Columbia
University (James, December, Storms of My Grandchildren, 236)

The paleoclimate record does not provide a case with a climate forcing of the magnitude and speed that will occur if fossil fuels are all burned. Models are nowhere near the stage at which they can predict reliably when major ice sheet disintegration will begin. Nor can we say how close we are to methane hydrate instability. But these are questions of when, not if. If we burn all the fossil fuels, the ice sheets almost surely will melt entirely, with the final sea level rise about 75 meters (250 feet), with most of that possibly occurring within a time scale of centuries. Methane hydrates are likely to be more extensive and vulnerable now than they were in the early Cenozoic. It is difficult to imagine how the methane hydrates could survive, once the ocean has had time to warm. In that event a PETM-like warming could be added on top of the
fossil fuel warming. After I've come to conclude that if

the ice is gone, would Earth proceed to the Venus syndrome, a runaway greenhouse effect that would destroy all life on the planet, perhaps permanently? While that is difficult to say based on present information,
we burn all reserves of oil, gas, and coal, there is a substantial chance we will initiate the runaway greenhouse.

If we also burn the tar sands and tar shale, I believe the Venus syndrome is a dead certainty.

1AC: Climate Advantage 4/6

This will cause massive biodiversity loss that results in extinction
Hansen 2009, heads the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies and adjunct professor in the Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences at Columbia
University (James, December, Storms of My Grandchildren, 147)

The current extinction rate is at least one hundred times greater than the average natural rate. So the concern that humans may have initiated the sixth mass extinction is easy to understand. However, the outcome is still very much up in the air, and human-made climate change is likely to be the determining factor. I will argue that if we continue on a business-asusual path, with a global warming of several degrees Celsius, then we will drive a large fraction of species, conceivably all species, to extinction. On the other hand, just as in the case of ice sheet stability, if we bring atmospheric composition under control in the near future, it is still possible to keep human-caused extinctions to a moderate level. Only a prioritization of Earth observation satellites can provide the necessary data, verification, and political will to solve global climate change. Lewis et. Al. 2010 (James A., senior fellow and director of the Technology and Public Policy Program at CSIS; Sarah O. Ladislaw, CSIS Senior Fellow,
Energy and National Security Program; and Denise E. Zheng, CSIS; Earth Observation for Climate Change: A Report of the CSIS Technology and Public Policy Program, csis.org/files/publication/100608_Lewis_EarthObservation_WEB.pdf)

Climate change poses a dilemma for space policy. If we accept that climate change poses credible and major risks to regional stability, national security, and economic health, the United States needs to reconsider how it spends its money for civil space. Earth observation data are critical to understanding the causes and effects of climate change and quantifying changing conditions in the environment. The shortage of satellites actually designed and in orbit to measure climate change is unacceptable if we are serious about climate change. Until this year, U.S. space policy was on autopilot.
The Bush space policy did not differ mark- edly from the space policy of Jimmy Carter. The hallmark of this period was heavy investment in the shuttle and space station. The commitment to these 1970s technologies
eroded public interest in space. A science reporter for a national newspaper said that when he wrote on the unmanned Mars explorers, thousands of readers would look at the story on the newspapers Web site, but when he wrote about the shuttle, there would be only a few hundred hits. The overlong commitment to the shuttle and the station ended in final years of the Bush administration, but unfortunately it was replaced with an unworkable vision for manned explora- tion that would have consumed a major portion of the space budget. In fact, a mission to Mars is beyond the technical capabilities of any nation. Leonardo da Vinci could draw helicopters and aircraft, but they were made of wood and cloth. Until breakthroughs in materials, chemistry, and physics, his ideas could not be implemented. The same is now true for manned planetary explora- tion. Our propulsion and life support systems will not support a manned flight to Mars. In contrast, a return to the Moon is achievable. The dilemma is that NASA would need an- other $150 billion to return to the moon more than 40 years after the first visit. There is no doubt that a return to the moon would bring prestige to the United States and that if another nation such as China was to get there beforehand it will be interpreted as another sign of U.S. decline. Years of a static approach to space policy have put us in this uncomfortable situation. From the perspective of the national interest, however, the United States would be better served by building and main- taining a robust space capacity

This is a question of priorities. Manned flight should remain a priority, but not the first priority. Earth observation data is critical to understanding the causes and effects of climate change and quantifying changing conditions in the environment. The paucity of satellites actually designed and in orbit to measure climate change is disturbing. The United States does not have a robust climate-monitoring infrastructure. In fact, the current infrastructure is in decline. Until that decline is reversed and an adequate space infrastructure put in place, building and launching satellites specifically designed for monitoring climate change should be the first priority for civil space spending . Manned spaceflight provides prestige, but Earth observation is crucial for security and economic well-being. The United States should continue to fund as a priority a more robust and adequate space infrastructure to measure climate change, building and orbiting satellites specifically designed to carry advanced sensors for such monitoring. Satellites provide globally consistent observations and the means to make simultaneous observations of diverse measurements that are essential for climate studies. They supply high-accuracy global observations of the atmosphere, ocean, and land surface that cannot be acquired by any other method. Satellite
for monitoring climate change.

instruments supply accurate measurements on a near-daily basis for long periods and across broad geographic regions. They can reveal global patterns that ground or air sensors would be unable to detectas in the case of data from NASA satellites that showed us the amount of pollution arriving in North America from Asia as equal to 15 percent of local emissions of the United States and Canada. This

sort of data is crucial to effective management of emissions the United States, for example, could put in place regulations to decrease emissions and find them neutralized by pollution from other regions.15 Satellites allow us to monitor the pattern of ice-sheet thickening and thinning. While Arctic ice once increased a few
centimeters every year, it now melts at a rate of more than one meter annually. This knowledge would not exist without satellite laser altimetry from NASAs ICESat satellite.16 Satellite

observations serve an indispensable rolethey have provided unprecedented knowl- edge of inaccessible regions. Of the 44 essential climate variables (ECV) recognized as necessary to support the needs of the parties to the UNFCCC for the purposes of the Convention, 26 depend on satellite observations. But deployments of new and replacement satellites have not kept pace with the termination of older systems. Innovation and investment in Earth observation technology have failed to keep pace with global needs for monitoring and verification. Much of our data comes from satellites put in orbit for other purposes,
such as weather prediction and monitoring. The sensors on these weather satellites provide valuable data, but they are not optimized for monitoring climate change or for adequately assessing the effect of mitigation efforts. More precise and specialized data are needed to

