P. 1
Solar Satellites Affirmative

Solar Satellites Affirmative

4.0

|Views: 394|Likes:
Publicado porAffNeg.Com

More info:

Published by: AffNeg.Com on Jan 08, 2009
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOC or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

09/14/2012

Sections

DDI 08- K.O.

AFF Anuj, Eric, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Solar Satellites: The Space 1/226

Solar Satellites- The Space AFF

Solar Satellites 1AC...........................................................................................................5 Contention 1- The Advantages..........................................................................................6 Advantage 2: Cosmic Dominance/ Galactic Peace........................................................12 Advantage 3: Ditching the Rock.....................................................................................18 Contention 2 is Solvency .................................................................................................22 Inherency- Now is key time.............................................................................................24 Military Support..............................................................................................................25 Obstacles Now..................................................................................................................26 Tech Feasible Now............................................................................................................27 Solar Advances Now........................................................................................................28 Lack of Funding...............................................................................................................29 Space has untapped energy.............................................................................................31 Space Race and Space Col inevitable.............................................................................32 Military Advantage- Uniqueness....................................................................................33 Oil Dependency Kills Readiness.....................................................................................35 Resupply Hurts Readiness..............................................................................................36 Oil Consumption Increasing...........................................................................................37 DOD Lacks Organized Program....................................................................................38 Oil is running out.............................................................................................................39 Links- Solar Solves Readiness.........................................................................................40 Energy Key to Readiness.................................................................................................46 Agile Force key to Readiness..........................................................................................50 Impacts- Oil Dependency: kills Global Leadership......................................................51 Hurts Western Economies...............................................................................................53 Escalates armed conflict, terrorism and econ collapse.................................................54 Dependency impact Laundry List..................................................................................55 Kills International Leverage...........................................................................................56 Forward Deployment Solves Leadership and conflict prevention..............................57 Military = alt energy usage public and private sector .................................................58 Military= Energy Leader................................................................................................59 Middle East Stability.......................................................................................................60 Information Warfare Advantage- Uniqueness..............................................................63 U.S. must increase efforts to expand cyberspace deterrence.......................................66 Specific Internal Link- Space Radar..............................................................................67 Internal Links- Information key to RMA......................................................................69 RMA key to Readiness.....................................................................................................71 Impacts- Space Radar Good: Deterrence......................................................................73 Cyber-warfare cause Accidental Nuke War..................................................................75 RMA key to deter Chinese Asymmetric attack.............................................................79 High-Tech Leadership key to Hegemony.......................................................................80 Cyber-attacks are easy- resources exist.........................................................................81 Cyber-attack tracing causes Miscalc..............................................................................82 RMA stops Prolif..............................................................................................................83

1

DDI 08- K.O. AFF Anuj, Eric, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Solar Satellites: The Space 2/226

Prolif leads to Nuke War.................................................................................................84 Space weapons Good- Econ/Accident/taiwan add on...................................................86 Weaponization already started.......................................................................................88 Weaponization Inevitable................................................................................................89 Weaponizing now- China................................................................................................91 Weaponization Zero-Sum................................................................................................97 Now is key to Weaponize- we must do it first................................................................98 U.S. key to check Rogue Nations in space......................................................................99 Prolif= Extinction...........................................................................................................100 Space Radar key to diffuse conflict, and defend from asteroids...............................101 Asteroids kill everything................................................................................................102 Weapons key to surveillance.........................................................................................103 Space key to Military.....................................................................................................104 Space Dominance key to Peace.....................................................................................105 Hege High- Must go to space now.................................................................................110 Moral imperative to go to space....................................................................................111 U.S. space dominance dissolves military need.............................................................112 Dominance Solves Space Arms Race............................................................................116 Space Weapons BAD- Expeditionary force Add-on....................................................117 Expeditionary Space force prevents orbital weapons.................................................119 Space Weapons not coming...........................................................................................121 Space Weapons Fail.......................................................................................................122 Space Weapons undermine U.S. strength....................................................................123 U.S. has more to gain over negotiations of weapons...................................................124 Chinese attack................................................................................................................125 Conventional Warfare better........................................................................................126 Risks arms race and accidental nuke war...................................................................127 Space Weapons Bad- destroys military........................................................................128 Exacerbates fears of debris chain.................................................................................129 Space weapons case pre-emptive attack......................................................................130 China Does Not Want Space Weapons.........................................................................131 Arms Control Solves......................................................................................................132 Space Col- K2 Helium-3................................................................................................133 Helium-3 Solves..............................................................................................................135 Helium 3 Solves US-China Conflict..............................................................................136 Solar Satellites K2 Space Colonization.......................................................................137 Space Colonization Solves Extinction..........................................................................139 Space Colonization Solves Nuke war...........................................................................141 Solar Power Advantage.................................................................................................142 Beaming is effective........................................................................................................143 Gets a lot of Sunlight.....................................................................................................146 Comparatively better than other renewables..............................................................147 SSP Preserves Biodiversity............................................................................................149 Solvency..........................................................................................................................150 Incentives solve...............................................................................................................151 Quantum Dots are effective PV’s..................................................................................152
2

DDI 08- K.O. AFF Anuj, Eric, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Solar Satellites: The Space 3/226

No Heat Problems..........................................................................................................153 Solar Satellites are environmentally clean...................................................................154 Federal Key.....................................................................................................................156 Small efforts lead to Space Solar Farms......................................................................157 Construction is Feasible................................................................................................159 No Launch Harms..........................................................................................................160 2AC Stuff- Now is key Exts...........................................................................................161 Now is key—Maslow Window......................................................................................162 Timeframe Exts..............................................................................................................165 Energy Solvency.............................................................................................................166 CHINA EXTS.................................................................................................................167 A2 Status Quo Solves.....................................................................................................170 A2 Unreliable..................................................................................................................171 A2 Hurts environment...................................................................................................172 A2 No Solar Panel Tech.................................................................................................174 A2 No Reception Tech....................................................................................................175 A2 No Beam-down Tech................................................................................................176 A2 No Launch Tech........................................................................................................177 A2 No Tech......................................................................................................................178 A2 Microwave Beams Bad............................................................................................179 A2 Spending Link..........................................................................................................180 A2 Ground Solar Conditions........................................................................................181 A2 DoD CP......................................................................................................................182 A2 International CP.......................................................................................................183 A2 States CP...................................................................................................................184 Non-Uniques...................................................................................................................185 Spending Non-Uniques..................................................................................................186 A2: SBSP Energy Too Expensive..................................................................................187 A2: ASATs Create Space Debris...................................................................................188 Int’l PERM SOLVENCY:.............................................................................................189 A2 Micro-meteorides—.................................................................................................190 Politics Links- Congress Supports................................................................................191 Congress Supports Space Exploration.........................................................................192 Space Weapons unpopular............................................................................................193 NASA Funding Bipartisan............................................................................................194 NASA Funding Partisan................................................................................................195 NASA Funding unpopular............................................................................................196 Plan Costs PC.................................................................................................................197 Negative Stuff- 1NC FRONTLINE..............................................................................198 COLONIZATION BAD EXTS – Virus Turn..............................................................204 HEG BAD EXTS............................................................................................................206 No Solar Cells.................................................................................................................207 Micrometeoroids Ext.....................................................................................................208 Requires too much Krypton..........................................................................................209 Treaty with Russia prevents Beaming..........................................................................210 Space Causes Cancer.....................................................................................................211
3

DDI 08- K.O. AFF Anuj, Eric, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Solar Satellites: The Space 4/226

DOD COUNTERPLAN.................................................................................................212 EFFICIENCY COUNTERPLAN.................................................................................213 IRAQ NEG.....................................................................................................................214 NO CHINA RACE.........................................................................................................217 BIZCON LINK...............................................................................................................219 OIL DA LINKS..............................................................................................................220 SPENDING LINKS.......................................................................................................221 NASA WON'T DO PLAN.............................................................................................222 SQUO SOLVES..............................................................................................................223 PRIVATE INVESTMENT NOW..................................................................................224 Space Inevitable.............................................................................................................225

4

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Solar Satellites 1AC

Plan: The United States Federal Government should substantially increase monetary incentives for development and deployment of Solar Power Satellites in the United States. We’ll clarify.

5

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Contention 1- The Advantages
Advantage 1- The Information War
UAV’s are failing- Space Radar is essential to fill the gap in military aircraft surveillance Taylor Dinerman, author and journalist based in New York City, July 16, 2007, (“Solar power satellites and space radar” The Space Review: essays and commentary about the final frontier, http://www.thespacereview.com/article/910/1 [Bapodra]) Using power from an SPS, such a satellite would be able to liberally use its ion engines to change its orbit. These engines would never be powerful enough to make the kind of quick responsive maneuvers that some space operations commanders would like to see in future LEO-based spacecraft, but they would be a step in the right direction. The demise of the E-10 program that had been intended to replace the Air Force’s JSTARS and AWACS surveillance aircraft has left a hole in future US situational awareness capabilities that neither unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), such as the Predator and Global Hawk, nor existing satellite programs can possibly fill. Space Radar could do so, but only if the program is restructured to make it at once more ambitious in terms of future capability and less ambitious in terms of near-term operations.

Effective Space Radar is only possible through solar power satellite electric transmissions Taylor Dinerman, author and journalist based in New York City, July 16, 2007, (“Solar power satellites and space radar” The Space Review: essays and commentary about the final frontier, http://www.thespacereview.com/article/910/1 [Bapodra]) In order to achieve the power levels needed for an effective GMTI system using current technology, very large solar arrays would be needed. Even if these were to use the new Boeing solar cells that, according to the company, are more than 30% efficient, the arrays would still be much bigger than anything on any operational satellite. Such large arrays would make the SR spacecraft easy targets for enemy antisatellite weapons and would also produce so much drag while in low Earth orbit (LEO) that their lifespan would be shorter—perhaps much shorter—than current-generation reconnaissance satellites. Why, then, does such a system need to rely 100% on its own power? If solar power satellites (SPS) were available in geosynchronous orbit and could beam electricity to the SR satellites in LEO, this might allow the radar satellites to have as much power as their power control systems and heat radiators could handle. Power could be transmitted by a tightly focused laser or microwave beam to one or two receptors, integrated into the spacecraft’s bus. If the radar antenna were integrated into the skin of the satellite the way it is on a B-2 bomber, such satellite would be difficult to detect and track.

6

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt Space Radar will be able to see critical areas of the Earth over a short time span, will be able to monitor adversarial territory as well as terrorist locations John Pike, Director of GlobalSecurity.org, 9/24/2005, “Space Radar” http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/systems/sr.htm [Bapodra] With Space Radar it will be possible to see all critical areas of the Earth over a relatively short time span. In other words, fairly frequent revisit over areas. If it was tasked to cover an emerging situation anywhere in the world, it could respond by providing both collected and processed information within minutes to hours depending on where the location was and where the satellites were in orbit when the issue arose. If the trouble spot is within a theater of operations where US airborne assets are already deployed, the SR would be able to hand off Space Radar data and information to the other systems to help them know where to look and where to identify the issue. Likewise, air ISR assets could also tip and cue the Space Radar. The result of this interaction would be much more precise and decisive ISR information available on a shorter timeline. If the area of concern is deep inside an adversary’s territory, which would be out of reach of airborne assets, then Space Radar could cover that area on every satellite pass, thereby regularly updating our knowledge of an unfolding situation. An example of that might be terrorists who are using caves to store weapons. There might be a repetitive pattern of vehicles coming and going from these caves over time. Those are the types of things that Space Radar would be good at in the GMTI mode — identifying the movement of vehicles and activity in an area and be able to update that knowledge on a regular basis. SR could then switch to SAR [synthetic aperture radar] mode and take a high-quality SAR picture of the area where movement tips us off that something is going on.

7

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt Space provides critical survalience and navigationwhich that allow for a smaller and more effective military. Everett Carl Dolman, School of Advanced Studies (SAAS), 2003, “Space Power and US Hegemony: Maintaining a Liberal
World Order in the 21st Century”, http://www.gwu.edu/~spi/spaceforum/Dolmanpaper%5B1%5D.pdf //[E.Berggren]

Absent access to space – the U.S. would be unable to conduct large military operations abroad and make us more vulnerable to anti-space hostilities.
Everett Carl Dolman, School of Advanced Studies (SAAS), 2003, “Space Power and US Hegemony: Maintaining a Liberal World Order in the 21st Century”, http://www.gwu.edu/~spi/spaceforum/Dolmanpaper%5B1%5D.pdf //[E.Berggren]

8

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt Intelligence and communication is essential for future combat effectiveness. Tech advancement is critical to precision warfare
Sharjeel Rizwan, Defence Journal Columnist Pakistan September 2000, “Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA)”, Defence Notes http://www.defencejournal.com/2000/sept/military.htm [Bapodra]

Today the advent of new forms of communication and imaging technology, incorporated into systems such as “smart” weaponry and digitised battlefield networks have led to the rethinking of war making and strategy conceptualisation over the ages, as technology has developed, new methods of collecting information have emerged. These new methods have improved the battlefield awareness of our Commanders and Soldiers. Command, Control, Communication, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance C41SR has enabled the integration of these new inputs. Technological advancements of weapons and vehicles of air power are being developed in a manner that will continue to shorten the time cycles for action along with the other segments of IDA. A significant portion of technological progress being made in the military sphere deals with reconnaissance, surveillance and target acquisition (RSTA) systems. The employment of RSTA technologies is moving warfare further towards greater utilisation of aerial assets for gathering of information, greater range of striking power through long-range offensive systems, and higher accuracy through availability of better target information. RSTA with communications give military forces the ability to locate targets with accuracy, carry out designation and cueing of weapon systems that significantly enhance combat power. The use of RSTA systems, AWACs, UAVs and their integration into a C4ISR system has enabled the use of sophisticated weapons like “smart bombs” and precision guided munitions (PGMs) which are extremely accurate and reduce civilian casualties. C4ISR has also led to the expansion of space and the compression of time on the battlefield. C4ISR provides situational awareness (SA) for integration and coordination of joint element manoeuvres and sensor to shooten connectivity for weapons employment. It is the essential capability for binding the nation’s armed services defence and intelligence agencies and other government and private organisations into a viable, coherent force. The resultant information superiority fundamentally changes the way operations are conducted. Joint C4ISR enables ability to mass effects without massing forces; protects against asymmetric threats; and provides joint force flexibility, interpretability and efficiency.

9

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

We’ll claim two Scenarios to Military Effectiveness First is Hegemony
Military readiness is key to hegemony – it deters rogue states and counterbalancing Thomas Donnelly. National Security Outlook. 2003 http://www.aei.org/scholars/scholarID.68/scholar.asp [Bapodra] The preservation of today's Pax Americana rests upon both actual military strength and the perception of strength. The variety of victories scored by U.S. forces since the end of the cold war is testament to both the futility of directly challenging the United States and the desire of its enemies to keep poking and prodding to find a weakness in the American global order. Convincing would-be great powers, rogue states, and terrorists to accept the liberal democratic order--and the challenge to autocratic forms of rule that come with it--requires not only an overwhelming response when the peace is broken, but a willingness to step in when the danger is imminent. The message of the Bush Doctrine--"Don't even think about it!"--rests in part on a logic of preemption that underlies the logic of primacy.

US hegemony is key to prevent multiple scenarios for nuclear war Zalmay Khalilzad, U.N. Ambassador, RAND Corporation 1995 , Washington Quarterly, Spring, Lexis Under the third option, the United States would seek to retain global leadership and to preclude the rise of a global rival or a return to multipolarity for the indefinite future. On balance, this is the best long-term guiding principle and vision. Such a vision is desirable not as an end in itself, but because a world in which the United States exercises leadership would have tremendous advantages. First, the global environment would be more open and more receptive to American values -- democracy, free markets, and the rule of law. Second, such a world would have a better chance of dealing cooperatively with the world's major problems, such as nuclear proliferation, threats of regional hegemony by renegade states, and low-level conflicts. Finally, U.S. leadership would help preclude the rise of another hostile global rival, enabling the United States and the world to avoid another global cold or hot war and all the attendant dangers, including a global nuclear exchange. U.S. leadership would therefore be more conducive to global stability than a bipolar or a multipolar balance of power system.

10

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Second is Prolif
Information is critical to Revolution in Military Affairs
Jeffrey McKitrick et al, US Air War College, 2001, "The Revolution in Military Affairs," http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/battle/chp3.html [Bapodra] Another revolution under way in warfare is that associated with information systems, their associated capabilities, and their effects on military organizations and operations. We call this new warfare area information warfare, which we define as the struggle between two or more opponents for control of the information battlespace. At the national level, information warfare could be viewed as a new form of strategic warfare, one of the key issues being the vulnerability of socio-economic systems, and the question is how to attack the enemy's system while protecting yours. At the military operational level, information warfare may contribute to major changes in the conduct of warfare; therefore, one of the key issues is the vulnerability of command, control, communications, and intelligence systems, and the question is how to attack the enemy's system while protecting yours. As we increasingly assimilate information capabilities into our military structure and focus more and more on establishing and maintaining an "information advantage" as a war-winning strategy, we also change the vulnerabilities of US forces, and, ultimately of the United States itself. The force structure that will implement information warfare 25 years from now may well be different from today's military in more ways than just its equipment. Moreover, the character of warfare may change in ways that affect our thinking regarding intelligence and crisis and wartime decision making

Revolution in Military Affairs prevents nuclear proliferation
Martin Libicki, Senior Analyst, Rand Corporation, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, March 1, 2001 [Bapodra] Moore would have the United States back off its attempts to shove its military forces into techno-overdrive (especially in space). The Defense Department, in contrast, has no such desire; it sees countering WMD as yet another item on its agenda. Left unexamined, though, was the possibility that the linkage between the RMA and nuclear proliferation does not hold. Indeed, the RMA has had little discernible effect on the efforts that other nations have made to develop nuclear weapons, which are by far the most militarily useful of the WMD. In fact, the reverse may well be true: The RMA reduces the rationale for nuclear acquisition on the part of states that might otherwise plan to use them against U.S. forces.

Proliferation leads to extinction. Victor Utgoff, Deputy Director of Strategy, Forces, and Resources Division of Institute for Defense Analysis, Summer 02, “Proliferation, Missile Defence and American Ambitions”, Survival, p.87-90. [Bapodra]
The war between Iran and Iraq during the 1980s led to the use of chemical weapons on both sides and exchanges of missiles against each other’s cities. And more recently, violence in the Middle East escalated in a few months from rocks and small arms to heavy weapons on one side, and from police actions to air strikes and armoured attacks on the other. Escalation of violence is also basic human nature. Once the violence starts, retaliatory exchanges of violent acts can escalate to levels unimagined by the participants before hand. Intense and blinding anger is a common response to fear or humiliation or abuse. And such anger can lead us to impose on our opponents whatever levels of violence are readily accessible. In sum, widespread proliferation is likely to lead to an occasional shoot-out with nuclear weapons, and that such shoot-outs will have a substantial probability of escalating to the maximum destruction possible with the weapons at hand. Unless nuclear proliferation is stopped, we are headed toward a world that will mirror the American Wild West of the late 1800s. With most, if not all, nations wearing nuclear ‘six-shooters’ on their hips, the world may even be a more polite place than it is today, but every once in a while we will all gather on a hill to bury the bodies of dead cities or even whole nations.

11

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Advantage 2: Cosmic Dominance/ Galactic Peace
First, Not only is a war in space inevitable – but nations are looking to weaponize. Steven Lee Myers, [staff writer for the new your times and Phd in international relations, March 9, 2008, “Look Out Below. The Arms Race in Space May Be On.”, L/N//E.Berggren] The consequences of war in space are in fact so cataclysmic that arms control advocates like Mr. Kimball would like simply to prohibit the use of weapons beyond the earth's atmosphere. But it’s already be too late for that. In the weeks since an American rocket slammed into an out-of-control satellite over the Pacific Ocean, officials and experts have made it clear that the United States, for better or worse, is already committed to having the capacity to wage war in space. And that, it seems likely, will prompt others to keep pace. What makes people want to ban war in space is exactly what keeps the Pentagon's war planners busy preparing for it: The United States has become so dependent on space that it has become the country's Achilles' heel. ''Our adversaries understand our dependence upon space-based capabilities,'' Gen. Kevin P. Chilton, commander of the United States Strategic Command, wrote in Congressional testimony on Feb. 27, ''and we must be ready to detect, track, characterize, attribute, predict and respond to any threat to our space infrastructure.'' Whatever Pentagon assurances there have been to the contrary, the destruction of a satellite more than 130 miles above the Pacific Ocean a week earlier, on Feb. 20, was an extraordinary display of what General Chilton had in mind -- a capacity that the Pentagon under President Bush has tenaciously sought to protect and enlarge. Is war in space inevitable? The idea or such a war has been around since Sputnik, but for most of the cold war it remained safely within the realm of science fiction and the carefully proscribed American-Soviet arms race. That is changing. A dozen countries now can reach space with satellites -- and, therefore, with weapons. China strutted its stuff in January 2007 by shooting down one of its own weather satellites 530 miles above the planet. ''The first era of the space age was one of experimentation and discovery,'' a Congressional commission reported just before President Bush took office in 2001. ''We are now on the threshold of a new era of the space age, devoted to mastering operations in space.''

12

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt The U.S. is in a rare position of unprecedented hegemony – The time to go to space is now before nations catch up to us.
Everett Carl Dolman, School of Advanced Studies (SAAS), 2003, “Space Power and US Hegemony: Maintaining a Liberal World Order in the 21st Century”, http://www.gwu.edu/~spi/spaceforum/Dolmanpaper%5B1%5D.pdf //[E.Berggren]

13

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt Because of how valuable our space assets are – we must develop offensive capabilities to protect from or deter an attack on them.
Everett Carl Dolman, School of Advanced Studies (SAAS), 2003, “Space Power and US Hegemony: Maintaining a Liberal World Order in the 21st Century”, http://www.gwu.edu/~spi/spaceforum/Dolmanpaper%5B1%5D.pdf //[E.Berggren]

Solar Power satellite research will be implemented for space radars, lasers and small satellites

Kim Ramos, Major, Air Force, 4/00, "Solar Power Constellations Implications for the United States Air Force," http://stinet.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identi fier=ADA394928
As the world population increases and natural resources used to produce energy decrease, alternative methods to produce sustainable, environmental cost effective energy are required. One proposed solution to the problem is solar power satellites. Solar power satellites are satellites, which collect the energy of the sun, convert it onto a beam, and beam that energy to a receiving antenna. The receiving antenna converts the beam into electricity and feeds the electricity into a power grid. The receiving antenna may be located on another satellite, or on Earth. Presented here are several solar power satellite proposals, architectures, incremental technology demonstrations and predictions as to when they will become commercially viable. Given the previous information, this paper analyzes the implications for the Air Force in relation to doctrine and future plans. The research method consisted of a search of scientific journals, published symposium papers, and research reports. The search focused on the current

research on solar power satellites, and Air Force programs, which have power issues. Based on the research, the Air Force should plan to capitalize on the advantages of solar power satellite constellations. Solar power satellites can assist with implementing various plans (i.e., long endurance unmanned aerial vehicles, space-based radar, lasers, and small satellites), complying with public law, and reducing the logistics tail associated with an expeditionary force.

14

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt Space is the ultimate high-ground – The U.S. has a unique window of opportunity establish dominance. Once we establish space dominance it eliminates any chance of a space arms race or any other nation to secure space
Everett Carl Dolman, School of Advanced Studies (SAAS), 2003, “Space Power and US Hegemony: Maintaining a Liberal World Order in the 21st Century”, http://www.gwu.edu/~spi/spaceforum/Dolmanpaper%5B1%5D.pdf //[E.Berggren]

15

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt U.S. control of space creates the stability for lasting global peace and prosperity.
Everett Carl Dolman, School of Advanced Studies (SAAS), 2003, “Space Power and US Hegemony: Maintaining a Liberal World Order in the 21st Century”, http://www.gwu.edu/~spi/spaceforum/Dolmanpaper%5B1%5D.pdf //[E.Berggren]

16

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt The U.S. has a moral imperative to secure space and promote peace and prosperity – before any other state does gets control of space
Everett Carl Dolman, School of Advanced Studies (SAAS), 2003, “Space Power and US Hegemony: Maintaining a Liberal World Order in the 21st Century”, http://www.gwu.edu/~spi/spaceforum/Dolmanpaper%5B1%5D.pdf //[E.Berggren]

17

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Advantage 3: Ditching the Rock
Advances in Space Based Solar Power spurs space travel
National Security Space Office, 10/10/07, “Space‐Based Solar Power As an Opportunity for Strategic Security” (Alex Werner)
SBSP cannot be constructed without safe, frequent (daily/weekly), cheap, and reliable access to space and ubiquitous in‐space operations. The sheer volume and number of flights into space, and the efficiencies reached by those high volumes is game‐ changing. By lowering the cost to orbit so substantially, and by providing safe and routine access, entirely new industries and possibilities open up. SBSP and low‐cost, reliable space access are co‐dependent, and advances in either will catalyze development in the other.

The suns radiation can be harnessed by satellites to ensure a prosperous and sustainable space colony. SpaceMagazine May 26, 2005, [http://www.spacemagazine.co.uk/ //e.berggren] Space is filled with radiant energy and beyond earth's atmosphere this energy flow more steadily and more intensely from the sun than that which penetrates to the surface of the Earth. So an abundant and essential source of energy that would be used in space for the space colony would be solar radiation by developing satellite solar power stations. To live in space, humans must be protected from the fierce intensity and penetrating wavelengths of unattenuated sunlight, but this same energy is one of the primary resources of space. The colony will have to have enough energy to maintain a fairly uniform temperature even though it is apace. The sun shines twenty-four hours a day and is not dimmed by an atmosphere. Shaded materials not exposed to direct sunlight will almost be at absolute zero. While the temperature in closed bodies exposed to the sun can soar above the boiling point. The colony will need to have both heaters and air conditioners. On the other hand, this sun's energy can be converted into electricity in the colonies. It will be converted with ten percent efficiency to electrical power which is sold at a rate of .012 kw/hr, a square kilometer of space would return more than $14,000,000 each year. Converting solar power to electricity in space, we would build satellite solar power stations that would intercept the sunlight and convert it into electricity. The satellite solar power stations would intercept enough sunlight to replace five nuclear reactors or coal plants. The stations could be as big as nine miles long and four miles wide and it would only weigh twenty thousand tons. It would be built with hollow triangular girders made of aluminum that is very fast and easy to build . Solar power satellites are a pollution free way to generate electricity and cost no more than coal or nuclear energy. There has been twomajor designed stations made so far. One is designed by Peter Glaser of Author D. Little Inc., which would use very large arrays of photo voltaic cells to make the conversion directly into energy. The other major design is by Gordon Woodcock of Boeing Aircraft Corporation, proposed having conventional turbogenerators operating on a Brayton cycle with helium as the working fluid. All in all radiation from the sun is a great source of energy for the future of space colonization. The use of the sun will cut down on the use of fossil fuels and any other chemicals that could be used to create energy in space. With more research and testing, the use of the sun's radiation will greatly enhance the space colonization and will help in the everyday life of the colony. Space Colonization prevents extinction Christian Science Monitor , January 2, 1992,[ “How Space Colonies Could Benefit Earth”, L/N //e.berggren]
18

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt Ultimately, space colonies could be built anywhere in the solar system. By increasing the size of the mirrors used to direct sunlight into the living and agricultural sections, it would be possible to support habitats beyond the orbit of Pluto if we so desire. Given the known resources of the asteroids, there is sufficient material to construct habitats capable of supporting populations thousands of times larger than that of Earth. By increasing our ecological niche to include the solar system, the human species would become much less likely to be destroyed by a single natural or made-man catastrophe.

Extinction is inevitable by 2050 without space colonization
Daily Record 2002 [Graham Brough, “WOULD THE LAST PERSON TO LEAVE EARTH PLEASE TURN OUT THE LIGHTS; EXPERTS WARN WE NEED TO MOVE PLANET AS MODERN LIFE KILLS OURS,” Jul 8, LN//

The Earth will be so gutted, wrecked, over-exploited and the barren seas so fished out that we will have to find a new planet – or even two - by 2050. Environmentalists at the World Wildlife Fund say we have just another half century of luxury living left before the Earth becomes a spent husk. By that time, we will either have to colonise space or risk human extinction as population and consumption expand.

Space colonization enables nuclear survival
Fred Koschara,[computer programmer/ major in planetary studies, 2001, http://www.l5development.com/fkespace/financialreturn.html] Potentially one of the greatest benefits that may be achieved by the space colonies is nuclear survival, and the ability to live past any other types of mass genocide that become available. We have constructed ourselves a house of dynamite, and now live in fear that someone might light a match. If a global nuclear war were to break out, or if a deadly genetic experiment got released into the atmosphere, the entire human race could be destroyed in a very short period of time. In addition, many corporate attitudes seem concerned with only maximizing today's bottom line, with no concern for the future. This outlook leads to dumping amazingly toxic wastes into the atmosphere and oceans, a move which can only bring harm in the long run. Humanity has to diversify its hold in the universe if it is to survive. Only through space colonization is that option available, and we had all best hope we're not to late.

19

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt Colonization Solves for an Asteroid impact – That would kill every one even the cockroaches. Corey Powell 2000 “20 ways the World could be Swept Away”[JWU]
1.

Asteroid impact Once a disaster scenario gets the cheesy Hollywood treatment, it's hard to take it seriously. But there is no question that a cosmic interloper will hit Earth, and we won't have to wait millions of years for it to happen. In 1908 a 200-foot-wide comet fragment slammed into the atmosphere and exploded over the Tunguska region in Siberia, Russia, with nearly 1,000 times the energy of the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima. Astronomers estimate similar-sized events occur every one to three centuries. Benny Peiser, an anthropologist-cum-pessimist at Liverpool John Moores University in England, claims that impacts have repeatedly disrupted human civilization. As an example, he says one killed 10,000 people in the Chinese city of Chi'ing-yang in 1490. Many scientists question his interpretations: Impacts are most likely to occur over the ocean, and small ones that happen over land are most likely to affect unpopulated areas. But with big asteroids, it doesn't matter much where they land. Objects more than a half-mile wide- which strike Earth every 250,000 years or so- would touch off firestorms followed by global cooling from dust kicked up by the impact. Humans would likely survive, but civilization might not. An asteroid five miles wide would cause major extinctions, like the one that may have marked the end of the age of dinosaurs. For a real chill, look to the Kuiper belt, a zone just beyond Neptune that contains roughly 100,000 ice-balls more than 50 miles in diameter. The Kuiper belt sends a steady rain of small comets earthward. If one of the big ones headed right for us, that would be it for pretty much all higher forms of life, even cockroaches.

20

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt One hundred trillion humans are lost every second of delayed colonization Nick Bostrom, 2004, philosophy professor at Yale & Oxford,” http://www.nickbostrom.com/astronomical/waste.htm[JWU] "As I write these words, suns are illuminating and heating empty rooms, unused energy is being flushed down black holes, and our great common endowment of negentropy is being irreversibly degraded into entropy on a cosmic scale. These are resources that an advanced civilization could have used to create value-structures, such as sentient beings living worthwhile lives. The rate of this loss boggles the mind. One recent paper speculates, using loose theoretical considerations based on the rate of increase of entropy, that the loss of potential human lives in our own galactic supercluster is at least ~10^46 per century of delayed colonization.[1] This estimate assumes that all the lost entropy could have been used for productive purposes, although no currently known technological mechanisms are even remotely capable of doing that. Since the estimate is meant to be a lower bound, this radically unconservative assumption is undesirable. We can, however, get a lower bound more straightforwardly by simply counting the number or stars in our galactic supercluster and multiplying this number with the amount of computing power that the resources of each star could be used to generate using technologies for whose feasibility a strong case has already been made. We can then divide this total with the estimated amount of computing power needed to simulate one human life. As a rough approximation, let us say the Virgo Supercluster contains 10^13 stars. One estimate of the computing power extractable from a star and with an associated planet-sized computational structure, using advanced molecular nanotechnology[2], is 10^42 operations per second.[3] A typical estimate of the human brain's processing power is roughly 10^17 operations per second or less.[4] Not much more seems to be needed to simulate the relevant parts of the environment in sufficient detail to enable the simulated minds to have experiences indistinguishable from typical current human experiences.[5] Given these estimates, it follows that the potential for approximately 10^38 human lives is lost every century that colonization of our local supercluster is delayed; or equivalently, about 10^31 potential human lives per second. While this estimate is conservative in that it assumes only computational mechanisms whose implementation has been at least outlined in the literature, it is useful to have an even more conservative estimate that does not assume a non-biological instantiation of the potential persons. Suppose that about 10^10 biological humans could be sustained around an average star. Then the Virgo Supercluster could contain 10^23 biological humans. This corresponds to a loss of potential equal to about 10^14 potential human lives per second of delayed colonization. What matters for present purposes is not the exact numbers but the fact that they are huge. Even with the most conservative estimate, assuming a biological implementation of all persons, the potential for one hundred trillion potential human beings is lost for every second of postponement of colonization of our supercluster.[6]"

21

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Contention 2 is Solvency
Federal government coordination catalyzes SBSP investment and development
Tyler Hamilton, Toronto Star business columnist, author, 10-15-07 ("Space-based solar power back in play" http://www.thestar.com/columnists/article/266738)[JWu]

On the positive side, technology has advanced significantly over the past four years. "While significant technical challenges remain, space-based solar power is more technically executable than ever before and current technological vectors promise to further improve its viability," according to the study. "A government-led proof-ofconcept demonstration could serve to catalyze commercial sector development." The recommendation is that a co-ordinated national program be created with "highlevel leadership" and financial resources "at least" on level with nuclear fusion research or construction of an international space station. It's proposing a 10-megawatt pilot plant that would beam a continuous flow of solar electricity back to Earth.

And, USFG contribution and incentives ensure space power
National Security Space Office, 10/10/07, “Space‐Based Solar Power As an Opportunity for Strategic Security” (Alex Werner)

Several major challenges will need to be overcome to make SBSP a reality, including the creation of low‐cost space access and a supporting infrastructure system on Earth and in space. Solving these space access and operations challenges for SBSP will in turn also open space for a host of other activities that include space tourism, manufacturing, lunar or asteroid resource utilization, and eventually settlement to extend the human race. Because DoD would not want to own SBSP satellites, but rather just purchase the delivered energy as it currently does via traditional terrestrial utilities, a repeated review finding is that the commercial sector will need Government to accomplish three major tasks to catalyze SBSP development. The first is to retire a major portion of the early technical risks. This can be accomplished via an incremental research and development program that culminates with a space‐borne proof‐of‐concept demonstration in the next decade. A spiral development proposal to field a 10 MW continuous pilot plant en route to gigawatts‐class systems is included in Appendix B. The second challenge is to facilitate the policy, regulatory, legal, and organizational instruments that will be necessary to create the partnerships and relationships (commercial‐commercial, government‐commercial, and government‐government) needed for this concept to succeed. The final Government contribution is to become a direct early adopter and to incentivize other early adopters much as is accomplished on a regular basis with other renewable energy systems coming on‐line today.

22

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt Scientific advances mean that we have the technology to go into space; the only barrier is federal government patronage
NewScientist 10/11/07 ("Pentagon backs plan to beam solar power down from space" http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn12774)[JWu]

Space-based solar power was first proposed in 1968 by Peter Glaser, an engineer at the consulting firm Arthur D. Little. Early designs involved solar panel arrays of 50 square kilometres, required hundreds of astronauts in space to build and were estimated to cost as much as $1 trillion, says John Mankins, a former NASA research manager and active promoter of space solar power. Economically unfeasible After conducting preliminary research, the US abandoned the idea as economically unfeasible in the 1970s. Since that time, says Mankins, advances in photovoltaics, electronics and robotics will bring the size and cost down to a fraction of the original schemes, and eliminate the need for humans to assemble the equipment in space. Several technical challenges remain to be overcome, including the development of lowercost space launches. A satellite capable of supplying the same amount of electric power as a modern fossil-fuel plant would have a mass of about 3000 tonnes – more than 10 times that of the International Space Station. Sending that material into orbit would require more than a hundred rocket launches. The US currently launches fewer than 15 rockets each year. In spite of these challenges, the NSSO and its supporters say that no fundamental scientific breakthroughs are necessary to proceed with the idea and that space-based solar power will be practical in the next few decades. "There are no technology hurdles that are show stoppers right now," said Damphousse.