1AC: Climate Advantage 5/6

understand and predict climate change, and getting these data will require new orbital sensors. Countries

have improved many of their climate observation capabilities, but reports suggest little progress in ensuring long-term continuity for several important observing systems. The bulk of climate data is collected by the United States, and NASAs investment in the Earth Observing System missions has provided the climate-quality data used to establish trends in sea level, ozone concentrations, ocean color, solar irradiance, Earths energy balance, and other key variables. While this investment has made an invaluable contribution, it is not an operational system. Many satellites currently in orbit are operating well past their planned lifetimes. In the next eight years, half of the worlds Earth observation satellites will be past their useful life. One reason for this is that many of the satellites that provide critical data for monitoring climate change are experimental satellites (such as TRMMthe Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission). Satellites built as research efforts provide real benefit, but if they are not replaced when their service life ends and if a permanent operational capability for Earth observation is not put in place, we will face insurmountable problems for observing capabilities and our ability to manage climate change. Many missions and observations for collecting climate data are at risk of interruption. These include measurements of ocean color that are critical for studying phytoplankton bloom and the role of ocean biomass as a carbon source and sink and data on the role of forests in the carbon cycle. Perhaps the most important shortcoming involves the monitoring of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and greenhouse gases. Reduction and regulation of CO2 emissions are part of every discussion on how to manage climate change, but the crash of NASAs Orbiting Carbon Observatory (OCO) satellite left the world essentially bereft of the ability to make precise measurements to assess emissions reduction efforts. OCO cost approximately $278 million,17 which was about 2 percent of NASAs annual budget for manned space flight in 2009. Its loss will cripple global car- bon monitoring until we have its replacement, finally funded this year and scheduled for launch no later than February 2013 . Existing GHG monitoring networks and programs are predominantly ground-based, but they are not truly adequate to the task. Ground-based networks are limited because they can only provide disjointed pieces of a larger picture. Moreover, these systems are aging, and investment for replacement has declined. We now rely on Japans GOSAT, the European Space Agencys SCIAMACHY sensor, and Canadas microsatellite, CanX-2, for observations of atmospheric concentrations of carbon; however, these sensors are not advanced enough to meet data requirements needed to understand critical aspects of the carbon cycle, and they are highly constrained by their range of coverage. For example, the carbon produced from a fossil fuel power plant is too small to measure with
GOSAT, and low spatial resolution and high uncertainty of measurements limit the monitoring capabilities of SCIAMACHY.18 The implications are serious for measuring the effectiveness of climate policies.

If reduction in GHG emissions (the most significant being carbon dioxide) is the centerpiece of mitigation efforts and a goal for both national legislation and international agreement, we are woefully unprepared to assess the effectiveness of these measures. It will be difficult to assess and adjust CO2-reducing measures without greater investment in orbiting sensors.19 The need for information has never been greater, but there are significant gaps in global Earth monitoring capabilities.20 Although more than 50 nations operate or plan to operate Earth observation satellites, most of these are basic electro-optical satellites, essentially orbiting digital cameras that lack the necessary sensors for precise climate monitoring. There are only a handful of dedicated satellites for monitoring climate change, and the time has passed when general-purpose weather satellites can meet our informational needs. Japan, Europe, and the United States operate satellites with some of the sensors needed to monitor climate change, but a recent National Academies study found that of the 26 essential climate variables that can be monitored from space, we have coverage of only 16.21 Only a coordinated federal policy and investment, including revised priorities for our civil space programs, can change this. For most of the last decade, NASA was unable to replace its climate-monitoring satellites. Re- placing these satellites is crucial to avoid a drastic decline in collecting the most valuable information for monitoring climate change. The Obama administration has proposed a budget for NASAs Earth science programs of $2.4 billion in new funding over the next five years, an increase of more than 60 percent. The new funding, which requires congressional approval, will help replace OCO and allow NASA to replace the twin GRACE satellites that make detailed measurements of Earths gravity field that can provide important climate data. The request for NOAAs budget for climate-related activities has been increased as well. NOAA will be spending $2.2 billion to maintain and further develop satellites and to support climate research; $435 million has been requested to support the U.S. Global Change Research Program, with $77 million in new increases for core climate services and observations. Spending on space has always been a question of priorities. Until recently, those priorities were frozen in time, reflecting political needs that were decades out of date. Our national priorities have changed. A new priority, reflecting the new challenges to our security and national interest, involves monitoring and understanding climate change . Debate over climate change is fierce
and there are many skeptics, but the signs of major changes are undeniable. Warnings of catastrophe are likely overblown, but we

1AC: Climate Advantage 6/6

do not fully understand the implications of climate change or the util- ity of various measures to mitigate it. Climate

change is occurring, and it creates new risks. In this context, the recent decision to scale back spending on human space flight and increase spending on Earth observation is a better match for national priorities and interests. It updates a space policy that has been badly out of date for years. Observation of climate change began more than a century ago with simple measurements of the Earths average
temperature. These were interesting, but inadequate. The breakthrough in understanding climate change came with Earth observation satellites. Satellites provide global awareness in ways that other technologies cannot match. The monitoring needed for a serious ef- fort requires observations that can only be done from space. Recommendations Climate change will have pervasive and unavoidable effects on economic and national security. Managing these consequences and mitigating them when possible are new and difficult tasks for governments. Progress in mitigating and adapting to climate change will require the worlds countries to agree to coordinate

climate change offers a unique opportunity for the United States to engage other nations in pursuing common interests and addressing future challenges. Not only is the United States well positioned to lead on this issue because of its significant space and scientific capacity, it also faces global expectations that it should shoulder the leadership burden for climate change . A commitment to building the space and information
their actions. Reaching such agreement will be no easy task. That said, infrastructure needed to manage climate change could demonstrate the U.S. leadership, based on competence and advancing the global good, that the world respects and admires. Operationalization is the next step for dealing with climate changeto make the data and knowledge generation by satellites and science easier to use in policymaking. Operationalization requires a new approach. Climate change has largely been an issue of science. The

Effective global management of climate requires a new approach with three integrated elementsspace, networks, and collaboration. Our belief is that a concerted effort to analyze and share data from the many national efforts could significantly advance our understanding of the risks and causes of climate change, better measure the effects of mitigation policies, and guide planning on how to adapt to changes in the environment. Achieving such a concerted effort will require coordination must occur on several different levels if it is to have a meaningful
existing vehicles for international cooperation and data sharing are aimed at the scientific community. effect. The firstthe collection and measurement of relevant datadepends largely on satellites. Without the proper data, it would be very difficult to develop and aggregate a global picture of climate change and its nature and pace. It would be difficult to measure the effects of mitigation efforts, determine when or whether policies are effective, or pre- dict when and how climate effects will affect local communities. The second level is to expand the analysis and sharing of information. In some ways, we are only in the early stages of developing a global enterprise for assessing climate change. Much of the research and analysis conducted thus far has been focused on understanding the nature and pace of climate change, forecasting future changes in Earths natural systems based on changes in differ ent variables, and substantiating theories about how human efforts to reduce the effects of climate change might actually have some effect. More work is needed in each area to improve our under- standing and update it as the natural environment continues to change. Finally, data must move from the scientific community to the policy communityto govern- ments and policymakersif data are to guide change. While the UNs Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change tailored analysis to meet policymakers needs in the hopes of reaching a global consensus for action, the challenge today is to extend and strengthen connections between the sci- ence and policy communities. A coordinated multinational effort to better inform the policy process can change this. Our belief is that a concerted effort to analyze and share data from the many national efforts could sig- nificantly advance our understanding of the risks and causes of climate change, better measure the effects of mitigation, and guide planning on adapting to changes in the environment. To this end, our recommendations follow: The U.S. approach to climate change policy needs to inform decisionmakers and planners in both government and the private sector by providing understandable metrics and analyses of the effectiveness of, and compliance with, mitigation programs and adaption plans. The customers for this should include federal

the United States should increase its Earth observation capabilitiesespecially space-based sensors for carbon monitoringto improve our ability to understand the carbon cycle and to inform any future international agreement. This means that until these capabilities are adequate for monitoring climate change, investment in Earth observation satellites should take precedence over other space programs. Increased spending on earth observation satellites specifically designed for climate change should be maintained until the current capability shortfall is eliminated. The United States
agencies, state and local governments, private sector users, and other nations. To better serve the national interest, should accelerate, expand, and reinforce a National Climate Service to im- prove climate information management and decisionmaking. In a related effort, the United States should support the World Meteorological Organization in its efforts to create a World Climate Service System. The United States should complement its national effort by supporting and expanding mul- tilateral efforts to coordinate Earth observation for climate change, building on existing inter- national efforts such as GCOS. This could entail coordinated investment in space and, subsidies for ground facilities in developing countries, recognizing that the United States, EU, Japan, and Canada will bear the largest share of the cost at this time.

1AC Disasters Advantage 1/5

Advantage __ is Disasters Natural and technical disasters are increasing at an alarming rate. The globe is becoming a field of intensifying death and destruction.

Brunsma and Picou 2008 (David, University of Missouri, and J. Steven, University of South Alabama, Disasters in the Twenty-First Century:
Modern Destruction and Future Instruction Social Forces Volume 87, Number 2, December 2008) Sociologists are becoming increasingly aware of the changing nature of risk in late modernity and the shifting landscape of the sociological study of disasters. This

increased "consciousness of catastrophe" is directly related to the empirical fact that the number of "natural" and "technological" disasters have increased substantially over the past 30 years. In the past eight years, some 422 disaster declarations have been issued in the United States alone etching disasters as an important part of contemporary American experience (Bogues 2008). The number of people and communities affected by this most recent spate of catastrophic events reflects a global intensification of death and destruction that invites analytical and
empirical application of a critical sociological imagination. While affecting society as a whole, these "focusing events," or "destabilizing events," have also had an impact on scholarly enterprises, shifting the attention of sociologists from more traditional areas of professional inquiry to the expansion and application of innovative concepts and methods to the study of disasters (Birkland 1997; Picou and Marshall 2007). This paradigm shift means that disaster research is being actively re-imagined throughout the broader discipline.

We have turned away from recognizing the responsibility of the government to care for its most vulnerable populations, especially in the face of uncontrollable environmental changes. The refusal to hold the government responsible for disaster preparedness and response result in the marking of racialized populations as expendable in favor of the smooth functioning of the market. Giroux 2006 (Henry, Global TV Network Chair Professorship at McMaster University in the English and Cultural Studies Department, Reading
Hurricane Katrina: Race, Class, and the Biopolitics of Disposability, College Literature 33.3 (2006) 171-196)

Soon after Hurricane Katrina hit the Gulf Coast, the consequences of the long legacy of attacking big government and bleeding the social and public service sectors of the state became glaringly evident as did a government that displayed a "staggering indifference to human suffering" (Herbert 2005). Hurricane Katrina made it abundantly clear that only the government had the power, resources, and authority to address complex undertakings such as dealing with the totality of the economic, environmental, cultural, [End Page 174] and social destruction that impacted the Gulf Coast. Given the Bush administration's disdain for the legacy of the New Deal, important government agencies were viewed scornfully as oversized entitlement programs, stripped of their power, and served up as a dumping ground to provide lucrative administrative jobs for political hacks who were often unqualified to lead such agencies. Not only was FEMA downsized and placed under the Department of Homeland Security but its role in disaster planning and preparation was subordinated to the all-inclusive goal of fighting terrorists. While it was virtually impossible to miss the total failure of the government response in the aftermath of Katrina, what many people saw as incompetence or failed national leadership was more than that. Something more systemic and deep-rooted was revealed in the wake of Katrinanamely, that the state no longer provided a safety net for the poor, sick, elderly, and homeless. Instead, it had been transformed into a punishing institution intent on dismantling the welfare state and treating the homeless, unemployed, illiterate, and disabled as dispensable populations to be managed, criminalized, and made to disappear into prisons, ghettos, and the black hole of despair. The Bush administration was not simply unprepared for Hurricane Katrina as it denied that the federal government alone had the resources to address catastrophic events; it actually felt no responsibility for the lives of poor blacks and others marginalized by poverty and relegated to the outskirts of society. Increasingly, the role of the state seems to be about engendering the financial rewards and privileges of only some members of society, while the welfare of those marginalized by race and class is now viewed with criminal contempt . The coupling of
the market state with the racial state under George W. Bush means that policies are aggressively pursued to dismantle the welfare state, eliminate affirmative action, model urban public schools after prisons, aggressively pursue anti-immigrant policies, and incarcerate with impunity Arabs, Muslims, and poor youth of color. The

central commitment of the new hyper-neoliberalism is now organized around the best way to remove or make invisible those individuals and groups who are either seen as a drain or stand in the way of market freedoms, free trade, consumerism, and the neoconservative dream of an American empire. This is what I call the new biopolitics of disposability: the poor, especially people of color, not only have to fend for themselves in the face of life's tragedies but are also supposed to do it without being seen by the dominant society. Excommunicated from the sphere of human concern, they have been rendered invisible, utterly disposable, and heir to that army of socially homeless that allegedly no longer existed in color-blind America.

1AC Disasters Advantage 2/5

The refusal to engage in disaster preparedness exacerbates the global vulnerability to environmental change, ensuring the global poor can never escape the devastating cycle of poverty. Briceo 08 (Slvano Director, United Nations, International Strategy for Disaster Reduction Linking Disaster Risk Reduction and Poverty Reduction ) Disasters are often portrayed as acts of nature, or of a natural order. Yet this is mostly far from reality. The major factors influencing disaster risks are human and social vulnerability, matched with the overall capacity to respond to or reduce the impact of natural hazards. Poverty is therefore a major factor increasing disaster risk, by increasing vulnerability to disasters and reducing existing coping capacities. It is only by addressing these two issues together that we can make the difference between a community trapped in a grinding poverty cycle, and one with secure lives and livelihoods. Another patch of common ground is that the poor suffer the most from disasters.1 94.25% of all people killed by disasters in from 1975-2000 were low income or lower-middle income people. The poorest people comprised 68% of deaths from disasters . These plain
numbers are an indictment of socioeconomic inequality, and a telling signpost to where disaster risk reduction must concentrate its efforts as of moral necessity.

Furthermore, drought, cyclones, and flood seasons are repeatedly depriving the poor of their assets, livelihoods, and labour force, all too often locking them into endemic poverty cycles. Even in the poorest communities, however, there is a wealth of
knowledge and experience on how to break this negative feedback cycle. From this set of good practices, for instance, water and environmental management emerge as a very prominent link between disaster risk reduction and poverty reduction. The examples of drought risk reduction initiatives highlighted in this publication are equally inspiring, and make intuitive sense. There is a need to further promote these initiatives, so that they can be scaled up or replicated on a wider scale.

Our affirmative is a mechanism by which we can reclaim public spaces to demand transformation of the biopolitics of disposability towards a politics of democratic inclusion. Recognition of the responsibility to transform our relation to natural disaster and how it renders populations vulnerable and expendable is key to transformative politics.