If we start now, the timeframe is within the decade Frank Morring, Senior Space Technology Editor, Aerospace Daily and Defense Report, 10-11-07 ("NSSO backs space solar power" aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story.jsp?id=news/solar101107.xml &headline=NSSO%20Backs%20Space%20Solar%20Power%20&channel=space)[JW u] "This is not a 50-year solution," said John Mankins, an expert in the field and president of the Space Power Association. "The kinds of things that are possible today say a truly transformational demonstration at a large scale is achievable within this decade." As an example, Mankins listed the rapid progress in boosting the efficiency of solar cells. While 20-25 percent efficiency was once considered a long-term goal, efficiencies on the order of 40 percent already have been achieved. And the modularity and scalability of the systems needed to build an SSP platform make testing relatively straightforward.
23

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Inherency- Now is key time
Now is key time for space development CNN 7/1/08 ("How to harvest solar power? Beam it down from space!" http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science/05/30/space.solar/index.html)[JWu] NASA revisited space solar power with a so-called "Fresh Look" study in the mid-90s but the research lost momentum when the space agency decided it did not want to further pursue the technology, Mankins told CNN. By around 2002 the project was indefinitely shelved -- or so it seemed. "The conditions are ripe for something to happen on space solar power," said Charles Miller, a director of the Space Frontier Foundation, a group promoting public access to space. "The environment is perfect for a new start." Skyrocketing oil prices, a heightened awareness of climate change and worries about natural resource depletion have recently prompted a renewed interest in beaming extraterrestrial energy back to Earth, Miller explained. And so has a 2007 report released by the Pentagon's National Security Space Office, encouraging the U.S. government to spearhead the development of space power systems. We must go into space now. If not, we may never get the chance again Bruce Cordell, PhD planetary and space physics, Weizmann postdoctoral fellow at Caltech, ex-physics professor at the California State University, space scientist, worked with NASA. May 11 08 ("Nasa programs and MEPs" http://21stcenturywaves.com/blog/category/perspectives/)[JWu] Currently, the most important issue for humanity’s future – within the next 5 – 10 years — is to resume the large-scale human expansion into space by achieving self-sufficient colonies (e.g. on the Moon) before 2025. This is serious business because such opportunities are not continuously available. Indeed, unless we breakout into space by 2025, the last 200 years of macroeconomic and macrohistorical experience teach that long-term trends in the economy, technology, and society will not be favorable again for human expansion until about 2071. This is especially sobering because attempting to estimate the geopolitical, technological, and/or economic state of the world that far into the future is essentially impossible, and therefore the next Maslow Window (2015 – 2025) is of inestimable importance. New sources of energy are needed now to keep up with rocketing demand NASA, 3-21-01 (Science and Technology Directorate at NASA, "Beam it down, Scotty", http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast23mar_1.htm)[JWu] With the world's population projected to skyrocket to 10 billion people by the year 2050, supplying cheap, environmentally friendly electricity to meet basic needs will be a daunting challenge. "We need new sources of electrical power," said John Mankins, Manager of Advanced Concepts Studies at NASA Headquarters Office of Space Flight, "and we have been studying a variety of space solar power concepts. Tremendous advances have been made in many relevant technologies in the last fifteen years."

24

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Military Support
Plan has military support NewScientist 10/11/07 ("Pentagon backs plan to beam solar power down from space" http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn12774)[JWu] A futuristic scheme to collect solar energy on satellites and beam it to Earth has gained a large supporter in the US military. A report released yesterday by the National Security Space Office recommends that the US government sponsor projects to demonstrate solar-power-generating satellites and provide financial incentives for further private development of the technology.

25

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Obstacles Now
There are many obstacles before we develop solar satellites, but they will be operational by 2020 if we act now
Lara Farrar, CNN correspondent, June 1, 2008, (“How to harvest solar power? Beam it down from

space!” http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science/05/30/space.solar/index.html?eref=rss_space [Bapodra])
But a number of obstacles still remain before solar satellites actually get off the ground, said Jeff Keuter, president of the George C. Marshall Institute, a Washington-based research organization. "Like any activity in space, there are enormous engineering challenges," he said. One major barrier is a lack of cheap and reliable access to space, a necessity for launching hundreds of components to build what will be miles-long platforms. Developing robotic technology to piece the structures together high above Earth will also be a challenge. Then there is the issue of finding someone to foot what will be at least a billion-dollar bill. "It will take a great deal of effort, a great deal of thought and unfortunately a great deal of money," Keutersaid. "But it is certainly possible." And Miller, of the Space Frontier Foundation, said he thinks it will be possible in the next 10 years. "We could see the first operational power satellite in about the 2020 time frame if we act now," he said.

26

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Tech Feasible Now
Advances in technology make space solar power feasible now—a small governmental endorsement to catalyze investment is the only barrier Andrzej Zwaniecki, USInfo Staff writer, site maintained by U.S. Department of State's Bureau of International Information Programs, 8-20-07, ("Space solar energy has future, U.S. researchers say" www.america.gov/st/washfile-english/2007/August/20070820153255saikceinawz0.864773.html)[JWu] In recent decades, the technologies essential to the concept have made “tremendous” progress, he told USINFO. For example, efficiency of solar power generation and wireless power transmission has more than quadrupled, allowing for significant reductions in the size, mass and potential costs of the solar power systems. Martin Hoffert, former chair of the Department of Applied Sciences at New York University, told members of the Capitol Hill Club in August that space solar power research and development can proceed with existing technologies. But the potential costs remain high, discouraging entrepreneurs and the government from investing in it. The major expense -- transporting equipment and materials into orbit aboard a space shuttle -- is $20,000 per kilogram of payload, or the carrying capacity of a space vehicle. Proponents of space solar power believe the project would become viable economically if the payload cost could be reduced to below $200 per kilogram, and the total expense of delivery and robotic assembly on orbit could be brought below $3,500 per kilogram. That is not likely to happen any time soon and a reusable launch vehicle, needed to reduce costs drastically, eventually would require government investment, Mankins said. He said, however, that a small-scale demonstration project of the space solar power concept could help convince skeptics and provide a strong political justification for such an investment.

Solar space power is feasible now—the only stumbling block is perception of cost Popular Mechanics, January 08 (""Space-based solar power beams become next energy frontier." http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/air_space/4230315.html?series=35)[JWu]

The idea of using satellites to beam solar power down from space is nothing new—the Department of
Energy first studied it in the 1970s, and NASA took another look in the ’90s. The stumbling block has been less the engineering challenge than the cost. A Pentagon report released in October could mean the stars are finally aligning for space-based solar power, or SBSP. According to the report, SBSP is becoming more feasible, and eventually could help head off crises such as climate change and wars over diminishing energy supplies. “The challenge is one of perception,” says John Mankins, president of the Space Power Association and the leader of NASA’s mid-1990s SBSP study. “There are people in senior leadership positions who believe everything in space has to cost trillions.”

27

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Solar Advances Now
Solar power advances happening now Monique Hanis, Communications Director for Communications Director forSolar Energy Industries, 08, “Emerging solar technologies,” http://www.wncgreenbuilding.com/2008/emerging_solar_technologies We are witnessing an exciting time in the solar-energy sector. Research facilities, universities and companies are striving to develop new and innovative solar technologies for the commercial and residential sectors. From building-integrated and thin-film materials, to concentrating-solar and solar-thermal applications, the options for converting the sun’s rays into energy are expanding like never before. Meanwhile, improvements in the technology, manufacturing processes and installation are converging to help drive costs down. Federal incentives, along with state and local rebate and loan programs, are now lessening the up-front costs of solar energy. In fact, a number of companies including Google, Wal-Mart, Best Buy, Macy’s and Safeway have plans for significant solar photovoltaic (PV) installations as part of their energy-efficiency programs. Advancements in PV technology continue as researchers at the National Renewable Energy Lab, University of Delaware, Sandia National Lab and others create new combinations of layered-cell structures that split and refract sunlight for more efficient energy production. Prototype PV cells have reportedly reached 42 percent efficiency, nearly three times the 15 to 22 percent in today’s PV panels. Other innovations — like the trackers at Nellis Air Force Base that rotate 15-megawatt PV panels to follow the sun — improve performance by 30 percent.

28

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Lack of Funding
No solar power research funding now Arthur Smith, President Long Island Space Society, 8-11-03 ("the case for space based solar development", http://www.spacedaily.com/news/ssp-03b.html)[JWu] A review by the National Research Council (2) found the program to have a credible plan which required significant funding increases. Rather than strengthening the program, however, all funding for the space solar power group ceased after September 2001, and essentially no R&D work on power from space is now being done in the US.
NASA can’t solve under current funding National Research Council, 2001, Laying the Foundation for Space Solar Power: An Assessment of NASA’s Space Solar Power Investment Strategy, http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10202&page=12 With such a broad scope it is not surprising that the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) centers, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, and industry participants have defined a myriad of technologies that could be developed for the future applications. It should also not be surprising that if NASA’s year-to-year expenditure remains at around $10 million or less, the program will be inadequate to meet the identified needs. Funding has been in yearly incremental add-ons by the U.S. Congress and has not been part of the formal NASA operating plan. It is impossible to make efficient progress in technology development when funding and management support are uncertain. However, the current SERT managers have defined a potentially valuable program despite these obstacles. Tech advancements adequate. Incentives needed to continue long-term investments. Jason Hardison, writer for Austin Media Group, 10/10/07, “Who Shocked J.R.?,” http://www.larryhagman.com/WHO_SHOCKED_JR.doc Hagman is urging Congress to extend solar investment credits in the current energy bill. Such credits are crucial for the industry and Wall Street to continue to make mid- and long-term investments in manufacturing plants, developing utility-scale solar projects, and adding much-needed jobs to meet current demand. “The technology is here. Solar is real and more affordable than it has ever been,” says Hagman. “If we really want this to take, we have to give alternative energy the same perks that we give to oil and coal. So go out and buy a Senator!”

29

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
Funding insufficient for SBSP now Space Frontier Foundation, 10/10/07, “Space-Based Solar Power (SBSP): Meeting Humanity’s Energy, National Security, Environmental and Economic Development Needs,” http://209.85.215.104/search?q=cache:eUrUz9kZq0QJ:www.space-frontier.org/Presentations/SFFViews SBSPReport10Oct07.pdf+ anchor+tenant+customer&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us The NSSO-led study reports that the United States has spent over $20 Billion on fusion energy research in a steady and sustained manner. In fact, the White House has requested $418 million for fusion research in FY2008, which is 5 times the total amount this nation has invested in SBSP over the last 40 years. The Space Frontier Foundation agrees that “SBSP requires a coordinated national program with highlevel leadership and resourcing commensurate with its promise, but at least on the level of fusion energy research or International Space Station construction and operations.” NASA under budget cuts and lack of management talent now. New scientist spur needed. Taylor Dinerman, author and journalist based in New York City, 5/19/08, “NASA and Space Solar Power,” http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1130/1 NASA has good reason to be afraid that the Congress or maybe even the White House will give them a mandate to work on space solar power at a time when the agency’s budget is even tighter than usual and when everything that can be safely cut has been cut. This includes almost all technology development programs that are not directly tied to the Exploration Missions System Directorate’s Project Constellation. Not only that, the management talent inside the organization is similarly under stress. Adding a new program might bring down the US civil space program like a house of cards.

30

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space has untapped energy
Space has near infinite untapped energy Arthur Smith, President Long Island Space Society, 8-11-03 ("the case for space based solar development", http://www.spacedaily.com/news/ssp-03b.html)[JWu] Space is big - there is an awful lot of energy out there, and the crumbs we fight about here on Earth are laughably tiny in comparison. Zettawatts from the Sun pass just through the region between Earth and Moon - that's enough energy for each man, woman and child in the US to sustainably power an entire US economy all to themselves. Even our terrestrial energy choices, fossil or renewable, fission or wind, almost all derive from the energy profligacy of our Sun and other stars before it. Gathering power in space and transmitting it to Earth should not be a mystery to us in this 21st century. Communications satellites already do it routinely. One significant obstacle to power applications, however, is regulatory: there is no spectrum allocated to power transmission, as there is for communications.

31

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space Race and Space Col inevitable
Space renaissance, race, and colonization are inevitable Bruce Cordell, PhD planetary and space physics, Weizmann postdoctoral fellow at Caltech, ex-physics professor at the California State University, space scientist, worked with NASA. May 11 08 ("Economic growth" http://21stcenturywaves.com/blog/category/perspectives/)[JWu] A variety of long-term indicators – economic, social, technological, and political – strongly suggest that a new international space race will take shape during the next 5 – 10 years. This unprecedented thrust into space is expected to significantly exceed the scale and scope of the 1960’s Apollo Moon program and will culminate by 2025 in a variety of major activities in space such as humans on Mars, tourists on the Moon, and solar power satellites in LEO. Long-term patterns in the economy, technology, and exploration over the last 200 years appear to have predictive power for the 21st Century. In particular, a roughly 56-year cycle was identified, where macro-engineering projects (e.g., Panama Canal), significant human explorations (e.g., Lewis and Clark), and major military conflicts (e.g., Civil War) tended to cluster together, near economic booms. The bottom-line forecast is that the decade from 2015 to 2025 will be the analog of the 1960s, bringing a global focus on achievement in space exploration and a Camelot-like zeitgeist. The purpose of this Weblog is to evaluate these forecasts based on macroeconomics and macrohistory, by comparing them to events and trends from around the world in 10 Wave Guide areas.

32

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Military Advantage- Uniqueness
Oil Makes Unsustainable
Declining supply of oil will make the US military unsustainable Bryan Bender, Boston Globe Staff, May 1, 2007, (“Pentagon study says oil reliance strains military Urges development of alternative fuels” http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/linkframe.php?linkid=34812 [Bapodra]) WASHINGTON -- A new study ordered by the Pentagon warns that the rising cost and dwindling supply of oil -- the lifeblood of fighter jets, warships, and tanks -- will make the US military's ability to respond to hot spots around the world "unsustainable in the long term." The study, produced by a defense consulting firm, concludes that all four branches of the military must "fundamentally transform" their assumptions about energy, including taking immediate steps toward fielding weapons systems and aircraft that run on alternative and renewable fuels. It is "imperative" that the Department of Defense "apply new energy technologies that address alternative supply sources and efficient consumption across all aspects of military operations," according to the report, which was provided to the Globe. Weaning the military from fossil fuels quickly, however, would be a herculean task -- especially because the bulk of the US arsenal, the world's most advanced, is dependent on fossil fuels and many of those military systems have been designed to remain in service for at least several decades.

Energy costs threaten US military sustainability and continue dependence on nations that are threats to US interests Bryan Bender, Boston Globe Staff, May 1, 2007, (“Pentagon study says oil reliance strains military Urges development of alternative fuels” http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/linkframe.php?linkid=34812 [Bapodra]) “The US military will have to be even more energy intense, locate in more regions of the world, employ new technologies, and manage a more complex logistics system," according to the report. "Simply put, more miles will be traveled, both by combat units and the supply units that sustain them, which will result in increased energy consumption." The costs of relying on oil to power the military are consuming an increasing share of the military's budget, the report asserts. Energy costs have doubled since the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, it says, and the cost of conducting operations could become so expensive in the future that the military will not be able to pay for some of its new weapon systems. Ensuring access to dwindling oil supplies also carries a big price tag. The United States, relying largely on military patrols, spends an average of $44 billion per year safeguarding oil supplies in the Persian Gulf. And the United States is often dependent on some of the same countries that pose the greatest threats to US interests. Achieving an energy transformation at the Department of Defense "will require the commitment, personal involvement , and leadership of the secretary of defense and his key subordinates," the report says.

33

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Oil demand and changing energy geopolitics threaten to fall short of America’s military energy needs Chip Cummins, Securing America’s Future Energy Newsroom reporter, December 19, 2006, “Choke Points: As Threats to Oil Supply Grow, A General Says U.S. Isn't Ready” Page A1 http://www.secureenergy.org/site/page.php?node=364&id=7 [Bapodra] Three years into the sharpest spike in oil prices in a generation, policy makers and military leaders across the globe are grappling with the implications of fundamental change in energy geopolitics. One such leader is the new U.S. defense secretary, Robert Gates, who took part last year in a war game simulating disruptions to the oil trade. It concluded the U.S. had few short-term fixes if supplies were jolted. Supply lines are longer and oil fields more numerous than a generation ago. New threats have emerged, from rebels in West Africa to terrorists targeting Saudi Arabia. With supply and demand tightly balanced, even small disruptions can cause big price swings, endangering economic growth. Nationalistic fossil-fuel powers such as Russia have shown willingness to brandish energy as a weapon. The war in Iraq has hammered the oil industry in the world's third-largest holder of conventional oil reserves. In this new era, one of the central security assumptions of the 20th century -- that a powerful U.S. military can protect America's energy interests across the globe -- falls short. Oil consumption in the military is increasing because of WOT and geopolitical oil tensions Eileen Westervelt and Donald F. Fournier, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, September 2005 “September Energy Trends and Implications for U.S. Army Installations”, http://static.cbslocal.com/station/wcco/news/specialreports/projectenergy/06_0420_projectenergy_energytr endsreportfromarmycorps.pdf [Bapodra] Energy Trends Figure 1 and Table 1 show current demand, supply, and proportionate distribution of energy for the world, nation, and Army. Table 2 lists world reserves. The Army and the nation’s heavy use of oil and natural gas is not “in synch” with the nation’s or the earth’s supplies. The relative fuel shares of energy use vs. energy reserves underscores our need to supplement oil and natural gas as our staple fuels. The domestic supply and demand imbalance would lessen if coal and/or nuclear energy were made more environmentally acceptable or if the renewable share of our energy portfolio were to increase. Worldwide energy consumption is expected to increase by 2.1 percent/yr and domestic energy consumption by 1.4 percent per year. This will exacerbate global energy competition for existing supplies. Army energy consumption is dominated by facilities consumption. Facilities consumption may decrease in both total quantity and in intensity basis—but not without an aggressive energy program with careful planning, diligent monitoring, and prudent investment. The closure of European installations and relocation of troops onto domestic installations will make this outcome especially challenging. The energy consumption associated with Army mobility (tactical and nontactical vehicle consumption) is expected to remain constant, but may potentially increase depending of future phases of the Global War on Terror and on geopolitical tensions resulting from the world energy situation.