Giroux 2006 (Henry, Global TV Network Chair Professorship at McMaster University in the English and Cultural Studies Department, Reading Hurricane Katrina: Race, Class, and the Biopolitics of Disposability, College Literature 33.3 (2006) 171-196)
Katrina reveals that we are living in dark times. The shadow of authoritarianism remains after the storm clouds and hurricane winds have passed, offering a glimpse of its wreckage and terror. The politics of a disaster that affected Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi is about more than government incompetence, militarization, socio-economic polarization, environmental disaster, and political scandal . Hurricane Katrina broke through the visual blackout of poverty and the pernicious ideology of color-blindness to reveal the government's role in fostering the dire conditions of largely poor African-Americans, who were bearing the hardships incurred by the full wrath of the indifference and violence at work in the racist, neoliberal state .
Global neoliberalism and its victims now occupy a space shaped by authoritarian politics, the terrors inflicted by a police state, and a logic of disposability that removes them from government social provisions and the discourse and privileges of citizenship. One

of the most obvious lessons of Katrinathat race and racism still matter in Americais fully operational through a biopolitics in which "sovereignty resides in the power and capacity to dictate who may live and who may die" (Mbembe 11-12). Those poor minorities of color and class, unable
to contribute to the prevailing consumerist ethic, are vanishing into the sinkhole of poverty in desolate and abandoned enclaves of decaying cities, neighborhoods, and rural spaces, or in America's ever-expanding prison empire. Under the Bush regime, a biopolitics driven by the waste machine of what Zygmunt Bauman defines as "liquid modernity" registers a new and brutal racism as part of the emergence of a contemporary and savage

Any viable attempt to challenge the biopolitical project that now shapes American life and culture must do more than unearth the powerful antidemocratic forces that now govern American economics, politics, education, media, and culture; it must also deepen possibilities of individual and collective struggles by fighting for the rebuilding of civil society and the creation of a vast network of democratic public spheres such as schools and the alternative media in order to develop new models of individual and social agency that can expand and deepen the reality of democratic public life. This is a call for a diverse "radical party," following Stanley Aronowitz's exhortation, a party that prioritizes democracy as a
authoritarianism. [End Page 188] global task, views hope as a precondition for political engagement, gives primacy to making the political more pedagogical, and understands the importance of the totality of the struggle as it informs and articulates within and

Democratically minded citizens and social movements must return to the crucial issue of how race, class, power, and inequality in America contribute to the suffering and hardships experienced daily by the poor, people of color, and working- and middle-class people. The fight for equality offers new challenges in the process of constructing a politics that directly addresses poverty, class domination, and a resurgent racism. Such
across a wide range of sites and sectors of everyday lifedomestically and globally.

1AC Disasters Advantage 3/5

a politics would take seriously what it means to struggle pedagogically and politically over both ideas and material relations of power as they affect diverse individuals and groups at the level of daily life. Such struggles
would combine a democratically energized cultural politics of resistance and hope with a politics aimed at offering workers a living wage and all citizens a guaranteed

Biopolitics is not just about the reduction of selected elements of the population to the necessities of bare life or worse; it is also potentially about enhancing life by linking hope and a new vision to the struggle for reclaiming the social, providing a language capable of translating individual issues into public considerations, and recognizing that in the age of the new media the terrain of culture is one of the most important pedagogical spheres through which to challenge the most basic precepts of the new authoritarianism. The waste machine of modernity, as Bauman points out, must be challenged within a new
standard of living, one that provides a decent education, housing, and health care to all residents of the United States.
understanding of environmental justice, human rights, and democratic politics (2000, 15). Negative globalization with its attachment to the mutually enforcing modalities of militarism and racial segregation must be exposed and dismantled. And this demands new forms of resistance that are both more global and differentiated. But if these struggles are going to emerge, especially in the United States, then we need a politics and pedagogy of hope, one that takes seriously Hannah Arendt's call to use the [End Page 189] public realm to throw light on the "dark times" that threaten to extinguish the very idea of democracy. Against the tyranny of market fundamentalism, religious dogmatism, unchecked militarism, and ideological claims to certainty, an emancipatory biopolitics must enlist education as a crucial force in the struggle over democratic identities, spaces, and ideals. Central to the biopolitics of disposability is the recognition that abiding powerlessness atrophies the public imagination and leads to political paralysis. Consequently, its policies avidly attack critical education at all levels of cultural production in an all-out effort to undermine critical thought, imagination, and substantive agency. To significantly confront the force of a biopolitics in the service of the new authoritarianism, intellectuals, artists, and others in various cultural sitesfrom schools to higher education to the mediawill have to rethink what it means to secure the conditions for critical education both within and outside of the schools. In the

Against the biopolitics of racial exclusion, the university should be a principal site where dialogue, negotiation, mutual understanding, and respect provide the knowledge and experience for students to develop a shared space for affirming differences while simultaneously learning those shared values necessary for an inclusive democratic society. Similarly, both public and higher education must address with new courage the history of American slavery, the enduring legacy of racism in the United States, and its interface with both political nationalism
context of formal schooling, this means fighting against the corporatization, commercialism, and privatization of public schools. Higher education has to be defended in the same terms. and the enduring market and religious fundamentalisms at work in contemporary society. Similarly, racism must be not be reduced to a private matter, a case of individual prejudice removed from the dictates of state violence

What must be instituted and fought for in higher education is a critical and anti-racist pedagogy that unsettles, stirs up human consciousness, "breeds dissatisfaction with the level of both freedom and democracy achieved thus far," and inextricably connects the fates of freedom, democracy, and critical education (Bauman 2003, 14). Hannah Arendt once argued that "the public realm has lost the power of illumination," and one result is that more and more people "have retreated from the world and their obligations within it" (1955, 4). The public realm is not merely a space where the political, social, economic, and cultural interconnect; it is also the pre-eminent space of public pedagogythat is, a space where subjectivities are shaped, public commitments are formed, and choices are made. As sites of cultural politics and public pedagogy, public spaces offer a unique opportunity for critically engaged citizens,
and the broader realm of politics, and left to matters of "taste, preference, and ultimately, of consumer, or lifestyle choice" (Gilroy 2005, 146-47). young people, academics, [End Page 190] teachers, and various intellectuals to engage in pedagogical struggles that provide the conditions for social empowerment. Such struggles can be waged through the new media, films, publications, radio interviews, and a range of other forms of cultural production. It is especially crucial, as Mark Poster has argued, that scholars, teachers, public intellectuals, artists, and cultural theorists take on the