34

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Oil Dependency Kills Readiness

The Army is completely dependent on fossil fuel, impeding in deployment, maneuverability, and diverting troops from combat Felicia French, Army Environmental Policy Institute, April 5, 2005, “How the Army Can Be An Environmental Paragon Through Energy”, http://www.aepi.army.mil/internet/how-army-can-be-energyparagon.pdf] [Bapodra] The Army does not have the luxury of ignoring its dependence on fossil fuel. Along with the rest of the Nation, it is almost completely dependent on fossil fuel to accomplish its mission. The Department of Defense (DoD) bill for mobility and installation energy was over $8.2 billion in fiscal year 2004 (27: NP). DoD is the largest single consumer of the total U.S. energy consumed. The Army uses about 6 percent of DoD mobility fuels (gas, diesel and jet fuel) to power tactical and utility vehicles, and weapons platforms to include M1 Abrams tanks and all helicopters (9: 4). However, this does not account for the fuel used by Air Force planes and Navy ships in transporting Army personnel and equipment in peacetime and especially in wartime. Fuel logistics for the Army accounts for 70 percent of all tonnage hauled when the Army mobilizes. The transportation of that same fuel from base to projection platform comprises 8 percent of the cost (21: 85). The Army also pays $3.2 billion annually to 20,000 active duty and 40,000 reserve component personnel to transport this fuel (21: 88). The Army could have more “teeth” and less “tail” if we weren’t so dependent upon this fuel. This logistical behemoth impedes deployment, maneuverability, and increases our personnel and equipment requirements and diverts troops from combat arms. Additionally, in 2003 it costs $769 million in energy bills for the Army to maintain over 4,100 installations and sites (about two-thirds of all DoD installations) including Army National Guard, Army Reserve, and overseas facilities. This totaled 896 million square feet in 158,690 buildings (10: 1).

35

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Resupply Hurts Readiness
Resupply in fuel inhibits warfighting, providing vulnerability to our combat forces Amory Lovins, Rocky Mountain Institute Chief Scientist, 2001, “Battling Fuel Waste in the Military” http://www.rmi.org/images/PDFs/Security/S01-12_BattlingFuelWaste.pdf The Army’s formidable half-mile-a-gallon M1A2 tanks are powered by inefficient 1960s-design gas turbines that yield 1500 horsepower to make 68 tons dash around a battlefield at 30 mph (42 on the road). They do that pretty well. But 60- to 80-odd percent of the time, that huge turbine is idling at one percent efficiency to run a 5-kilowatt “hotel load,” mostly air conditioning and electronics. Most civilian vehicles would use a small auxiliary power unit to serve such tiny, steady loads efficiently. Tanks don’t, because their fuel was assumed to cost about a buck a gallon. But to keep up with a rapidly advancing armored unit on the battlefield, cargo helicopters may have to leapfrog big bladders of fuel hundreds of kilometers into theater, using much of the fuel to do so. The delivery cost can then rise to $400–600 a gallon—yet it was assumed to be zero. If the designers had known the real delivery cost, they’d have designed the tanks very differently. Fuel-wasting design doesn’t just cost money; it inhibits warfighting. Each tank is trailed by lumbering fuel tankers. An armored division may use as much as 20, perhaps even 40, times as many daily tons of fuel as it does of munitions—around 600,000 gallons a day. Of the unit’s top ten battlefield fuel guzzlers, only Abrams tanks (#5) and Apache helicopters (#10) are combat vehicles. Several of the rest carry fuel. This takes a lot of equipment and people. The Army directly uses about $0.2 billion dollars’ worth of fuel a year, but pays about 16 times as much, $3.2 billion a year, just to maintain 20,000 active and 40,000 reserve personnel to move that fuel. And unarmored fuel carriers are vulnerable. Attacks on rear logistics assets can make a fuelhungry combat system grind to a halt. Yet the warfighting benefits of fuel economy— in deployability, agility, range, speed, reliability, and maneuverability—are as invisible as the fuel delivery cost. Delivering fuel dramatically increases the cost to operate and sustain military forces Scott Buchanan, Department of Defense Office of Force Transformation 2006, “Energy and Force Transformation Joint Force Quarterly” http://www.ndu.edu/inss/Press/jfq_pages/editions/i42/17JFQ42%20Buchanan%20Pg%2051-54.pdf Delivering fuel where and when it is needed is a significant and increasing burden on the Services. The logistics costs to deliver fuel include people, training, platforms (for example, oilers, trucks, and tanker aircraft), and other hardware and infrastructure. Those costs can be tens and sometimes hundreds of times the cost of the fuel itself, depending on how it is delivered. However, the exact costs are unknown because acquisition and operational decision processes neither fully quantify those costs nor consider alternatives to the “logistics systems” that platform acquisition and perhaps operational decisions will dictate.12 It is likely that actual costs of delivering fuel for operations are dramatically higher than decision makers realize. Until now, the methods for acquiring military platforms, both combat and support, and accounting for the costs of fuel to operate and sustain them have been sufficient. However, is the confluence of new and evolving operational concepts, high fuel costs, and fiscal constraints demanding a transformation in our view of energy? The available evidence suggests that it is.

36

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Oil Consumption Increasing
Oil consumption in the military is increasing because of WOT and geopolitical oil tensions Eileen Westervelt and Donald F. Fournier, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, September 2005 “September Energy Trends and Implications for U.S. Army Installations”, http://static.cbslocal.com/station/wcco/news/specialreports/projectenergy/06_0420_projectenergy_energytr endsreportfromarmycorps.pdf [Bapodra] Energy Trends Figure 1 and Table 1 show current demand, supply, and proportionate distribution of energy for the world, nation, and Army. Table 2 lists world reserves. The Army and the nation’s heavy use of oil and natural gas is not “in synch” with the nation’s or the earth’s supplies. The relative fuel shares of energy use vs. energy reserves underscores our need to supplement oil and natural gas as our staple fuels. The domestic supply and demand imbalance would lessen if coal and/or nuclear energy were made more environmentally acceptable or if the renewable share of our energy portfolio were to increase. Worldwide energy consumption is expected to increase by 2.1 percent/yr and domestic energy consumption by 1.4 percent per year. This will exacerbate global energy competition for existing supplies. Army energy consumption is dominated by facilities consumption. Facilities consumption may decrease in both total quantity and in intensity basis—but not without an aggressive energy program with careful planning, diligent monitoring, and prudent investment. The closure of European installations and relocation of troops onto domestic installations will make this outcome especially challenging. The energy consumption associated with Army mobility (tactical and nontactical vehicle consumption) is expected to remain constant, but may potentially increase depending of future phases of the Global War on Terror and on geopolitical tensions resulting from the world energy situation. Oil consumption has led to dependency within the DOD, and rising prices haven’t reduced consumption Gregory Lengyel Colonel USAF, August 2007, “Department of Defense Energy Strategy Teaching an Old Dog New Tricks”, 21st Century Defense Initiative of the Brookings Institution, http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/papers/2007/08defense_lengyel/lengyel20070815.pdf [Bapodra] The United States of America has a National Security problem, in which the Department of Defense (DOD) has a unique interest – energy security. Energy is the life-blood of the US economy and dependence on imported energy is a looming national crisis. Cheap and abundant energy has been the historical norm for American consumers and war fighters, and to most Americans energy is taken for granted. Electricity is as much a part of daily life as breathing air and drinking water. Electricity powers our lights, alarm clocks, coffee pots, toasters, heating, ventilation and air conditioning, MP3 players, computers, televisions, traffic lights, subway systems, air traffic control networks, industry, and almost every other facet of daily life in the 21st century, and it’s been that way for almost 100 years. The US National Academy of Engineering ranks “Electrification” as the #1 Engineering Achievement of the 20th Century.1 Much of American society is centered on individual mobility, extensive road networks, and large parking lots. The United States has more cars than registered drivers, and with a few notable exceptions, fuel has remained affordable and plentiful. Fuel costs moved from the subconscious to the conscious after recent increases in the price of oil caused gasoline prices to rise to $3 per gallon, but for the most part, increased fuel prices have done nothing to reduce consumption. The United States imports 26% of its total energy supply and 56% of the oil it consumes.

37

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

DOD Lacks Organized Program
The DOD lacks coordinated energy programs and is based on energy efficiency Gregory Lengyel Colonel USAF, August 2007, “Department of Defense Energy Strategy Teaching an Old Dog New Tricks”, 21st Century Defense Initiative of the Brookings Institution, http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/papers/2007/08defense_lengyel/lengyel20070 815.pdf [Bapodra] Despite these trends there is no existing formal Department of Defense Energy Strategy and no single individual or organization responsible for energy issues within the Department. The DOD Annual Energy Management Report for FY 2006 lists the Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition, Technology and Logistics) as the DOD Senior Energy Official responsible for meeting the goals of Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct 2005) and Executive Order (EO) 13123, Greening the Government through Efficient Energy Management.22 However, this position has been vacant for several years and does not satisfy the need for a comprehensive Senior Energy Official for the Department. This is not to say the DOD is unconcerned with energy issues. The Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) and the Services have recently conducted or sponsored numerous studies focusing on energy, many of which have been invaluable information sources for this paper: MITRE Corporation JASON Project, Reducing DOD Fossil Fuel Dependence (2006); Defense Science Board, More Capable Warfighting Through Reduced Fuel Burden (2001), and soon to be released Energy Strategy (2006-2007); OSD Energy Security Integrated Product Team (2006); Air Force Scientific Advisory Board, Technology Options for Improved Air Vehicle Fuel Efficiency (2006); Navy Research Advisory Council, Study on Future Fuels (2005); Army Corps of Engineers, Energy Trends and Their Implications for US Army Installations (2005); and Defense Advanced Research Projects, Petroleum-Free Military Workshop (2005), to name a few. Common recommendations include making fuel efficiency a more significant factor in determining new mobility platforms (e.g. miles per gallon for ground vehicles, nautical miles/pound (lb.) fuel/lb. payload for aircraft and ships) and creating incentives for energy efficiency throughout the DOD. However, none of the studies offered anything other than liquid hydrocarbons as the best fuel for DOD mobility platforms for at least the next 25 years. Impressive groups of energy experts have produced many of these studies, but they are all either Service specific or temporary in nature, meaning the group of experts dispersed after writing the study’s final report. The lack of a full-time energy advocate within the DOD leaves a void in follow-up actions to study recommendations, or creation of directive guidance on energy issues within the Department.

38

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Oil is running out
Market correction doesn’t account for how scarce oil is- the DOD has to take action before the global oil supply is depleted Scott Buchanan, Department of Defense Office of Force Transformation 2006, “Energy and Force Transformation Joint Force Quarterly” http://www.ndu.edu/inss/Press/jfq_pages/editions/i42/17JFQ42%20Buchanan%20Pg%2051-54.pdf Depending upon which view one chooses to accept, the global oil supply will either last no more than a few decades or will perhaps last a century. On one side of the debate, experts argue that because of the limited supply of oil, it will increase in expense as it depletes in availability or production (referred to as Hubbert’s peak). Market analysts, on the other hand, argue that the market will force a correction of the oil demand, thereby stemming the flow of oil and prolonging the inevitable. Both arguments underscore that oil is an increasingly scarce commodity. Clayton Christensen has argued that “markets that don’t exist can’t be analyzed.”7 Until a market correction takes hold, or there is a global shift toward alternative sources of fuel, oil demand will continue and, perhaps increasingly, will influence the global security environment. DOD has the opportunity to take action to shape this future to our advantage

39

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Links- Solar Solves Readiness
Solar-based energy can replace long supply oil chains Newswise, June 20, 2001 [“Future Army Could Run On Alternative Fuels, Photosynthesis,” http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/24748/] [Bapodra] WEST LAFAYETTE, Ind. -- Getting fuel to soldiers in the field has been a problem since machines replaced horses. But according to a new report, by 2025 soldiers could make fuel and electricity where they are, instead of relying on long supply chains to transport energy to them. "Opportunities in Biotechnology for Future Army Applications," a report released today (Wednesday, 6/20) by the National Research Council's Board on Army Science and Technology, says future U.S. Army operations in the field could rely on alternative fuels and biological methods to produce electricity through photosynthesis. The report was prepared by a 16-member committee of university and industry scientists. Purdue University's Michael Ladisch, distinguished professor of agricultural and biological engineering and distinguished professor of biomedical engineering, chaired the NRC committee. One of the most well-known examples of a military energy crisis occurred near the end of World War II. As U.S. Gen. George Patton raced through France, he quickly outran his supply lines and the ability to refuel his trucks and tanks. On Aug. 28, 1944, Patton declared, "At the present time our chief difficulty is not the Germans, but gasoline. If they would give me enough gas, I could go all the way to Berlin!" Three days later, despite the efforts of the famed Red Ball Express, a convoy of trucks hurrying fuel to Patton's army, he and his men were stranded dry. The chance to sweep through France into Germany soon passed. Robert Love, study director for the National Research Council, says such situations could be avoided in the future by employing alternative fuels made from natural and renewable resources. "The real issues for the Army are the ability to simplify logistics requirements, to remain flexible with battlefield fuels, and to capitalize on alternative fuels, such as methane, instead of restricting ourselves to fossil fuels," he says. "With fossil fuels, logistics can become difficult because you have to have this long supply chain." Solar satellites can beam energy securely to bases eliminating depending on land fuel deliveries National Security Space Office, part of a long-term government study on the feasibility of solar space power as a provider of U.S. energy, 10-10-07, “Space-Based Solar Power As an Opportunity for Strategic Security,” http://www.nss.org/settlement/ssp/library/final-sbsp-interim-assessment-release-01.pdf For the DoD specifically, beamed energy from space in quantities greater than 5 MWe has the potential to be a disruptive game changer on the battlefield. SBSP and its enabling wireless power transmission technology could facilitate extremely flexible “energy on demand” for combat units and installations across an entire theater, while significantly reducing dependence on vulnerable over‐land fuel deliveries. SBSP could also enable entirely new force structures and capabilities such as ultra long‐endurance airborne or terrestrial surveillance or combat systems to include the individual soldier himself. More routinely, SBSP could provide the ability to deliver rapid and sustainable humanitarian energy to a disaster area or to a local population undergoing nation‐building activities. SBSP could also facilitate base “islanding” such that each installation has the ability to operate independent of vulnerable ground‐based energy delivery infrastructures. In addition to helping Americamin and allied defense establishments remain relevant over the entire 21st Century through more secure supply lines, perhaps the greatest military benefit of SBSP is to lessen the chances of conflict due to energy scarcity by providing access to a strategically secure energy supply.

40

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt Renewable energies can eliminate the military’s dependency on oil
Thomas Crowley et al, Tanya D. Corrie, David B. Diamond, Stuart D. Funk, Wilhelm A. Hansen, Andrea D. Stenhoff, Daniel C. Swift, Logistics Management Institute, April 2007, “Transforming the Way DoD Looks at Energy: An Approach to Establishing an Energy Strategy”, REPORT FT602T1, http://www.oft.osd.mil/library/library_files/document_404_FT602T1_Transforming%20the%20Way%20D oD%20Looks%20at%20Energy_Final%20Report.pdf [Bapodra] In an environment of uncertainty about the price and availability of traditional energy sources, DoD is facing increasing energy demand and support requirements that it must meet if it is to achieve its broader strategic goals—notably, establishment of a more mobile and agile force. However, recent technological advances in energy efficiency and alternative energy technologies offer a unique opportunity for DoD to make progress toward reconciling its strategic goals with its energy requirements through reduced consumption of fuel—especially foreign fuel. To capitalize on this opportunity, DoD needs to implement an energy strategy that encompasses the development of innovative new concepts and capabilities to re- duce energy dependence while maintaining or increasing overall warfighting effectiveness. Recognizing that DoD must change how it views, values, and uses energy—a transformation that will challenge some of the department’s most deeply held assumptions, interests, and processes—the Office of Force Transformation and Resources, within the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, asked LMI to develop an approach to establishing a DoD energy strategy. LMI identified three areas of disconnect between DoD’s current energy consumption practices and the capability requirements of its strategic goals: Strategic. DoD seeks to shape the future security environment in favor of the United States. But, our dependence on foreign supplies of fuel limits our flexibility in dealing with producer nations who oppose or hinder our goals for greater prosperity and liberty. DoD’s operational concepts seek greater mobility, persistence, and agility for our forces. But, the energy logistics requirements of these forces limit our ability to realize these concepts. Fiscal. DoD seeks to reduce operating costs of the current force to procure new capabilities for the future. But, with increased energy consumption and increased price pressure due to growing global demand for energy, energy-associated operating costs are growing.

Solar satellites can power distant tanks and military bases Graham Philips, Reporter from the Catalyst, 13 March 2008,“Solar Space Power” Audio and textual transcript, internally quotes Dr Charles H. Lineweaver, Senior Fellow of Planetary Science Institute (PSI) , Research School of Astronomy and Astrophysics (RSAA) and Research School of Earth Sciences, http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/2008/03/13/2187801.htm [Bapodra] Charley Lineweaver:: I think someone at the Pentagon sat down and said why are we involved in Iraq, why are we spending 7 billion dollars a month on this, wouldn’t it be more useful if we took that money and did something to secure a better energy supply Narration: Of course – the technology also has… some military applications… such as powering tanks… in far away deserts... Dr Lineweaver: They’re in conflict positions where there aren’t power lines that can supply their troops and the military are willing to pay top dollar for power that can be distributed to them where they want it when they want … hey I’m the military I can – I can afford to pay 10 times more a 100 times more than civilian prices then it becomes worthwhile to have that ability to beam it down to a war zone for example.

41

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

SBSP helps solve military energy needs James Bloom, The Guardian staff writer, 11-1-07, ("Power from the final frontier", http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2007/nov/01/guardianweeklytechnologysection.research)[JWu ] The US army could also use such a device to deliver electricity to its troops. Military units in forward areas pay $1 per kilowatt hour, six times the UK domestic price. They pay a lot more to bring in fuel. Lives could be saved by cutting long and vulnerable logistics chains - though it would require the large collectors.

Space solar power key to readiness Frank Morring, Sr Space Tech. Editor, Aerospace Daily and Defense Report, 10-11-07 ("NSSO backs space solar power" aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story.jsp?id=news/solar101107.xml &headline=NSSO%20Backs%20Space%20Solar%20Power%20&channel=space)[JWu] Collecting solar power in space and beaming it back to Earth is a relatively near-term possibility that could solve strategic and tactical security problems for the U.S. and its deployed forces, the Pentagon's National Security Space Office (NSSO) says in a report issued Oct. 10. As a clean source of energy that would be independent of foreign supplies in the strife-torn Middle East and elsewhere, space solar power (SSP) could ease America's longstanding strategic energy vulnerability, according to the "interim assessment" released at a press conference and on the Web site spacesolarpower.wordpress.com. And the U.S. military could meet tactical energy needs for forward-deployed forces with a demonstration system, eliminating the need for a long logistical tail to deliver fuel for terrestrial generators while reducing risk for eventual large-scale commercial development of the technology, the report says.

42

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
Solar Converters can make field military and intelligence more effective, unlimited power is critical for their survival Randyll R. M. Fernandez, Jr., Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California, September 2005, “A Novel Photovoltaic Power Converter For Military and Space Applications”, Masters Theisis Thesis Advisor: Sherif Michael Second Reader: Robert Ashton, NPS, http://stinet.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA439411&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf [Bapodra] For field military personnel on a mission in remote areas, the ability to have uninterrupted communications and use of their equipment from unlimited available power sources are critical for their survival. The PVPC technology can make a more self-sufficient and mobile soldier. They will be less reliant on supply chains by carrying lesser combat load due to elimination of unnecessary non-rechargeable batteries to power their equipment. Intelligence can make or break the outcome of a mission or war. Incorporating the PVPC technology to current development in aviation especially to the very promising SoLong aircraft or other UAV prototype can provide us with unlimited information on any area of interest. Other military applications can benefit substantially from this new technology as proven from all the test results. In short, PVPC ‘s ability to provide more power can have a significant impact in the way our military conducts its missions.

43

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
SBSP provides much needed risk-free energy to forward bases Space Frontier Foundation, international organization composed of space activists, scientists and engineers, media and political professionals.10-10-07 ("Meeting Humanity’s Energy, National Security, Environmental
and Economic Development Needs" http://www.space-frontier.org/Presentations/ SFFViewsSBSPReport10Oct07.pdf)[JWu]

Perhaps the biggest news of the NSSO-led study is that the team uncovered something new that might forever change the economic equation for space-based solar power. The report estimates that the Department of Defense (DoD) is paying about $1 per kilowatt-hour for electricity in forward bases in Iraq, when all indirect costs are included. This is an order of magnitude higher in price than what Americans pay for electricity in their homes. These higher electricity prices are not caused by gouging, but by the realities of war and how electricity is generated for the warfighter. Currently, we pump oil out of the ground in the Middle East or the continental United States, and then transport the oil to the Gulf coast where it is refined into kerosene. We then pump the kerosene onto tankers, which must be guarded by the U.S. Navy, and transport it to the Gulf region. We then pump the kerosene off the tankers into individual trucks, which must be heavily guarded by American ground forces. Then, these convoys, which are primary targets for asymmetric attacks by improvised explosive devices, must run a dangerous gauntlet through a war zone. Finally, the kerosene is delivered to the forward bases, where it is converted into electricity. The NSSO-led study report finds that: Petroleum products account for approximately 70% of delivered tonnage to U.S. forces in Iraq—total daily consumption is approximately 1.6 million gallons. o Significant numbers of American men and women are killed and injured while they are defending these supply chains. The estimated cost of $1 per kilowatt hour does NOT include the cost in lives oAmerican men and women. In other words, if space-based solar power existed today it would be saving the lives of American men and women in Iraq. It is this fundamental finding that creates the possibility that the DoD might become an early adopter, and anchor tenant customer, for SBSP. The possibility that the Department of Defense might be willing to sign up as anchor tenant to “pay for SBSP services delivered to the warfighter in forward bases in amounts of 5-50 MW continuous, at a price of $1 or more per kilowatt-hour”, changes the entire economic equation of SBSP. Alternative energies allow forward deployment because they eliminate supply line dependency John Young, Director of Defense Research and Engineering, Office of the Secretary September 27, 2006 ,Political Transcript Wire, “Hold A Joint A Hearting On Dod Alternative Energy Programs,” http://www.accessmylibrary.c om/coms2/summary_0286-18480380_ITM [Bapodra] The Defense Department also has unique energy requirements which often align with the energy needs of the nation. For example, in early August, Major General Richard Zilmer, al- Anbar province commander, submitted an urgent request for renewable energy systems for remote forward deployed forces due to the vulnerability of supply lines to insurgent attack or ambush by roadside bombs. The Defense Department has worked steadily towards many of these goals and needs over the past several years. On the facilities side, by 2005, the department had reduced facilities energy use by over 28 percent from the 1985 baseline and the Energy Policy Act of 2005 has reset the baseline and increased the reduction target. Indeed, in 2005, military service installations received four of the five presidential awards for leadership in federal energy management. My colleague, Phil Grone, will be able to talk in much greater detail about these efforts. DOD continues to develop renewable energy technology and facilities on bases using geothermal sources, wind, solar, and ocean temperature differential. DOD has a range of research and development programs underway to improve energy efficiency. Examples include the use of lighter weight materials and platforms, fuel efficient engine designs, drag reducing coatings, and testing alternative fuels. The servicefunded energy and power technology initiative has focused on lightening the logistics burden of our ground forces by developing efficient power generation, energy storage, and power control and distribution technologies. Secretary Rumsfeld directed, in the strategic planning guidance this year, that a task force 44

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
review the department's efforts on power and energy alternatives and efficiency. The task force reviewed DOD plans to invest $1.8 billion on energy related efforts between fiscal years 2007 to 2011. The military services, combatant commands, and defense agencies embraced this task force and the result was tremendous collaboration.

45

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Energy Key to Readiness
The DOD must employ new alt-energy technology to sustain forward deployment Thomas Crowley et al, Tanya D. Corrie, David B. Diamond, Stuart D. Funk, Wilhelm A. Hansen, Andrea D. Stenhoff, Daniel C. Swift, Logistics Management Institute, April 2007, “Transforming the Way DoD Looks at Energy: An Approach to Establishing an Energy Strategy”, REPORT FT602T1, http://www.oft.osd.mil/library/library_files/document_404_FT602T1_Transforming%20the%20Way%20D oD%20Looks%20at%20Energy_Final%20Report.pdf [Bapodra] Recent experience indicates that the nature of the threat facing the United States is changing. Today, we cannot be sure in advance of the location of future conflicts, given the threat of dispersed, small-scale attacks inherent in warfare with rogue nations and insurgent forces. In addition, the U.S. military must be prepared to defend against single strikes capable of mass casualties. This complex security environment— an environment in which a wide range of conventional and unconventional attacks can come from unpredictable regions of the world and the risk of a single attack is high—requires the United States not only to maintain a force that is forward and engaged on a daily steady-state basis, but also to ensure that it is ready for quick, surge deployments worldwide to counter, and deter, a broad spectrum of potential threats. Theme 1. Our forces must expand geographically and be more mobile and expeditionary so that they can be engaged in more theaters and prepared for expedient deployment anywhere in the world. Theme 2. We must transition from a reactive to a proactive force posture to deter enemy forces from organizing for and conducting potentially catastrophic attacks. Theme 3. We must be persistent in our presence, surveillance, assistance, and attack to defeat determined insurgents and halt the organization of new enemy forces. To carry out these activities, the U.S. military will have to be even more energy intense, locate in more regions of the world, employ new technologies, and man- age a more complex logistics system. Considering the trend in operational fuel consumption and future capability needs, this “new” force employment construct will likely demand more energy/fuel in the deployed setting. Simply put, more miles will be traveled, both by combat units and the supply units that sustain them, which will result in increased energy consumption. Therefore, DoD must apply new energy technologies that address alternative supply sources and efficient consumption across all aspects of military operations.

46

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

The DOD requires intense energy postures for deterrence and global military power projection. Current utility of oil is unsustainable for our forces Thomas Crowley et al, Tanya D. Corrie, David B. Diamond, Stuart D. Funk, Wilhelm A. Hansen, Andrea D. Stenhoff, Daniel C. Swift, Logistics Management Institute, April 2007, “Transforming the Way DoD Looks at Energy: An Approach to Establishing an Energy Strategy”, REPORT FT602T1, http://www.oft.osd.mil/library/library_files/document_404_FT602T1_Transforming%20the%20Way%20D oD%20Looks%20at%20Energy_Final%20Report.pdf [Bapodra] The security and military strategies for DoD require an energy-intense posture for conducting both deterrence and combat operations. The strategies rely on persistent presence globally, mobility to project power and sustain forces, and dominant maneuver to swiftly defeat adversaries. These current and future operating concepts tether operational capability to high-technology solutions that require continued growth in energy sources. Current consumption estimates, although based on incomplete data, validate these increasing fuel requirements and the implications for future operations. Clearly, the skill of our logistics forces in providing fuel has grown significantly since World War II. Still, we must be mindful of the operational implications of logistics requirements. The stalling of General Patton’s Third Army following its campaign across France in August and September 1944 is a telling example of the fuel “tether.” Despite the heroic efforts of logistics forces, the wear and tear on supply trucks and the strategic priority for fuel and logistics support in other areas of operations limited Patton to local operations for nearly 2 months.20 The Defense Energy Support Center (DESC) estimates that 20,000 soldiers are employed to deliver fuel to operations (and spending $1 million per day to transport petroleum, which does not include fuel costs for contractor-provided combat support). The delivery of fuel poses such an operational and tactical risk that in July 2006, Maj. Gen. Richard Zilmer, the highestranking Marine Corps officer in Iraq’s Anbar Province, characterized the development of solar and wind power capabilities as a “joint urgent operational need.” General Zilmer cited reductions in often dangerous fuel transportation activities as the main motivation for this request: “By reducing the need for [petroleum-based fuels] at our outlying bases, we can decrease the frequency of logistics convoys on the road, thereby reducing the danger to our Marines, soldiers, and sailors.”21 Operational capability is always the most important aspect of force development. However, it may not be possible to execute operational concepts and capabilities to achieve our security strategy if the energy implications are not considered. Current planning presents a situation in which the aggregate operational capability of the force may be unsustainable in the long term. Enduring energy policies are necessary for further military effectiveness Eileen Westervelt, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, 2005 “September Energy Trends and Implications for U.S. Army Installations”, http://static.cbslocal.com/station/wcco/news/ specialreports/projectenergy/06_0420_projectenergy_energytrendsreportfromarmycorps.pdf [Bapodra] The energy situation is highly uncertain–for the Army, the Nation, and the world. Now is the time to consider both short and long-term issues to develop enduring energy policies and solutions for our military installations to discern an effective and viable path for the Army’s energy future. To sustain its mission and ensure the capability to project and support the forces, the Army must insulate itself from the economic and logistical energy-related problems coming in the near- to mid-future. This requires a transition to modern, secure, and efficient energy systems and to building safe, environmentally friendly technologies. This is both a supplyside and demand-side challenge requiring integrated solutions and thoughtful planning and execution. Primary issues affecting energy options are: availability, affordability, sustainability, and 47

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
security. Any review of these issues must take a global perspective since resources are unevenly distributed around the world. Further, the impacts of energy consumption have global reach from both an environmental and political perspective.

48

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Military deployment for deterrence and combat operations foster a tremendous energy demand Scott Buchanan, Department of Defense Office of Force Transformation 2006, “Energy and Force Transformation Joint Force Quarterly” http://www.ndu.edu/inss/Press/jfq_pages/editions/i42/17JFQ42%20Buchanan%20Pg%2051-54.pdf The speed with which military forces have deployed and engaged has depended on the speed and adaptability of the logistics tail, which has adapted and evolved to provide the ever-increasing demand for fuel that our newest platforms demand. Because of our tremendous logistics capability, the Armed Forces can be successfully deployed and employed anywhere in the world for both deterrence and combat operations. However, that capability comes at a high price: a tremendous energy demand. The energy consumption rates of our forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, for instance, is four times what it was in World War II and twice that of Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm.8 The logistics tail now consists largely of the fuel required to execute and sustain operations.

49

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Agile Force key to Readiness
The DOD requires a lighter, more agile, and dispersed force to increase logistical sustainment Scott Buchanan, Department of Defense Office of Force Transformation 2006, “Energy and Force Transformation Joint Force Quarterly” http://www.ndu.edu/inss/Press/jfq_pages/editions/i42/17JFQ42%20Buchanan%20Pg%2051-54.pdf The U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) can learn from the Royal Navy’s pre–World War I energy transformation. Like the Royal Navy a century ago, DOD is faced with the problem of limited resources due in large part to our energy infrastructure. Fuel represents more than half of the DOD logistics tonnage and over 70 percent of the tonnage required to put the U.S. Army into position for battle.3 The Navy uses millions of gallons of fuel every day to operate around the globe, and the Air Force, the largest daily DOD consumer of fuel, uses even more.4 The DOD energy burden is so significant that it may prevent the execution of new and still evolving operational concepts, which require the rapid and constant transport of resources without regard for the energy costs.5 These energy burdens will increase as new operational concepts demand a lighter, more agile and dispersed force, with the attendant increase in logistical sustainment. As increasing portions of the budget are set aside for fuel purchases to account for the volatility in fuel prices, increased capability will need to be built into new platforms to mitigate likely impacts on force shape and composition. It is crucial, therefore, that DOD develops an energy strategy that reduces the energy burdens of our operational concepts.

50

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Impacts- Oil Dependency: kills Global Leadership
Oil Dependency creates challenges against U.S. foreign policy and national security in every part of the globe. The DOD must take corrective measures against vulnerabilities in the global energy infrastructure Gregory Lengyel Colonel USAF, August 2007, “Department of Defense Energy Strategy Teaching an Old Dog New Tricks”, 21st Century Defense Initiative of the Brookings Institution, http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/papers/2007/08defense_lengyel/lengyel20070815.pdf [Bapodra] The lack of sustained attention to energy issues is undercutting US foreign policy and US national security. Major energy suppliers – from Russia to Iran to Venezuela – have been increasingly able and willing to use their energy resources to pursue their strategic and political objectives. Major energy consumers – notably the United States, but other countries as well – are finding that their growing dependence on imported energy increases their strategic vulnerability and constrains security objectives.19 Foreign Policy issues are
daily concerns for the White House and the Department of State, but the DOD is typically the department called upon when Foreign Policy goes awry. In his article, Energy Security: The New Threats in Latin America and Africa,

David L. Goldwyn, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, argues current US energy dependency challenges US power in five ways. First, many nations dependent on consuming imported oil are reluctant to join coalitions led by the United States to combat weapons proliferation, terrorism or aggression. Examples are the French, Russian and Chinese resistance to sanctions on Iran; Chinese
resistance to sanctions against Sudan; and US tolerance of Middle East repression that would otherwise be sanctioned were it to occur in any other non-oil-producing part of the world.20 Secondly, high oil revenues in the hands of oil

exporting nations allow governments to act with impunity against their own people, their neighbors, and the United States. Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, Latin America’s loudest anti-American cheerleader, has used oil revenue to build support for his economic vision by providing subsidized oil to neighboring countries and gain leverage over them by purchasing bonds to finance their debt. Russian President Vladimir Putin has renationalized the energy sector, restricted foreign access to Russia’s pipeline system, and demanded open access to Europe. Iran has reduced its international debt and increased foreign reserves to prepare of possible sanctions. “Even Saudi Arabia’s economic reform movement, born in the days of $10 oil in 1998, evaporated when oil reached $30 per barrel in 2000. Enrichment of America’s competitors or adversaries harms US security interests in every part of the globe”.21 The third problem is that the global oil market is far from being a free market system. Governments which do not allow free market access to develop, exploit and expand supplies control most of the world’s major oil reserves. Most free market commodities allow the market supply to expand to meet demand. As oil prices rise, many governments are less receptive to foreign investment, preventing supply from responding to demand and driving prices even higher. 22 An increased price of imported goods increases the US trade deficit and exports
wealth to foreign lands. In 2005, imported oil accounted for one-third of the country’s $800 billion trade deficit.23 A fourth problem created by the highly competitive world oil market is the political gamesmanship that undermines the fluidity and fairness of the market for available supplies. “New competitors like China and India are trying to negotiate long term contracts (at market prices) to ensure they have supplies in the event of a crisis or supply disruption…From an economic point of view it may not matter if China lends Angola $3 billion at low interest to gain part of an exploration project as long as the oil is produced. But China gains an enormous geopolitical advantage by this act.”24 A fifth problem oil dependency creates for America and directly impacts the DOD is vulnerability to price volatility that result from supply and demand shocks.25 From the fall of 2005 until gasoline prices started to decline in fall 2006, the “price of gasoline” had replaced “the weather” as every American’s favorite subject of conversation with a stranger. The price of standard crude oil on NYMEX was under $25 per barrel in September 2003, but by August 11, 2005, increased to over $60 per barrel, and topped out at a record price of $78.40 per barrel on July 13, 2006.26 Experts attributed the spike in prices to a variety of factors, including war in Iraq, North Korea's missile launches, the crisis between Israel and Lebanon, Iranian

51

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
(Lengyel Continues…) nuclear brinkmanship, and Hurricane Katrina. None of these factors, except for war in Iraq, could be controlled by the US government. The global energy infrastructure built over the last century is quite fragile and was not designed with any vision of terrorist attacks or computer hackers. The DOD must accept the fact that vulnerabilities exist and that bad actors will eventually exploit these vulnerabilities if corrective measures are not taken.