This also means deploying new technologies of communication such as the Internet, camcorder, and cell phone in political and pedagogically strategic ways to build protracted struggles and reclaim the promise of a democracy that insists on racial, gender, and economic equality. The new technoculture is a powerful pedagogical tool that needs to be used, on the one hand, in the struggle against both dominant media and the hegemonic ideologies they produce, circulate, and legitimate, and, on the other hand, as a valuable tool in treating men and women as agents of change, mindful of the consequences of their actions, and utterly capable of pursuing truly egalitarian models of democracy. The promise of a better world cannot be found in modes of authority that lack a vision of social justice, renounce the promise of democracy, and reject the
challenge of understanding how the new media technologies construct subjects differently with multiple forms of literacy that engage a range of intellectual capacities (2001). dream of a better future, offering instead of dreams the pale assurance of protection from the nightmare of an all-embracing terrorism. Against this stripped-down legitimation of authority is the promise of public spheres, which in their diverse forms, sites, and content offer pedagogical and political possibilities for strengthening the social bonds of democracy, new spaces within which to cultivate the capacities for critical modes of individual and social agency, and crucial opportunities to form alliances to collectively struggle for a biopolitics that expands the scope of vision, operations of democracy, and the range of democratic institutionsthat is, a biopolitics that fights against the terrors of totalitarianism. Such spheres are about more than legal rights guaranteeing freedom of speech; they are also sites that demand a certain kind of citizen informed by particular forms of

argues that if public space is not to be experienced not as a private affair, but as a vibrant sphere in which people learn how to participate in and shape public life, then it must be shaped through an education that provides the decisive traits of courage, responsibility, and shame, all of which connect the fate of each individual to the fate of others, the planet, and global democracy (1991, 81-123). In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, the biopolitical calculus of massive power differentials and iniquitous market relations put the scourge of poverty and racism on full display. To confront [End Page 191] the biopolitics of disposability, we need to recognize the dark times in which we live and offer up a vision of hope that creates the conditions for multiple collective and global struggles that refuse to use politics as an act of war and markets as the measure of democracy. Making human beings superfluous is the essence of totalitarianism, and democracy is the antidote in urgent need of being reclaimed. Katrina should keep the hope of such a struggle alive for quite some time because for many of us the images of those floating bodies serve as an desperate reminder of what it means when justice, as the lifeblood of democracy, becomes cold and indifferent in the face of death.
education, a citizen whose education provides the essential conditions for democratic public spheres to flourish. Cornelius Castoriadis, the great philosopher of democracy,

1AC Disasters Advantage 4/5

Earth Observation Satellites decentralize the state monopoly on information, allowing citizen groups to be meaningfully engaged in state politics.

Litfin 1999 (Karen T., Professor of Political Science, University of Washington,

The Status of the Statistical State: Satellites and the Diffusion of Epistemic Sovereignty, Global Society, Vol. 13, No.1, 1999) The ability to control the flow of information, or what I have called epistemic sovereignty, is central to the exercise of control and authority within a territorial jurisdiction. The transparency and the global perspective of ERS technologies entail multiple, and sometimes contradictory, implications for epistemic sovereignty_ The primary challenges are from the private sector, global science, and popular movements. On

the one hand, ERS contributes to the unbundling, but not the abolition, of territoriality, often deterritorialising state practices. The principle of non-intervention, upon which traditional norms of sovereignty have relied, is at least called into question by the global gaze and the ubiquity of ERS images. On the other hand, ERS has also strengthened the territorial sovereignty of a few developing countries in their remote regions. Yet the greatest contribution of ERS to the reconfiguration of epistemic sovereignty might very well be in its applications to the proliferation of information and political practices beyond the state-most importantly, in the decentralised networks which constitute global science and the local efforts of community, environmental and peace groups.81 While state-funded ERS programmes have their roots in the balance-of-power politics characteristic of the national security state, today they tend to exemplify the sorts of sovereignty bargains required by scientific and environmental co-operation. The availability of high-resolution data on the
commercial market has forced states to make a trade-off between traditional security objectives and industrial competitiveness. While none of these developments entails an outright "erosion" of sovereignty, they do highlight the importance of the epistemic dimension of sovereignty. The

control over the flow of information, which is essential to the modern scientific state, appears to be shifting beyond the scientific state.
If modernity is interpreted as the enclosure of the globe via the twin institu- tions of state sovereignty and private property, then ERS technologies at once epitomise and challenge that trend. On the one hand, by making visible the invisible, satellite imagery renders nature subject to claims of ownership and control--whether by states or by oil and mining companies. On the other hand, in

light of the globality and transparency inherent in ERS technologies and the emphasis on environmental co-operation, ERS has the potential to become a tool in the revisioning of nature as a global commons. Indeed, this is the thrust of much of the discourse surrounding environmental ERS. Likewise, the commercial availability of high-resolution satellite images opens the door for a host of non-state actors, especially citizens' groups and the news media, to involve themselves in the high-stakes national security issues which were once the sole purview of states' military establishments. There is also an interesting tension between the universal, totalising perspective of the
planetary gaze, and the application of ERS technologies to popular sovereignty through the decentralis- ation of scientific and political control.

And such mechanisms of participatory democracy are crucial to the creation of responsible and engaged citizens. The alternative is injustice and powerlessness.
Dr. Henry A. Giroux 2009 (Global Television Network Chair in English and Cultural Studies @ McMaster University; Received his Doctorate from
Carnegie-Mellon in 1977. Obama's View of Education Is Stuck in Reverse, TruthOut, July 24th, Available at http://www.truthout.org/072409A

Situated within a broader context of issues concerned with social responsibility, politics and the dignity of human life, education should be engaged as a site that offers students the opportunity to involve themselves in the deepest problems of society, to acquire the knowledge, skills and ethical vocabulary necessary for modes of critical dialogue and forms of broadened civic participation. This suggests developing classroom conditions for students to come to
terms with their own sense of power and public voice as individual and social agents by enabling them to examine and frame critically what they learn in the classroom "within a more political or social or intellectual understanding of what's going on" in the interface between their lives and the world at large.(4) At

the very least, students need to learn how to take responsibility for their own ideas, take intellectual risks, develop a sense of respect for others different than themselves, and learn how to think critically in order to function in a wider democratic culture. At issue here is providing students with an education that allows them to recognize the dream and promise of a substantive democracy, particularly the idea that as citizens they are "entitled to public services, decent housing, safety, security, support during hard times, and most importantly, some power over decision making."(5) This is a view of education that treats teachers as critical and supportive intellectuals, not technicians, students as engaged citizens, not consumers, and schools as democratic public spheres, not training sites for the business world. It is also a view of education in which matters of power, equality, civic literacy and justice are central to any viable notion of education that addresses the future in terms of its democratic possibilities, rather than the bottom line .(6)

1AC Disasters Advantage 5/5

Furthermore, only the investment in Earth Observation Satellites allow us to respond to catastrophe not retrospectively, but rather through a connection to our shared communities that provides the basis for the preparation for global environmental change, mitigating inegalitarian sacrifice.

Wigbels et. Al., 2008 (Lyn, G. Ryan Faith, and

Vincent Sabathier; Senior Fellow/Assistant Professor at the Center for Aerospace Policy Research at George Mason University; research analyst at the space foundation at CSIS; senior associate with the CSIS Technology and Public Policy Program EARTH OBSERVATIONS AND GLOBAL CHANGE Why? Where Are We? What Next?, A Report of CSIS Space Initiatives, csis.org/files/media/csis/pubs/080725_wigbels_earthobservation_web.pdf)