52

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Hurts Western Economies
Western economies are severely disrupted by attacks on oil supplies Richard Lugar, United States Senator, August 29, 2006, Speech at Purdue University, http://www.purdue.edu/UNS/html3month/2006/060829.SP-Lugar.energy.html [Bapodra] I will describe our energy dilemma as a six-pronged threat to national security. First, oil supplies are vulnerable to natural disasters, wars, and terrorist attacks that can disrupt the lifeblood of the international economy. Within the last year, the international flow of oil has been disrupted by hurricanes, unrest in Nigeria, and continued sabotage in Iraq. In late February of this year, terrorists penetrated the outer defenses of Saudi Arabia's largest oil processing facility with car bombs before being repulsed. Al-Qaeda and other terrorist organizations have openly declared their intent to attack oil facilities to inflict pain on Western economies.

53

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Escalates armed conflict, terrorism and econ collapse
Oil competition causes escalation in armed conflict, terrorism, and economic collapse Richard Lugar, United States Senator, August 29, 2006, Speech at Purdue University, http://www.purdue.edu/UNS/html3month/2006/060829.SP-Lugar.energy.html [Bapodra] Second, as large industrializing nations such as China and India seek new energy supplies, oil and natural gas will become more expensive. In the long run we will face the prospect that the world's supply of oil may not be abundant and accessible enough to support continued economic growth in both the industrialized West and in large rapidly growing economies. As we approach the point where the world's oil-hungry economies are competing for insufficient supplies of energy, oil will become an even stronger magnet for conflict. Third, adversarial regimes from Venezuela, to Iran, to Russia are using energy supplies as leverage against their neighbors. We are used to thinking in terms of conventional warfare between nations, but energy is becoming a weapon of choice for those who possess it. Nations experiencing a cutoff of energy supplies, or even the threat of a cutoff, may become desperate, increasing the chances of armed conflict, terrorism, and economic collapse.

54

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Dependency impact Laundry List
Oil dependency causes climate change and cancels U.S. benefits of foreign assistance to the developing world- causing instability, conflict, disease, and terrorism Richard Lugar, United States Senator, August 29, 2006, Speech at Purdue University, http://www.purdue.edu/UNS/html3month/2006/060829.SP-Lugar.energy.html [Bapodra] Fifth, the threat of climate change has been made worse by inefficient and unclean use of non-renewable energy. In the long run this could bring drought, famine, disease, and mass migration, all of which could lead to conflict and instability. Sixth, much of the developing world is being hit hard by rising energy costs, which often cancel the benefits of our foreign assistance. Without a diversification of energy supplies that emphasizes environmentally friendly energy sources that are abundant in most developing countries, the national incomes of energy poor nations will remain depressed, with negative consequences for stability, development, disease eradication, and terrorism.

55

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Kills International Leverage
Oil dependence has put the U.S. superpower in a vulnerable position killing international leverage Richard Lugar, United States Senator, August 29, 2006, Speech at Purdue University, http://www.purdue.edu/UNS/html3month/2006/060829.SP-Lugar.energy.html [Bapodra] Our current dependence on imported oil has put the United States in a position that no great power should tolerate. Our economic health is subject to forces far beyond our control, including the decisions of hostile countries. We maintain a massive military presence overseas, partly to preserve our oil lifeline. One conservative estimate puts U.S. oil-dedicated military expenditures in the Middle East at $50 billion per year. But there is no guarantee that even our unrivaled military forces can prevent an energy disaster. We have lost leverage on the international stage and are daily exacerbating the problem by participating in an enormous wealth transfer to authoritarian nations that happen to possess the commodity that our economy can least do without.

56

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Forward Deployment Solves Leadership and conflict prevention
Forward deployment and deterrence are critical to leadership and conflict prevention in the Korean peninsula, Taiwan Strait, and Kashmir Alagappa, 2003 – Director East-West Center Washington (Asian Security Order, Page 19-20) [stole from somewhere] Though its alliance network, forward deployment, and the extended deterrence provided by its nuclear capability, the United States plays an important role in the management of the three serious security conflicts and in stabilizing relations among major powers. Washington deters war on the Korean peninsula and across the Taiwan Strait, and American leadership has been crucial in defusing tensions in these conflicts as well as the Indo-Pakistani conflict over Kashmir. Because of the mistrust among Japan, China, Russia, and the two Koreas, it is often argued that only the United States can play a stabilizing role in Northeast Asia-by binding Tokyo and preventing the development of a militarily powerful Japan, and by checking the growing power and influence of China that is feared by several Asian countries.

57

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Military = alt energy usage public and private sector
The military can catalyze leadership for alternative energy development in public and private sector Felicia French, Army Environmental Policy Institute, April 5, 2005, “How the Army Can Be An Environmental Paragon Through Energy”, http://www.aepi.army.mil/internet/how-army-can-be-energy-paragon.pdf] [Bapodra] This paper will examine the use and conservation of energy for both army mobility and facility operations. The military has been on the forefront of many social, medical and technological changes; therefore we can use our credibility and resources to be the vanguard of change to renewable energy into mainstream society. As a voracious consumer of energy, it will be financially and politically feasible for the army to decrease dependence on fossil fuel. To do so would facilitate use of alternative energy by the public and private sector. Additionally, it is more conducive to a positive public image of being environmentally and fiscally responsible consequentially allowing greater access to local training sites-further decreasing our requirement for mobility fuel. The presentation offers recommendations for alternative and renewable energy to be used by the army and the numerous positive consequences of this transformation to include: diminishing US dependence on Middle Eastern oil, decreased dependence on one source of energy, halt the catastrophic effects of global warming, and ameliorate the deleterious health effects of fossil fuel combustion. The Army can use our credibility and resources to lead the change to renewable energy in American society. The Army has been at the forefront of many social (racial integration, equal pay and promotion), medical (prosthetics, medical evacuation, and anti-shock trousers) and technological changes (the internet and robotics). The Army has an opportunity to change its current energy strategy to a strategy that applies alternate sources of energy because its voracious consumption of fossil fuels significantly contributes to a long logistics tail. This leadership could also influence the use of alternative renewable public and private energy. This paper will discuss the financial feasibility, public perceptions and environmental considerations.

58

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Military= Energy Leader
The military is the technology leader, how it decides to meet future energy will shape the entire nation Bryan Bender, Boston Globe Staff, May 1, 2007, (“Pentagon study says oil reliance strains military Urges development of alternative fuels” http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/linkframe.php?linkid=34812 [Bapodra]) The Pentagon's Office of Force Transformation and Resources, which is responsible for addressing future security challenges, commissioned LMI, a government - consulting firm, to produce the report. Called "Transforming the Way DoD Looks at Energy," the study is intended as a potential blueprint for a new military energy strategy and includes a detailed survey of potential alternatives to oil -- including synthetic fuels, renewable biofuels, ethanol, and biodiesel fuel as well as solar and wind power, among many others. The military is considered a technology leader and how it decides to meet future energy needs could influence broader national efforts to reduce dependence on foreign oil. The report adds a powerful voice to the growing chorus warning that, as oil supplies dwindle during the next half-century, US reliance on fossil fuels poses a serious risk to national security. "The Pentagon's efforts in this area would have a huge impact on the rest of the country," Copulos said. The Department of Defense is the largest single energy consumer in the country. The Air Force spends about $5 billion a year on fuel, mostly to support flight operations. The Navy and Army are close behind. Of all the cargo the military transports, more than half consists of fuel. About 80 percent of all material transported on the battlefield is fuel. The military's energy consumption has steadily grown as its arsenal has become more mechanized and as US forces have had to travel farther distances.

59

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Middle East Stability
A. The US is key to Middle East peace, despite hostility to the US
Robert Kagan, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace 2006 The Washington Post January 15, Lexis Even in the Middle East, where hostility to the United States is highest, American influence remains remarkably high. Most still regard the United States as the indispensable player in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The Bush administration's push for democracy, though erratic and inconsistent, has unmistakably affected the course of events in Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Lebanon -- never mind Iraq. Contrary to predictions at the time of the Iraq war, Arab hostility has not made it impossible for both leaders and their political opponents to cooperate with the United States.

B. Mid-East instability is on the brink of spiraling into all-out regional conflict Marvin J. Cetron, president of Forecasting International Ltd, and Owen Davies, former senior editor at Omni magazine and a freelance writer specializing in science, technology, and the future, 9-1, 2007, The Futurist, “Worst-case scenario: the Middle East: current trends indicate that a Middle Eastern war might last for decades. Here is an overview of the most critical potential impacts.” There is more to come. After all, this is the most volatile region in the world. Sunnis and Shi'ites have carried on an intermittent religious and ethnic power struggle there for some 1,400 years. Worse, after World War I the victors deliberately broke the Middle East into artificial states that could never be stable, and thus could not easily be united under the banner of Pan Arabism. As Sesh Velamoor of the Foundation For the Future points out, if the West is unhappy with conditions in the Middle East, it has itself largely to blame. But the important point is that mere instability soon could break down into general chaos. Here is one possible course of events: Hezbollah's current protests in Lebanon and the government's reactive crackdown may result in a larger war. Saudi Arabia could intervene here, too, as it has been actively supporting the government of Prime Minister Fouad Siniora. At the same time, Hezbollah and Hamas, in the Occupied Territories, will be encouraged to expand their struggle against Israel. In Egypt, the banned but still powerful Muslim Brotherhood would be encouraged to resume the battle for a fundamentalist Islamic state, endangering Western access to the Suez Canal. Extremists from distant reaches of the Muslim world will flood into the Middle East. Saudi Arabia, a land of Sunni Arabs, and Iran, the home of Persian Shi'ites, already on opposite sides in Iraq, might expand their conflict to do battle across the Persian Gulf, with fallout in Kuwait, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates. One way or another, it all spins out of control. Everyone in the Middle East fights everyone else for decades.
60

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt C. The Middle East is heated and potentially explosive- massive conflict can occur at any time
The Age 9/24/2007 “Tempers must remain cool as the Middle East heats up”, http://www.theage.com.au/news/editorial/tempers-must-remain-cool-as-the-middle-east-heatsup/2007/09/23/1190486129857.html THE torturous road to peace in the Middle East becomes more excruciating every day and the cumulative effect of events in the region over the past week offer little hope for any reduction in what appear to be increasingly flammable tensions. If anything, the talk now is of war. The match that lights the flame may well be last Thursday's assassination of Lebanese MP Antoine Ghanem, a violent murder that pitched his divided nation further into turmoil. His death was the latest in a string of attacks against prominent critics of Lebanon's neighbour and former powerbroker Syria, the most notable being the 2005 killing of former prime minister Rafiq Hariri. Mr Ghanem's death introduces an unwelcome element of instability ahead of tomorrow's crucial presidential elections, especially if an anti-Syrian candidate is elected. More importantly, any instability could fan the flames of civil war in a country that has been a pivotal test-run for democracy in the region since September 11, 2001. The killing has been widely condemned by the international community and the finger pointed, once again, at Syria, and by implication its ally, Iran. Syria has, somewhat ingenuously, denied any involvement, as it has with the other high-profile assassinations of anti-Syrian leaders in Lebanon. Calls have been made for UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to launch an international probe into the bombing, and this should be carried out with haste. Talk of war further intensified after the deputy commander of Iran's air force, General Mohammad Alavi, announced that Iran had already prepared a plan to attack Israel if it bombed his country. This war of words was further escalated when a senior commander of Iran's Revolutionary Guard chose to outline the capability of his country's ballistic missiles, which he threatened to use on American targets in the Middle East. These threats coincide with growing international pressure on Iran to abandon what is regarded by the West, and particularly by the US, as its clandestine nuclear arms program. The French also added fuel to the fire when Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner warned the world to "prepare for the worst and the worst is war". The head of the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency, Mohamed ElBaradei, quickly entered the fray and warned against the use of force against Iran, a move UN officials described as an "out of control" drift to war. This pointed admonition coincides with a string of reports emanating from Washington that the Bush Administration is running out of patience with diplomacy and is intensifying its plans for air strikes against Iran. The events in Lebanon and the debate over Iran run parallel with Israel's declaration of the Gaza Strip as "hostile territory" and Israeli opposition leader Benjamin Netanyahu's confirmation that two weeks ago Israel carried out an air attack deep inside Syria, Iran's only Arab ally, on a site that it believed was being equipped for nuclear development by North Korea. Another suggestion is that the target was Iranian weapons destined for Lebanon's Hezbollah. There has also been speculation that the raid served as a "dry run"

61

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
(The Age Continues…) for a possible Israeli or US attack on Iran. Meanwhile, US efforts to ensure the success of a Middle East peace conference, planned for November, remain mired in political haggling over what is to be brought to the negotiating table. In the Middle East, every event, every tension, is connected to another, more so since the Iraq war, and it is this very mutuality that can make one act, such as the murder of a Lebanese MP, have dangerous consequences for the region as a whole. The Middle East is now overheated and potentially explosive, and Australia must impress upon its allies that, in a part of the world where every action can easily be met with a disproportionate reaction, there is more mileage in diplomacy than in any military solution.

C. Massive Middle Eastern Instability Causes nuclear war Steinbach, 02 (John Steinbach, Hiroshima/Nagasaki Peace Committee, March 2002, http://www.wagingpeace.org/articles/02.03/0331steinbachisraeli.htm ) Meanwhile, the existence of an arsenal of mass destruction in such an unstable region in turn has serious implications for future arms control and disarmament negotiations, and even the threat of nuclear war. Seymour Hersh warns, "Should war break out in the Middle East again,... or should any Arab nation fire missiles against Israel, as the Iraqis did, a nuclear escalation, once unthinkable except as a last resort, would now be a strong probability."(41) and Ezar Weissman, Israel's current President said "The nuclear issue is gaining momentum (and the) next war will not be conventional."(42) Russia and before it the Soviet Union has long been a major (if not the major) target of Israeli nukes. It is widely reported that the principal purpose of Jonathan Pollard's spying for Israel was to furnish satellite images of Soviet targets and other super sensitive data relating to U.S. nuclear targeting strategy. (43) (Since launching its own satellite in 1988, Israel no longer needs U.S. spy secrets.) Israeli nukes aimed at the Russian heartland seriously complicate disarmament and arms control negotiations and, at the very least, the unilateral possession of nuclear weapons by Israel is enormously destabilizing, and dramatically lowers the threshold for their actual use, if not for all out nuclear war. In the words of Mark Gaffney, "... if the familar pattern(Israel refining its weapons of mass destruction with U.S. complicity) is not reversed soon - for whatever reason - the deepening Middle East conflict could trigger a world conflagration."

62

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Information Warfare Advantage- Uniqueness
The United States is vulnerable to a cyber attack because of its increased dependence on data transactions Jacques Gansler, Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, "Chapter 13—Protecting Cyberspace," Transforming America's Military, August, 2002, http://purl.access.gpo.gov/GPO/LPS25605 [Bapodra] In the United States, we are blessed with wonderful geography from a national security perspective; we have friendly countries to the north and south and large oceans to the east and west. In the past, few enemies have ever had the means to threaten our homeland seriously. So, for most of our history, we have not had to worry about being attacked at home. There was a 40-year period during the Cold War when Soviet bombers and intercontinental ballistic missiles were poised to attack our cities, but with the demise of the Soviet Union, the successes of strategic arms reduction talks, and the warming of relations with Russia, we once again felt safe. Recent terrorist attacks, however, have reminded us of our physical vulnerability. At the same time, we also are making the transition to the new borderless geography in cyberspace. As we grow more dependent on the Internet, its inherent vulnerabilities have put all of us—government, military, industry, and citizens—at risk. The Internet was originally designed to be open, based on the premise that users were known and trustworthy. Security was not designed in from the beginning, so as the Internet has evolved into the current global network of networks, we have found it difficult to provide security for our data and transactions. The rapid pace of technical innovation introduces unanticipated vulnerabilities with every advance, and commercial software suppliers are often more eager to get their new products out in the market than they are anxious to assure their invulnerability. 2 Our security planning, often based on the older models of mainframes or well-defined networks within a single organization, have proved inadequate for this new environment with its ever-increasing threat.

63

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt The United States does not have defense capabilities against a cyber-attack James Adams, Co-founder and Chairman of iDefense, a cyber-intelligence and risk-management firm, and serves on the National Security Agency Advisory Board, and author of The Next World War: Computers Are the Weapons and the Front Line Is Everywhere, May, 2001 / June, 2001,Copyright 2001 . Foreign Affairs, Council on Foreign Relations, Inc. [Bapodra] In addition, the U.S. defense posture, which is designed around power projection and not homeland defense, leaves the country's information and communications networks vulnerable. Currently no mechanism exists for effective defense of the computer networks of businesses, the power grids of American cities, or even the information networks of the federal government. Indeed, cyber-defense is left to the FBI, a lawenforcement agency meant to pursue criminals, not defend the nation. Thus far, the FBI's efforts to coordinate cyber-defense have been hampered by a lack of technological skills and resources. The bureau has supposedly been coordinating the sharing of information across public and private sectors but has in fact focused on its traditional role of law enforcement. The Clinton administration's response to these challenges was fragmented and disorganized. Leadership in cyber-warfare was supposed to come from the National Security Council (NSC), but not enough materialized. Relations between the FBI and the NSC were tense, and those between the NSC and the Pentagon even worse, with officials refusing even to speak with one another. And cooperation among the military services remains weak, despite efforts to put all computer warfare under a single entity, the U.S. Space Command. Every service has developed its own information-warfare capability at huge cost and with significant duplication of effort. Similarly, the CIA, the Defense Intelligence Agency, and the NSA have each undertaken independent information-warfare efforts, with little cooperation between them.

64

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt As the United States grows as an unchallenged power, it becomes increasingly vulnerable to cyber-attack. Increased info tech is necessary James Adams, Co-founder and Chairman of iDefense, a cyber-intelligence and risk-management firm, and serves on the National Security Agency Advisory Board, and author of The Next World War: Computers Are the Weapons and the Front Line Is Everywhere, May, 2001 / June, 2001,Copyright 2001 . Foreign Affairs, Council on Foreign Relations, Inc. [Bapodra] JUST AS World War I introduced new weaponry and modern combat to the twentieth century, the information age is now revolutionizing warfare for the twenty-first. Around the world, information technology increasingly pervades weapons systems, defense infrastructures, and national economies. As a result, cyberspace has become a new international battlefield. Whereas military victories used to be won through physical confrontations of weapons and soldiers, the information warfare being waged today involves computer sabotage by hackers acting on behalf of private interests or governments. The recent escalation of tension between Israel and the Palestinians, for example, has had a prominent virtual dimension. From October 2000 to January 2001, attacks by both sides took down more than 250 Web sites, and the aggressions spread well beyond the boundaries of the Middle East to the computer networks of foreign companies and groups seen as partisan to the conflict. A decade after the end of the Cold War, the U.S. military stands as an uncontested superpower in both conventional and nuclear force. Ironically, its overwhelming military superiority and its leading edge in information technology have also made the United States the country most vulnerable to cyber-attack. Other nations know that they have fallen behind in military muscle, so they have begun to look to other methods for bolstering their war-fighting and defense capacities -- namely, "asymmetrical warfare," which the Pentagon characterizes as "countering an adversary's strengths by focusing on its weaknesses." Furthermore, the U.S. military is radically changing. The "revolution in military affairs" seeks to apply new technology, particularly digital information technology, to operational and strategic concepts. With plans ranging from computer-based weapons research programs to software that encrypts classified military data, from computer-guided "smart" bombs to a space-based missile defense, America's military forces are coming to depend more and more on computers and information networks. These two factors -- the dominance of U.S. conventional forces and the military's already extensive and growing use of information technology – make cyber-attack an increasingly attractive and effective weapon to use against the United States. But U.S. defense plans and policymakers' concept of national security have not caught up to the new threats of computer warfare. Indeed, recent warnings indicate that the United States remains highly vulnerable. To address this challenge, Washington urgently needs to modernize its thinking and transcend its strategies of deterrence and national security, which remain fixed in the Cold War, pre-Internet world.

65

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

U.S. must increase efforts to expand cyberspace deterrence
The United States must make clear that it will recognize an asymmetric cyber-attack as an act of war and respond against it James Adams, Co-founder and Chairman of iDefense, a cyber-intelligence and risk-management firm, and serves on the National Security Agency Advisory Board, and author of The Next World War: Computers Are the Weapons and the Front Line Is Everywhere, May, 2001 / June, 2001,Copyright 2001 . Foreign Affairs, Council on Foreign Relations, Inc. [Bapodra] In order for defense planners to coordinate a strategy for cyberspace, the definitions of national security and the appropriate methods of managing it need to be redefined. "National security" has always meant protecting the nation's borders from foreign attack, and the perceived national interest has often led to the projection of U.S. military power overseas to protect the homeland. But as the Chinese clearly understand, future war is no longer going to focus on borders and territorial disputes. In addition, previously it was defeat on the battlefield that decided the outcome of a conflict, and any wartime attacks on a country's private sector primarily targeted its industrial complex. In cyberspace, however, the asymmetric advantage goes to whoever understands that a successful computer attack against privately owned information networks is just as effective a weapon as military force. This is an uncomfortable concept for both military and political leaders to grasp, because it requires, first, acknowledging that the barriers between the public and private sectors have eroded and, second, embracing innovative strategies that take the private sector's new technological skills and vulnerability into account. Furthermore, effective defense means deterring attacks before they occur. The threat of retaliation is a good preventive strategy. Every nation already understands the consequences of using weapons of mass destruction against the United States. Washington must similarly put the world on notice that it will consider a cyber-attack against any U.S. entity an act of war that will generate an appropriate response. It must also make clear that the United States does not distinguish between methods of attack; whether struck by a bomb or a computer virus, it cares only about the effect.

66

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Specific Internal Link- Space Radar
Space Radar will greatly enhance our military intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities protecting our armed forces Terry Everett, eight-term member of the US House of Representatives Fall 2007, “Arguing for a Comprehensive Space Protection Strategy” Strategic Studies Quarterly Fall Space Radar, with its sophisticated synthetic aperture radar and moving target indicator sensors, will provide all-weather, day-night, 24-7 coverage of static and moving targets, greatly enhancing our intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities and protection of our armed forces. As William B. Scott and Linda H. Strine point out in a recent Aviation Week and Space Technology article, “Visionaries believe Space Radar will not only revolutionize the way military forces locate, track and target an enemy, but have as profound an impact on commerce and citizens’ daily lives as GPS does” if applications such as ship tracking for business and homeland security and all-weather, around-the-clock imaging for marketing are realized.14 Space Radar will have global utility for the military John Pike, Director of GlobalSecurity.org, 9/24/2005, “Space Radar” http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/systems/sr.htm [Bapodra] Space Radar is designed to give ground commanders of all services an eye-in-the-sky view of what is on the ground around them or over a mountain top. The system will be able to produce high-quality synthetic aperture radar imagery, as well as surface moving target indications. This radar in space will provide denied area, all weather, day and night surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities required by the national intelligence and joint warfighter communities. Specifically, a modern multifunctional radar will host a range of capabilities including synthetic aperture radar imagery, high resolution terrain information, advanced geospatial intelligence, and surface moving target indication. The SR program seeks to provide these important capabilities to the nation. Designed to be tightly integrated with present and planned intelligence systems, the resultant Space Radar will provide transformational capabilities to both the National Intelligence Community and Warfighting agencies alike through agile, responsive intelligence collections using near-real time tasking and data dissemination. The SR system will allow a 'deep look' into denied areas of interest in all weather, day or night, without risk to personnel or equipment. SR's on-demand intelligence capability will have global utility across the spectrum of conflict.

67

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt Space Radar will be able to see critical areas of the Earth over a short time span, will be able to monitor adversarial territory as well as terrorist locations John Pike, Director of GlobalSecurity.org, 9/24/2005, “Space Radar” http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/systems/sr.htm [Bapodra] With Space Radar it will be possible to see all critical areas of the Earth over a relatively short time span. In other words, fairly frequent revisit over areas. If it was tasked to cover an emerging situation anywhere in the world, it could respond by providing both collected and processed information within minutes to hours depending on where the location was and where the satellites were in orbit when the issue arose. If the trouble spot is within a theater of operations where US airborne assets are already deployed, the SR would be able to hand off Space Radar data and information to the other systems to help them know where to look and where to identify the issue. Likewise, air ISR assets could also tip and cue the Space Radar. The result of this interaction would be much more precise and decisive ISR information available on a shorter timeline. If the area of concern is deep inside an adversary’s territory, which would be out of reach of airborne assets, then Space Radar could cover that area on every satellite pass, thereby regularly updating our knowledge of an unfolding situation. An example of that might be terrorists who are using caves to store weapons. There might be a repetitive pattern of vehicles coming and going from these caves over time. Those are the types of things that Space Radar would be good at in the GMTI mode — identifying the movement of vehicles and activity in an area and be able to update that knowledge on a regular basis. SR could then switch to SAR [synthetic aperture radar] mode and take a high-quality SAR picture of the area where movement tips us off that something is going on.

Space radar will help war fighter awareness and intelligence gathering John Pike, Director of GlobalSecurity.org, 9/24/2005, “Space Based Radar (SBR)” http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/systems/sbr.htm [Bapodra] For the war fighter, it could support predictive battlespace awareness and could be equally predictive for the intelligence analyst. By finding the anomalous event, analysts get out ahead of activities. The refresh rate is such that analysts are not looking at history, they are looking at current events. Looking at current events, as opposed to the history, provides the ability to start drawing trend lines and anticipate how the subject of inquiry is going to act and respond increases dramatically. And, having watched him over a long period of time, the ability then to be predictive from an analytical point of view also goes up enormously. So, both the intelligence analyst and the military operator are going to find their environments completely changed by this system.
68

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Internal Links- Information key to RMA
Assimilating information capabilities are key to maintaining an info-advantage against cyber-attacks Jeffrey McKitrick et al, US Air War College, 2001, "The Revolution in Military Affairs," http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/battle/chp3.html [Bapodra] Another revolution under way in warfare is that associated with information systems, their associated capabilities, and their effects on military organizations and operations. We call this new warfare area information warfare, which we define as the struggle between two or more opponents for control of the information battlespace. At the national level, information warfare could be viewed as a new form of strategic warfare, one of the key issues being the vulnerability of socio-economic systems, and the question is how to attack the enemy's system while protecting yours. At the military operational level, information warfare may contribute to major changes in the conduct of warfare; therefore, one of the key issues is the vulnerability of command, control, communications, and intelligence systems, and the question is how to attack the enemy's system while protecting yours. As we increasingly assimilate information capabilities into our military structure and focus more and more on establishing and maintaining an "information advantage" as a war-winning strategy, we also change the vulnerabilities of US forces, and, ultimately of the United States itself. The force structure that will implement information warfare 25 years from now may well be different from today's military in more ways than just its equipment. Moreover, the character of warfare may change in ways that affect our thinking regarding intelligence and crisis and wartime decision making.

69

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt Intelligence and communication is essential for future combat effectiveness. Tech advancement is critical to precision warfare
Sharjeel Rizwan, Defence Journal Columnist Pakistan September 2000, “Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA)”, Defence Notes http://www.defencejournal.com/2000/sept/military.htm [Bapodra]

Today the advent of new forms of communication and imaging technology, incorporated into systems such as “smart” weaponry and digitised battlefield networks have led to the rethinking of war making and strategy conceptualisation over the ages, as technology has developed, new methods of collecting information have emerged. These new methods have improved the battlefield awareness of our Commanders and Soldiers. Command, Control, Communication, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance C41SR has enabled the integration of these new inputs. Technological advancements of weapons and vehicles of air power are being developed in a manner that will continue to shorten the time cycles for action along with the other segments of IDA. A significant portion of technological progress being made in the military sphere deals with reconnaissance, surveillance and target acquisition (RSTA) systems. The employment of RSTA technologies is moving warfare further towards greater utilisation of aerial assets for gathering of information, greater range of striking power through long-range offensive systems, and higher accuracy through availability of better target information. RSTA with communications give military forces the ability to locate targets with accuracy, carry out designation and cueing of weapon systems that significantly enhance combat power. The use of RSTA systems, AWACs, UAVs and their integration into a C4ISR system has enabled the use of sophisticated weapons like “smart bombs” and precision guided munitions (PGMs) which are extremely accurate and reduce civilian casualties. C4ISR has also led to the expansion of space and the compression of time on the battlefield. C4ISR provides situational awareness (SA) for integration and coordination of joint element manoeuvres and sensor to shooten connectivity for weapons employment. It is the essential capability for binding the nation’s armed services defence and intelligence agencies and other government and private organisations into a viable, coherent force. The resultant information superiority fundamentally changes the way operations are conducted. Joint C4ISR enables ability to mass effects without massing forces; protects against asymmetric threats; and provides joint force flexibility, interpretability and efficiency.

70

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

RMA key to Readiness
Transformation helps readiness Jason Sherman, March 30,2006, lnside the Pentagon, Report: Transformation reduces vulnembility to 'disruptive ' threats, Vo I. 22 No. 13, Lexis, MP is the Army's premier communications modernization program that provides the last mile of connectivity for the sustaining base. The 13MP installs fiber optic and wireless information transport systems along with the hardware and software required to ensure the installation has the most efficient, interoperable, commercially standard technology available. Beginning this fiscal year, the program will focus directly on those installations housing and supporting moduIar units, including their training and support activities. These improvements will support combat force readiness by meeting the information requirements of deploying, deployed, and returning warfighting forces. MP funds provide for the establishment of several Area Processing Centers (APC). These centers will host services for the entire array of combat support functions, including transportation, logistics, maintenance, munitions, engineering, acquisition, finance, medical, and military personnel readiness, In addition to providing enhanced reachback capability to deployed forces, the consolidation of IT investments and operating resources typically located on every Army installation will reduce operating costs and enhance the Army's ability to secure its networks. This will be accomplished by moving vulnerabilities typically located at every installation to APCs that are equipped with expanded IA and computer network defense capabilities. The robust secure architecture that is typically built into over 190 installations will now be consolidated into under ten APCs, reducing the number of entry points into Army networks. The APCs should be consolidated in Defense Information Systems Agency's (DISA) data mega centers.

71

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt Military Transformation makes war fighting more effective. Davis, 2003 (Joshua, November. Columnist and award winning documentary producer. "If we run out of batteries, this war is screwed". Wired Magazine Issue 1 1.06. <http:I/www. wired.corn/wired/archive/l1.06/battlefield.html>) He grabs my notebook and a blue ballpoint pen and draws an obtuse angle. "When we attacked in the last Gulf war, we basically- - had our vehicles lined in a wedge," he says. "We had five divisions moving across the desert like that. As they went through, they'd sweep an area clear - if there's a problem, the other unit can see and hear it, and, more important, the unit is close by and can arrive quickly to help. In that model, once you move through, the rear zones are secure. There's not much left back there." NOW Mims draws a bunch of small circles spread out on the page. This is Rumsfeld's theory of swarm tactics because 2 technology allows soldiers to keep track of each other, even when they're out of one another's sight, they , can now move in any formation, "We may not always know exactly where the enemy is," Mims explains, "but we know where we are. When the enemy engages us in this spread-out fashion, we send air cover to protect the unit until the support forces arrive." Swarm theory holds that you move fast and don't won7 about securing the rear. The benefits to this are many. First, you need fewer troops and less equipment. War becomes cheaper. Second, it's harder for the enemy to attack a widely dispersed formation. Third, units can cover much more ground - they aren't forced to maintain the wedge by slowing down to accommodate lagging vehicles. Fourth, swarming allows you to go straight for the heart of the enemy's command structure, undermining its support from the inside out rather than battling on the periphery.

72

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Impacts- Space Radar Good: Deterrence
Space Radar enhances global deterrence due to threat of surveillance Los Angeles Air Force Base, No Date Given “Fact Sheets: Space Radar: Space Radar” http://www.losangeles.af.mil/library/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=5308 [Bapodra] The Space Radar constellation is envisioned to consist of nine satellites, providing worldwide coverage with a frequent revisit rate. This robust constellation will be integrated into the nation's collection capabilities to significantly enhance our level of persistent surveillance against our adversaries. Space Radar will provide five types of tailorable products: · Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Imagery: grayscale imagery · Surface Moving Target Indication (SMTI): movement detection and characterization · Open Ocean Surveillance (OOS): wide area coverage to detect ships at sea · High Resolution Terrain Information (HRTI): 3-D topographic maps of an area · Geospatial Intelligence Products (GEOINT): advanced products Individually, these products will be able to satisfy many users' intelligence requirements. When combined, fused products yield even deeper understanding of targets. Yet Space Radar's truly transformational capability derives from the powerful combination of products and persistence, provided by a responsive, timely, and assured system. The products described above will be available during day or night, and during inclement weather conditions. The users will be able to rapidly update tasking, determine when the collection will occur, and plan operations with the confidence that Space Radar will be there to support them. Central to this capability is the introduction of Electronically Steered Array (ESA) technology onto the satellites, which allows the radar to shift its focus on different targets almost instantaneously, and the creation of a robust, interdependent ground system being developed in partnership with multiple national agencies. Space radar will profoundly change the nature of global persistent ISR, and its effects will be widespread. It will significantly advance intelligence analysts' abilities to solve hard intelligence problems, enable situational understanding throughout the full spectrum of conflict, and enhance global deterrence through the mere threat of observation. Space Radar is a joint effort of great benefit to the National Intelligence, Military, and Civil user communities.

73

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt Future Space Radar is critical to deterrence and surveillance of pro-terror states Dr. Stephen M. Younger, Director of Defense Threat Reduction Agency, December 2-3, 2003 “The 34th IFPA-Fletcher Conference on National Security Strategy and Policy Security Planning and Military Transformation after Iraqi Freedom” http://ifpafletcherconference.com/oldtranscripts/2003/ellis.htm [Bapodra] As Combatant Commanders rely on more sophisticated and integrated intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance support in the future, we must supply unprecedented situational awareness to give our fighting forces battlefield dominance. As USSTRATCOM assumes ISR duties, we will consider ISR as a weapons system that not only informs and enables operations, but also has a deterrent value all its own. When a potential adversary knows you're watching, and knows we have the capability to respond to any threat, it can be a great incentive to change behavior, if their actions are to be tried in the court of world opinion, or in a more kinetic environment. This is not only true of rogue states, but also of terrorist groups. Future systems such as space-based radar have the potential to provide persistent ISR [Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance] like we have never seen before. It is up to us to create mechanisms to share, analyze, and assimilate the product, and slide down the continuum from data to information to knowledge to wisdom. When we cannot target terrorists themselves, we can certainly work to deter their actions through the states and organizations supporting them. Returning to our nuclear arsenal, as Dr. Younger noted, we are on plan to reduce our operational stockpile as directed by the President and the Nuclear Posture Review, a seminal effort that perhaps should have been entitled the Strategic Posture Review, given its broad focus. As we are now two years into the NPR, a strategic capabilities assessment has been initiated by OSD to assess progress and provide midcourse guidance. In order to continue providing an effective deterrent, Congress recently provided funding to study elements of our nation's stockpile. These studies will help us determine the size and character of the future stockpile required to continue protecting our nation, our forces, and our allies in the years ahead. A weapon is only a deterrent if it retains credibility. That's why we're also examining the deterrent value of nuclear and conventional niche weapons, such as the robust nuclear earth penetrator and Big BLU. Deterrence only has credibility to the extent we back it up with capability and determination. Today's United States Strategic Command continues to be uniquely positioned to support deterrence through its cohesive package of both new and legacy missions. I thank you for your patience, and for your attendance at this most worthwhile gathering, and look forward to your questions. Thank you.

74

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Cyber-warfare cause Accidental Nuke War
Cyber-attacks trigger accidental nuclear escalation Stephen Cimbala, professor of political science at the Pennsylvania State University Delaware County Campus, Summer 1999, Armed Forces & Society: An Interdisciplinary Journal [Bapodra] The nuclear shadow over the information age remains significant. The essence of information warfare is in subtlety and deception: the manipulation of uncertainty. The essence of nuclear deterrence lies in the credible and certain threat of retaliation backed by an information environment accepted and trusted by both sides in a partly competitive, partly conflictual relationship. Nuclear assets may themselves become the targets of cyberwarriors. Triumphalism about the RMA in high technology conventional weapons overlooks asymmetrical strategies that might appeal to U.S. opponents. Among these might be the reciprocal use of information warfare to deny U.S. access in time of need to a timely nuclear response or to a credible nuclear threat. But even more problematic is the potential collision course between intentional information warfare and unintended side effects when cyberwar is waged against a nuclear armed state, especially one with a nonWestern culture. Neither the status of nuclear forces in the new world order, nor all of the military implications of the information revolution, are apparent now. There are reasons to suppose that the strategies and technologies of information warfare will develop along one track, whereas efforts to control nuclear weapons spread and to establish the safety and security of existing nuclear arsenals will involve a different community of specialists and attentive publics. Nevertheless, there are sufficient grounds to be concerned that a too successful menu of information strategies may contribute to a failure of nuclear deterrence in the form of accidental/inadvertent war or escalation. Unplanned interactions between infowarriors and deterrers could have unfortunate byproducts.