Is it possible to predict or alleviate the impacts of natural and manmade disasters? From the recent earthquake in China to
the cyclone in Myanmar to the rapid changes in our climate to the ongoing violence in Darfur, environmental and national security events are occurring around the globe. Can we learn to adapt to and mitigate the water shortages and droughts that, combined with crop failures and exacerbated by soaring energy prices and a growing demand for biofuels, have led to an unprecedented global food crisis? Will we be able to understand and take actions to minimize the impact of changing climate and associated weather events on the health of human popula- tionsfrom addressing rising sea levels to the accelerated spread of disease? Will we be able to balance the need for a wider array of alternative energy sources with respect to surging energy prices, simultaneously managing the implementation of carbon emission agreements including carbon cap and trade agreements? These questions, and many others, demonstrate the complex management challenges presented by global change.1 In

order for decisionmakers to address these management challenges, they must have reliable, continuous longterm data about our planet and environment. Earth observationsincluding sensors in space, on land, in the air, and at sea, as well as associated data management and dissemination systems, Earth system models, and decision support toolsprovide the infrastructure to deliver the data needed to understand ongoing global changes. In
the half century since the dawn of the space age, space-based technologies from communications satellites to the global position system (GPS)which underpin the success of globalization in recent decadeshave been instrumental in knitting our civilization more closely together. Similarly, we

have started to rely on Earth observations as another global public good. Earth observations are critical in a number of areas including dramatic applications in managing the effect of disasters, monitoring global agricultural productivity, assessing natural conditions including the state of the Earths fresh water supplies, and monitoring the indirect effects of global energy policies on Earths climate. These are all part of the vast effort involved in
understanding and managing the 20 per- cent to 80 percent of the U.S. economy (representing $2.75 trillion to $11 trillion in 2007) sensitive to weather in the short term, let alone the evolving risk profile associated with longer-term global change. We have successfully developed and integrated space-based communications and navigation capabilities to bring us closer together. While

we have made great strides in developing and using Earth observation capabilities, many challenges remain to provide equivalent accomplishments in the operational and sustained use of Earth observations for global security. While we have started to use Earth observations in predicting and responding to disasters, such as the Indonesian tsunami or Hurricane Katrina, we are far from secure in having an operational ability to systematically monitor, predict, mitigate, or understand in order to take the actions necessary to prevent the challenges caused by the ever-increasing pace of global change. If we are to understand and plan intelligently for global change, we must take every opportunity to build on our past successes and redress our existing shortcomings. Today, there are a number of steps the United States must undertake to deliver on the potential of Earth observations. First, the United States has the opportunity to demonstrate strong leadership within the U.S. Earth observation community through coherent, integrated planning, budgeting, and management of an Earth observation system providing long-term, continuous data acquisition. Second, the United States must lead the world toward effective international cooperation on Earth observations and, consequently, global change. Like any other kind of strong international leadership, leadership in Earth observations enhances our national foreign policy capabilities from providing data
to manage global resources to economic security enabled by Earth observation capacity building. Third, the United States must ensure that Earth observations meet the needs of all users and that the public and private sectors reinforcenot inhibiteach other to enable us to take advantage of the ingenuity and innovation that the private sector can offer. Rather

than learning to adapt to natural and [hu]manmade disasters, the changing climate, the global food crisis, and our growing appetite for energy, dealing only with the consequences after the fact, we need to start focusing our efforts on the Earth observation systems that will better connect humanity and its home, allowing us to prevent, predict, and mitigate the increasingly dramatic impacts of global change on a routine basis.

1AC: Solvency 1/3

The United States must fulfill its commitment to GEOSS in order to provide accurate data and the leadership necessary to resolve the mounting environmental changes we are experiencing. Killeen 2005 Timothy L. Director @ the National Center for Atmospheric Research. NASA Earth Science 4-28-05. CQ Congressional Testimony. Accessed
Via Lexis/Nexis The first example is probably well known to you. The ozone "holes" in the Antarctic and Arctic were monitored from space by various NASA satellite systems, including the Total Ozone Mapping Spectrometer (TOMS). The diagnosis of the physical and chemical mechanisms responsible for these dangerous changes to our protective ozone shield was made possible by the combination of observations, modeling, and theory supported by NASA. In fact, it

was a NASA highaltitude aircraft that made the "smoking gun" measurements that convinced the scientific and policy communities that chlorine compounds produced by various human activities were centrally responsible for the observed ozone loss. Following these observations, international protocols were put in place that are beginning to ameliorate the global-scale ozone loss. The
TOMS instrument has provided an ongoing source of data that permits us to track the level of ozone in the stratosphere, the annual opening and closing of the "ozone hole," and how this phenomenon is changing over time. These

continuing measurements and analyses and the effective regulatory response have led, among other things, to a reduction in projected deaths from skin cancer worldwide. Last week, President Bush mentioned proposed rules to limit air pollution from coalfired power plants. Air pollution is clearly an important concern. NASA has played a major role in the development of new technologies that can monitor the sources and circulation patterns of air pollution globally. It is another tremendous story of science serving society through innovation. In this case, through an international collaboration, NASA
deployed a one-of-a-kind instrument designed to observe global carbon monoxide and its transport from the NASA Terra spacecraft. These animations show the first global observations of air pollution. Sources of carbon monoxide include industrial processes (see, for example, source regions in the Pacific Rim) and fires (for example in Amazonia). These

global-scale data from space have helped change our understanding of the relationship between pollution and air quality - we now know that pollution is not solely or even primarily a local or regional problem. California's air quality is influenced by industrial activity in Asia, and Europe's air quality is influenced by activities here in America. From
such pioneering work, operational systems can now be designed to observe pollution events, the global distribution of chemicals and particulate matter in the atmosphere, and the ways in which these substances interact and affect the ability of the atmosphere to sustain life - such a system will undoubtedly underpin future efforts to understand, monitor, and manage air quality globally. Without NASA's commitment to innovation in the Earth sciences, it is hard to believe that such an incredible new capability would be available today. The Promise of Earth Observations in the Next Decade The achievements of the last several decades have laid the foundation for an unprecedented era of discovery and innovation in Earth system science. Advances in observing technologies have been accompanied by vast improvements in computing and data processing. When the Earth Observing System satellites were being designed, processing and archiving the data was a central challenge. The Terra satellite produces about 194 gigabytes of raw data per day, which seemed a daunting prospect at the time of its definition. Now laptop memories are measured in gigabytes, students can work with remote sensing datasets on their laptops, and a large data center like NCAR increases our data holdings by about 1000 gigabytes per day. The next generation of high performance computing systems, which will be deployed during the next five years or so, will be petascale systems, meaning that they will be able to process millions of gigabytes of data. The ongoing revolution in information technology has provided us with capabilities we could hardly conceive of when the current generation of Earth observing satellites was being developed. We have just begun to take advantage of the synergies between these technological areas. The U.S., through NASA, is uniquely positioned to take advantage of this technological opportunity. Example 3: Weather Forecasting

Weather forecasting in the Southern Hemisphere has been dramatically improved through NASA's contributions, and this experience illustrates the power of remote sensing for further global improvements in weather prediction. The lack of surface- based data in the Southern Hemisphere once meant that predictive skill lagged considerably behind that achieved in
the Northern Hemisphere. The improvement in the accuracy of Southern Hemisphere weather forecasting is well documented and almost entirely due to the increased use of remote-sensing data. But improvements in the quality of satellite data were not sufficient. Improvements in data assimilation a family of techniques for integrating observational results into predictive models were also necessary. The combination has resulted in rapid improvement in Southern Hemisphere forecasting, which is now nearly equal to that in northern regions. Data

assimilation capabilities continue to advance rapidly. One can now easily conceive of forecast systems that will fuse data from satellites, ground-based systems, databases, and models to provide predictions with unprecedented detail and accuracy - perhaps reaching natural limits of predictability. A new generation of weather forecast models with cloud-resolving spatial resolution is coming on line, and these models show significant promise for improving forecast skills across the board. Use of new NASA remote sensing data from upcoming missions such as Calipso (Cloud- Aerosol and Infrared Pathfinder Satellite) and CloudSat will be essential to fully validate and tune these new capabilities which will serve the nation in providing improved hurricane and severe storm prediction, and in the
development of numerous decision support systems reliant on state-of-the-art numerical weather prediction capabilities. Example 4: Earth System Models Data from NASA missions are central to constructing more comprehensive and detailed models that will more realistically represent the complexity of the Earth system. Cloud observations from MODIS (the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer) and precipitation measurements from GPM (the Global Precipitation Mission), for example, are critical to improving the representation of clouds and the water cycle in such models. Observations from MODIS and Landsat are fundamental to

The inclusion of this detail will help in the creation of true Earth system models that will enable detailed investigation of the interactions of Earth system processes and multiple environmental stresses within physically consistent simulated systems. In general terms, Earth system observations represent the only means of validating Earth system model predictions. Our confidence in
the development of more sophisticated representation of marine and terrestrial ecosystems and atmosphere-land surface interactions.

short-term, regional-scale weather predictions is based on how closely they match observed regional conditions. Assessing the performance of global-scale, longer-term model predictions likewise depends on comparing model results with observational records.

1AC: Solvency 2/3

Scientific confidence in the ability of general circulation models to represent Earth's climate has been greatly enhanced by comparing model results for the last century with the observational records from that period. At the same time, the sparse and uneven nature of past observational records is an ongoing source of uncertainty in the evaluation of model results. The existence of much more comprehensive and consistent global measurements from space such as the data from the NASA Terra, Aqua, and Aura satellites is a giant step forward in this regard, and, if maintained, will enable much more rigorous evaluation of model performance in the future. In summary, Earth system models, with increasing temporal and spatial resolutions and validated predictive capabilities, will be used by industry and governmental decision makers across a host of domains into the foreseeable future. This knowledge base will drive new economies and efficiencies within our society. I believe that requirements flowing from the needs and capabilities of sophisticated Earth system models will be very useful for NASA in developing strategic roadmaps for future missions. C. The Importance of Careful Planning The central role of NASA in supporting Earth system science, the demonstrated success and impact of previous and current NASA missions, and the promise of continued advances in scientific understanding and societal benefits all argue for a careful, analytical approach to major modifications in the NASA Earth science program. As noted above, the development of space systems is a time-consuming and difficult process. Today's

actions and plans will have long-term consequences for our nation's capabilities in this area. The link between plans and actions is one of the most important points I
want to address today. From the outside, the interagency planning process seems to be experiencing substantial difficulties in maintaining this link. The NASA Earth science program is part of two major Presidential initiatives, the Climate Change Science Program (CCSP) and the Global Earth Observation System of Systems (GEOSS). With regard to the CCSP, it is not apparent that the strategies and plans developed through the interagency process are having much impact on NASA decision-making. In January 2004, then- Administrator of NASA, Sean O'Keefe, called for acceleration of the NASA Glory mission because of the direct relevance of the mission to understanding the roles of aerosols in the climate system, which is one of the highest-priority science questions defined in the CCSP research strategy. NASA is now proposing cancellation of the mission. As I have emphasized throughout this testimony, the progress of and benefits from Earth system science research are contingent upon close coordination between research, modeling, and observations. The close coordination of

This coordination currently appears to be fragile. The effect of significant redirections in NASA and reduction in NASA's Earth science effort are equally worrisome in the case of the Administration's GEOSS initiative, which is focused on improving the international coordination of environmental observing systems. Both NASA and NOAA satellite programs are vital to this effort. The science community is very supportive of the GEOSS concept and goals. There are over 100 space-based remote-sensing systems that are either operating or planned by various nations for the next decade. Collaboration among space systems, between space- and ground-based systems, and between suppliers and users of observational data is critical to avoiding duplication of effort and to getting the most out of the investments in observing technology. The tragic example of the Indian Ocean Tsunami demonstrates the need for such coordination. The tsunami was detected and observed before hitting land, but the absence of effective communication links prevented warnings from reaching those who needed them in time. A functioning GEOSS could lead to major improvements in the rapid availability of data and warnings, and the U.S. is right to make development of such a system a priority. But U.S. credibility and leadership of this initiative will be called into question if our nation is unable or unwilling to coordinate and maintain the U.S. programs that make up the core of our proposed contribution. D. Answers to Questions Posed by the Committee My testimony to this point has outlined my views on a series of key issues for the NASA
program planning among the agencies that support these activities is also a necessity. Earth science program. Much of the text found above is relevant to consideration of the specific questions posed by the Committee in its letter of invitation. In this section, I provide more direct answers to these questions to the extent possible and appropriate. How should NASA prioritize currently planned and future missions? What criteria should NASA use in doing so? I believe that NASA should work with the scientific and technical community and its partner agencies to define a NASA Earth science plan that is fully compatible with the overall CCSP and GEOSS science strategies. In my view, the interaction with the scientific and technical community should include both input from and review by the National Research Council (NRC) and direct interaction with the strong national community of Earth science investigators and the aerospace industry who are very familiar with NASA capabilities and developing technological opportunities. Competitive peer review processes should be used appropriately in assessing the merit of competing approaches and in key decision- making. I believe NASA should also find a means of involving users and potential users of NASA-generated data in this process, perhaps through public comment periods or a series of workshops. Sufficient time should be allotted to this process for a careful and deliberative evaluation of options. This science plan should then guide the process of setting mission priorities. Defining criteria to use in comparing and deciding upon potential missions would be an important part of this planning exercise. I would recommend consideration of a set of criteria that include: -- compatibility with science priorities in the CCSP and GEOSS science plans -- potential scientific return from mission -- technological risk -- direct and indirect societal benefits -- cost. I believe that the decadal planning activity underway at the NRC in response to a request from NASA and NOAA is a valuable step in this process. What are the highest priority unaddressed or unanswered questions in Earth science observations from space? I believe this question is most appropriately addressed through the community process suggested above. There are many important Earth science questions, and prioritizing among them is best done in a deliberative and transparent process that involves extensive input from and discussion by the science community. I would personally cite soil moisture, three-dimensional cloud characteristics, global vector tropospheric winds, pollutant characteristics and transport, carbon fluxes, and aerosol distributions as all high priority measurements to make on a global

NASA Earth science programs have played a key role in developing our understanding of the Earth as a coupled system of inter- related parts, and in the identification and documentation of a series of global-scale changes in the Earth's environment, including ozone depletion, land use and land cover change, loss of biodiversity, and climate change. Other examples of societal
scale. What have been the most important contributions to society that have come from NASA Earth sciences over the last decade (or two)?

contributions include improved weather forecasting, improved understanding of the large-scale climate variations, such as the El Nino- Southern Oscillation and the North Atlantic Oscillation that alter seasonal patterns of rainfall, and improved understanding of the status of and changes in marine and terrestrial ecosystems that contributes to more effective management of natural resources. What future benefits to the nation (societal applications) are possible that NASA Earth sciences could

NASA Earth science activities are part of developing a global Earth information system that can provide ongoing and accurate information about the status of and changes in the atmosphere, oceans, and marine and terrestrial ecosystems that sustain life, including the impact of human activities. The continued development of observation systems, sophisticated Earth system models, data assimilation methods, and information
provide? What gaps in our knowledge must we fill before those future benefits are possible? In a broad sense,
technologies holds the promise of much improved predictions of weather and climate variations and much more effective predict ion and warning of natural hazards. Much has already been accomplished to lay the

many important questions remain. Some of the most important have to do with the functioning and human alteration of the Earth's carbon, nitrogen, and water cycles, and how these cycles interact; the regional manifestation of global scale climate change; and the reactions of ecosystems to simultaneous multiple stresses.
groundwork for such a system, but

1AC: Solvency 3/3

And finally, the United States participation is crucial to successful implementation of GEOSS. Wigbels et. Al., 2008 (Lyn, G. Ryan Faith, and Vincent Sabathier; Senior Fellow/Assistant Professor at the Center for Aerospace Policy Research
at George Mason University; research analyst at the space foundation at CSIS; senior associate with the CSIS Technology and Public Policy Program EARTH OBSERVATIONS AND GLOBAL CHANGE Why? Where Are We? What Next?, A Report of CSIS Space Initiatives, csis.org/files/media/csis/pubs/080725_wigbels_earthobservation_web.pdf)

In July 2003, the United States, under the leadership of Secretary of State Colin Powell, Secretary of Commerce Donald Evans, Secretary of Energy Samuel Bodman, and NOAA administrator Conrad Lautenbacher, launched a worldwide effort to develop a Global Earth Observation System of Systems (GEOSS). Today, 72 nations, the European Commission, and 52 other participating organizations are members of the Group on Earth Observations (GEO), the implementing body for GEOSS. The U.S.-led creation of GEO has been a tremendous scientific, environmental, and foreign policy achievement. It has engagedat the ministerial levelgovernments who have agreed on the value of Earth observations to obtain concrete societal benefits. GEO members have identi- fied nine broad societal benefit areas that are intrinsically reliant on Earth observation products: disasters, health, energy, climate, agriculture, ecosystems, biodiversity, water, and weather. To date, GEO has focused on coordinating the data from applications in these nine areas, providing easier and more open data access and fostering use of this data for broader development of science, ap- plications, and Earth observation capacity building. This coordination includes promoting archi- tecture and software interoperability allowing the development of standard interoperable formats for collecting, processing, storing, and disseminating the full range of Earth observation data and thematic products. GEO is also developing a Web portal to provide a one-stop source for aggre- gating and accessing all the data
from all the systems operated by its members. GEO is focusing on the transition from technology demonstration systems to a sustainable system for maintaining long-term data acquisition and continuity. GEO is also looking

Within GEO, the United States has led a growing consensus on making data freely available at low cost, prompting other nations to open up previously unavailable data sets. There was a
at current and new schemes for funding, including public-private partnerships. broad recognition in the November 2007 Cape Town Declaration, agreed upon at the GEO Ministerial Summit in Cape Town, South Africa, that the success of GEOSS will depend on a commitment by all GEO partners to work together to ensure timely, global, and open access to data and prod- ucts. Individual members made commitments in this direction. For example, Brazil and China offered their China-Brazil Earth Resources Satellite (CBERS) data free of charge to all African nations, and Brazil is putting a ground station in South Africa to facilitate distribution of that data. The Cape Town Declaration stated that GEO supported the establishment of a process with the objective to reach a consensus on the implementation of the Data Sharing Principles for GEOSS to be presented to the next GEO Ministerial Summit, which is expected to occur before the end of 2010.

The realization of GEOSS will be achieved through the timely combination of observations from around the world and a number of relatively small geographical regions . This will require the contributions of
International cooperation is essential for the creation of GEOSS. many nations, since no single country has the resources to build the global system of systems needed to address global change. It will also require an understanding of what gaps exist, where capabilities overlap, and where

Other nations are making commitments to and large investments in Earth observations, which can complement U.S. Earth observation capabilities and contribute synergistically to a global system of systems. There is strong European political support for
strategic redundancies are required. And it will require a multilateral commitment to lever- age the capabilities of all nations that have or plan to have Earth observation programs . monitoring and measur- ing global change, and the European Global Monitoring of Environment and Security (GMES) Initiative has gathered substantial momentum in the European Union and with European space agencies, as well as wide-ranging participation of European industry. The Japanese Space Agency (JAXA) launched the Advanced Land Observing Satellite (ALOS) in 2006 and is developing Global Change Observation Mission (GCOM-Water) and planning a GCOM-Climate mission. China is making significant investments in Earth observations, with plans to launch several satel- lites for Earth resources, meteorology, and oceanography in the next decade. India is developing a suite of instruments and is planning a joint mission with France (Megha-Tropique) focusing on the water cycle in the intertropical region. A list of current and planned Earth observation satellites is included in appendix B. With Europe, China, Japan, India, and other nations making very large investments in Earth observation capabilities, there is tremendous potential for synergistic cooperation and novel ways to leverage new capabilities. For example, the Europeans are now making decisions about the GMES program that could result in the (intentional or unintentional) development of a capability that already exists in other

Another factor driving these decisions about redundancy is data avail- ability. For example, in response to data sharing difficulties and the national security applications of some data, the United States wants to maintain a core capability for land imaging that would be synergistically supplemented with data from other non-U.S sources. Nonetheless, even today, some satellite capabilities are needlessly duplicated as a result of lack of coordination .
programs elsewhere. In the past, some nations have elected to duplicate capabilities existing elsewhere because they want their own national satellite or because they want a better capability. The Committee on Earth Observation Satellites (CEOS) grew from an initiative launched at the 1982 G-7 Economic Summit to coordinate space-borne Earth observation missions. The main goal of CEOS is to ensure that critical questions relating to Earth observations and global change are addressed while avoiding the unnecessary duplication of satellite missions related to global change. CEOS has 28 members that have satellite programs and an additional 20 associate mem- bers, including UN agencies and organizations that have or plan to have relevant ground facilities, support programs, or satellites. CEOS is a GEO Participating Organization: the GEO Secretariat and many GEO members look to CEOS to help assemble the space segment of GEOSS. The CEOS Strategic Implementation Team is developing several virtual satellite constellations involving data sharing. While CEOS leads or contributes to a number of GEO tasks, including the virtual constellation task, the relationship between GEO and CEOS with respect to the

much more needs to be done in order to implement GEOSS. Jason and NPO- ESS are examples of successful international engagement. There are further opportunities for the United States to be proactive in seeking partnerships on cooperative missions and
development of GEOSS is still evolving and could be strengthened. Furthermore,

. With the exception of ocean monitoring, the United States has not built the cooperative relationships to transition new sensors and systems (beyond what are essentially technology demonstration missions) to long-term data acquisition and continuity. Finally, it is widely acknowledged that strong, senior U.S. leadership in the GEO process has been critical to achieving the gains it has made. NOAA administrator Lautenbacher has played a key role in the creation and continuous U.S. leadership in GEO. It is critically important that the United States continue to represent itself in the GEO arena at such a senior level in order to keep ministerial level officials in other nations engaged and supportive of the creation of GEOSS. The priority that the United States places on GEO as evidenced by the leadership it provides will have a significant impact on the future of GEO .
developing interoperable systems