75

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt Information warfare combines nuclear weapons and information to cause accidental nuclear war. Stephen Cimbala, professor of political science at the Pennsylvania State University Delaware County Campus, Summer 1999, “Accidental/Inadvertent Nuclear War and Information Warfare.” Armed Forces & Society: An Interdisciplinary Journal [Bapodra] The end of Cold War has led some to assume that nuclear weapons and nuclear deterrence are passe. Along with this, is a related assumption that a revolution in high technology, conventional weaponry will accelerate the rate of nuclear political and military obsolescence. On the other hand, all concede that the "revolution in military affairs" is driven mostly by new technologies in information, communications, and electronics. [1] New information and communication technologies may enable new forms of war making, including information warfare, that are dysfunctional for deterrence stability with, or without, nuclear weapons. It is possible that the remnants of pax atomica will combine with attacks using the new strategies of information to produce an outcome no one favors: accidental or inadvertent nuclear war or escalation. In order to proceed, we need a working definition of information warfare. A large literature offers candidate views on the concept of information warfare. [2] For present purposes, information warfare can be defined as activities by one state or nonstate actor against another that attempt to disrupt, deceive, or destroy one or more of the following attributes of military or military related information: (1) the physical aspects of information transfer or communication, such as landlines, radio receivers, satellites, commanders, and command posts, not to exclude the flow of electrons back and forth between senders and receivers; (2) the communications contents, consisting of asserted facts, ideas, proposals, and other messages; (3) the network of channels by which sender and receiver are connected and organizational behaviors influenced; (4) the security protocols that authenticate a message sender and/or enable senders and receivers to pass information back and forth without giving it away to the enemy; and, (5) persons in the security decision-making process, including their role perceptions and their images of the adversary that might be influenced by infowar. [3]

76

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt An information attack during nuclear tensions cause nuclear wars Stephen Cimbala, professor of political science at the Pennsylvania State University Delaware County Campus, Summer 1999, “Accidental/Inadvertent Nuclear War and Information Warfare.” Armed Forces & Society: An Interdisciplinary Journal [Bapodra] Each of the requirements for the avoidance of accidental/inadvertent nuclear war (balancing positive and negative control, making and acting upon valid warning and attack assessment, and maintaining authoritative and responsive delegation of authority and/or devolution of command) is potentially at risk from information warfare. First, the balance between positive and negative control becomes a more complicated juggling act as alert levels are raised. Some components of the force, say ICBMs, are permanently at high levels of readiness for prompt launch. Others, such as the bomber force, require a great deal of care and feeding under stressful conditions before they are launch ready. Nuclear armed sea-based cruise and ballistic missiles can be readied to fire in a short time provided that the submarine is on station, but some submarines may need to proceed from port to station and others may be moved in connection with targeting requirements or possible threats to their survivability. Elements of the command system also require synchronized movement across disparate services and civilian departments. If NATO alerts are involved in addition to U.S. forces--as they would have been during any Cold War confrontation with the Soviets--the management of alert phasing and timing becomes even more complicated. Info weapons introduced into this alerting process have the potential to disestablish the desirable balance between positive and negative control as forces are gradually empowered to go to war. From an enemy perspective, this might be considered a good thing: confuse the American alerting process and make the wartime command system only partly ready for battle. That is conventional, not nuclear, logic. In a nuclear crisis, the two sides have a shared interest in avoiding nuclear war as well as a competitive desire to prevent one another's gains. Accordingly, each will want the other to maintain assured control over the balance between unlocking the cocked pistol for retaliation and preserving control over the military movements and actions that might trigger inadvertent war. And those military movements and actions are dangerous precisely because their inherent danger might not be so obvious. As Thomas Schelling has noted, war can begin not as a deliberate decision by policy makers, but as the result of a process over which neither side has full control. The possible loss of control to be feared here is not military usurpation of civil authority or military disregard of authorized commands. Instead, it is a lack of correct foresight that results in a sequence of events foreseen by neither side, creating a new and more adverse climate of expectations about future behavior. [29]

77

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Implementing information warfare at times of nuclear crisis causes accidental nuke conflict escalation Stephen Cimbala, professor of political science at the Pennsylvania State University Delaware County Campus, Summer 1999, “Accidental/Inadvertent Nuclear War and Information Warfare.” Armed Forces & Society: An Interdisciplinary Journal [Bapodra] If the two sides in a nuclear crisis get into a sequence of events not correctly foreseen by either and seek to interpret those events correctly, information warfare will be harmful, not helpful, to correct interpretation. An example is perceptions management by one side designed to suggest to the media, public, and legislature of the other side that the first side's intentions are only honorable. [30] The second side, according to this carefully orchestrated set of perceptions fed from one side to another, is really the "aggressor" or the "uncooperative" partner. And the media and political elites of the second side might believe the image created by enemy perceptions management, calling upon leaders to stand down forces and accept the demands of the opponent. Or, leaders of the second side might be outraged at the cyberpropaganda of the first side, escalate their demands, and become more intransigent. As Robert Jervis explains: A state tends to see the behavior of others as more planned, coordinated, and centralized than it is. Actions that are accidental or the product of different parts of the bureaucracy following their own policies are likely to be perceived as part of a coherent, and often devious, plan. In a nuclear crisis, the propensity to see all of the other side's behavior as part of a plan would be especially likely to yield incorrect and dangerous conclusions.

78

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

RMA key to deter Chinese Asymmetric attack
US info development is key to prevent Chinese preemptive asymmetric attack James Adams, Co-founder and Chairman of iDefense, a cyber-intelligence and risk-management firm, and serves on the National Security Agency Advisory Board, and author of The Next World War: Computers Are the Weapons and the Front Line Is Everywhere, May, 2001 / June, 2001,Copyright 2001 . Foreign Affairs, Council on Foreign Relations, Inc. [Bapodra] THE U.S. GOVERNMENT now believes that more than 30 nations have developed aggressive computerwarfare programs. The list includes Russia and China, volatile governments such as Iran and Iraq, and U.S. allies such as Israel and France. Ambitious newcomers, including India and Brazil, are also seeking to become powers in the world of virtual combat. Americans celebrated the Persian Gulf War as a major victory for U.S. military forces and as a vindication of the nation's defense structure. But outside the United States, the conflict taught an additional lesson: a direct military confrontation with the United States would inevitably result in defeat. So while the United States has continued to develop its conventional forces (the Pentagon's defense budget is now larger than those of the 12 next largest nations combined), other countries have looked elsewhere for an asymmetric advantage. "The rest of the world realizes that you don't take the United States on in a military frontal sense, but you can probably bring it down or cause severe damage in a more oblique way," asserts Art Money, assistant secretary of defense for command, control, and intelligence. "And that's where the vulnerability in the United States resides." One country that American intelligence has been closely monitoring is China, which is actively exploring the possibilities raised by this new American vulnerability. Because Beijing sees the United States as its principal antagonist in the twenty-first century, Chinese military leaders and policymakers have made an intensive effort to apply the lessons learned from the Persian Gulf War's show of American military might. The heated Chinese debate about how to seize a military advantage over the United States produced a partial answer in Unrestricted Warfare, written by two People's Liberation Army (PLA) colonels, Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui. The book clearly sets out why China considers the Gulf War to have been the last hurrah for the old-style warrior. The authors believe that China will never be able to match American technological superiority. Moreover, having watched Moscow spend itself into oblivion trying to win the Cold War arms race, Beijing will seek to avoid the same mistake. Instead, the authors write, a digital attack will give China a significant asymmetric advantage and even bring about the defeat of the United States. China has therefore been making large investments in new technology for the PLA and has established a special information-warfare group to coordinate national offense and defense. China-watchers in the Pentagon refer to these efforts as the creation of "the Great Firewall of China." Part of the reason for such aggressive action is that China suspects that it is already under cyber-attack from the United States. Every piece of computer hardware or software imported from the United States or its allies is subject to detailed inspection when it arrives at the border. China's own technicians then take control of the goods and either resist or closely monitor Western experts' efforts to install the equipment themselves.

79

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

High-Tech Leadership key to Hegemony
High tech leadership is key to the economy and hegemony William Hawkins, Senior Fellow for National Security Studies at the U.S. Business and Industry Council, October 10, 2003, http://www.americaneconomicalert.org/view_art.asp?Prod_ID=901 [Bapodra] PCAST's draft warns that U.S. technological preeminence is not assured because as manufacturing is moving overseas, research and development is following, risking a shift in future innovation which could leave America behind the technology curve. Global R&D centers are emerging around manufacturing in India and Asia (especially in China) where labor costs for R&D design capabilities are one-third to one-tenth what they are in the United States. Companies are deciding to locate near strong R&D centers and “clusters of innovation.” Confidence in the quality of foreign design capabilities is slowly growing, as is the management of global design systems. Foreign government subsidies of all types are wide and varied and include tax rebates, tax holidays, stock options (with no capital gains taxes), science-based industrial parks, direct subsidies and worker training programs. “We are not just competing against foreign companies but foreign countries,” concludes the PCAST paper. PCAST considers R&D and manufacturing as the two basic anchors of the modern economy. R&D is coupled with manufacturing in an “innovation ecosystem” that drives successful innovation, new products, and improved productivity. With manufacturing leaving the country, the United States runs the risk of losing the strength of its innovation infrastructure of design, research and development and the creation of new products and whole industries. One aspect of the de-industrialization problem that is often overlooked is that it is manufacturing that generates the revenue that supports R&D and innovation. Loss of American high-tech leadership in both production and technology would have serious implications for the nation's economic vitality, living standards, and national security.

80

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Cyber-attacks are easy- resources exist
Cyber-attacks are easier because cyberspace levels the playing field from high-value to low-risk Jacques Gansler, Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, "Chapter 13—Protecting Cyberspace," Transforming America's Military, August, 2002, http://purl.access.gpo.gov/GPO/LPS25605 [Bapodra] Cyberspace tends to level the playing field between the entities in that space and offers attackers many high-value, low-risk targets. The threats can come from a hacker, an insider, a criminal, a terrorist, a hostile nationstate, or even some combination of these. The motivations can be equally diverse—mischief, theft, data collection, disruption of operations, falsification of data. The threats, obviously, can be aimed equally well against military or civilian targets. The weapons, with innocuous-sounding names like worms, viruses, and even Trojan horses, are themselves readily available on the Internet. Most important, the Internet itself is a very attractive target. Unlike physical break-ins, Internet attacks are easy. An attacker who gets access to a Web site can roam around freely and from a safe distance. Although in the past, a great deal of technical sophistication was required to penetrate a computer network, attacks are now possible even by much less well-informed adversaries; successful intruders share their programs— often with “hacking for dummies” type scripts—enabling anyone to duplicate their efforts.

81

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Cyber-attack tracing causes Miscalc
Cyber-attacks are difficult to trace- causes miscalculated responses Jacques Gansler, Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, "Chapter 13—Protecting Cyberspace," Transforming America's Military, August, 2002, http://purl.access.gpo.gov/GPO/LPS25605 [Bapodra] Attackers can and do obfuscate who and where they are, making Internet intrusions and attacks difficult to trace. Additionally, because the Internet allows packets to flow easily across political, administrative, and geographic boundaries, cooperation from many different entities, many without a vested interest, may be required to trace an attack. Consequently, attackers often operate (or appear to operate) from other countries, and thus international cooperation is required to trace and investigate attacks. Internet attacks are low-risk: since the attackers do not need to be physically present, the risk of identification is greatly reduced. Much of the activity is often masked by legitimate or unrelated activity, and because multiple jurisdictions may be involved, prosecution can be difficult and sometimes impossible.

82

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

RMA stops Prolif
Revolution in Military Affairs prevents nuclear proliferation Martin Libicki, Senior Analyst, Rand Corporation, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, March 1, 2001 Moore would have the United States back off its attempts to shove its military forces into techno-overdrive (especially in space). The Defense Department, in contrast, has no such desire; it sees countering WMD as yet another item on its agenda. Left unexamined, though, was the possibility that the linkage between the RMA and nuclear proliferation does not hold. Indeed, the RMA has had little discernible effect on the efforts that other nations have made to develop nuclear weapons, which are by far the most militarily useful of the WMD. In fact, the reverse may well be true: The RMA reduces the rationale for nuclear acquisition on the part of states that might otherwise plan to use them against U.S. forces. LET'S TAKE EACH CLAIM IN TURN. A QUESTION SUCH AS, "Would the RMA eventually spur countervailing WMD programs?" is tough to answer. The RMA is a 50year process that began sometime in the late 1970s (in efforts to counter the numerical superiority of Soviet tanks in the European theater), and it is only halfway complete. Fortunately, although the start of the RMA may be imprecise, the date at which it was first perceived can plausibly be fixed to the day--January 17, 1991--when U.S. bombers started coming back from Baghdad unscathed. Until then, there was considerable doubt that the U.S. military machine would work as advertised. Influential analysts argued that Defense was putting too much stock in high technology, which could neither be maintained nor used very well and thus offered no great advantage over cheaper, lower-tech equipment (which, being indisputably cheaper, could be purchased in larger quantities). Suddenly, their case was lost. A force equipped with high technology had worked much better than anticipated (having six months of downtime in the desert to work out the bugs did not hurt). The revolution was discovered.

83

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Prolif leads to Nuke War

Nuclear proliferation destroys international stability and causes escalatory nuclear wars George Quester Professor of Government & Politics at the University of Maryland 1994 The Washington Quarterly Vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 103-114, Spring Lexis If Americans ask themselves the elementary question of why they should be opposed to the proliferation of nuclear weapons, an obvious first answer might now be that such a spread of weapons of mass destruction could lead to U.S. cities being destroyed and/or U.S. military units or other U.S. assets abroad suffering nuclear attacks. Further, Americans also care about nuclear proliferation because foreign cities may get destroyed in future outbreaks of war. Following such proliferation, nuclear attacks on U.S. targets could take place more "rationally" in the wake of normal military and political conflicts. Crises sometimes lead to "a war nobody wanted," or to escalations that neither side can control. The risks that such deterrence failures would involve nuclear use are increased as more countries get nuclear weapons. Such nuclear attacks on U.S. targets could also take place less "rationally" -- if someone like Idi Amin or Mu'ammar Qadhafi were to take charge of a country that possesses nuclear weapons. The kinds of political forces that bombed the World Trade Center in New York, or attacked the entrance to Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) headquarters in Virginia, might then use nuclear weapons. Continues…. Americans, and most other people, will want to avoid a situation in which any state can defy the will of the rest of the world, just by being able to threaten the destruction of any of the world's cities. Whatever hopes are now entertained for a disciplined world order and a reliable system of collective security thus depend on the halting of nuclear proliferation. Finally, the United States will not find it easy to sit on the sidelines in a regional war involving nuclear-armed states. In desperate circumstances such states will try to threaten the interests of bystanders, in order to force an international intervention. And other states within and outside such a region will apply great pressures for U.S. and/or UN involvement.

84

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
NUCLEAR WAR LEADS TO EXTINCTION Victor Utgoff, Depute director of strategy, forces, and resources division of institute for defense analysis, ‘02, “Proliferation, Missile defense and American ambitions” Survival, P. 87-90

85

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space weapons Good- Econ/Accident/taiwan add on
A. Now is the key time to access space – failure to do so would result in global economic collapse, accidental nuclear war, and confrontation over Taiwan. Steven Lee Myers, [staff writer for the new your times and Phd in international relations, March 9, 2008, “Look Out Below. The Arms Race in Space May Be On.”, L/N//E.Berggren]
IT doesn't take much imagination to realize how badly war in space could unfold. An enemy -say, China in a confrontation over Taiwan, or Iran staring down America over the Iranian nuclear program -- could knock out the American satellite system in a barrage of antisatellite weapons, instantly paralyzing American troops, planes and ships around the world. Space itself could be polluted for decades to come, rendered unusable. The global economic system would probably collapse, along with air travel and communications. Your cellphone wouldn't work. Nor would your A.T.M. and that dashboard navigational gizmo you got for Christmas. And preventing an accidental nuclear exchange could become much more difficult. ''The fallout, if you will, could be tremendous,'' said Daryl G. Kimball, executive director of the Arms Control Association in Washington.

B. Economic collapse would escalate to full scale conflict and rapid extinction. Thomas Bearden [(Lt. Col in US Army), 6-24-00, “The Unnecessary Energy Crisis”, Free Republic, p.
online] History bears out that desperate nations take desperate actions. Prior to the final economic collapse, the stress on nations will have increased the intensity and number of their conflicts, to the point where the arsenals of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) now possessed by some 25 nations, are almost certain to be released. As an example, suppose a starving North Korea launches nuclear weapons upon Japan and South Korea, including U.S. forces there, in a spasmodic suicidal response. Or suppose a desperate China-whose long-range nuclear missiles (some) can reach the United States-attacks Taiwan. In addition to immediate responses, the mutual treaties involved in such scenarios will quickly draw other nations into the conflict, escalating it significantly. Strategic nuclear studies have shown for decades that, under such extreme stress conditions, once a few nukes are launched, adversaries and potential adversaries are then compelled to launch on perception of preparations by one's adversary. The real legacy of the MAD concept is this side of the MAD coin that is almost never discussed. Without effective defense, the only chance a nation has to survive at all is to launch immediate full-bore preemptive strikes and try to take out its perceived foes as rapidly and massively as possible. As the studies showed, rapid escalation to full WMD exchange occurs. Today, a great percent of the WMD arsenals that will be unleashed, are already on site within the United States itself. The resulting great Armageddon will destroy civilization as we know it, and perhaps most of the biosphere, at least for many decades.

86

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt C. An accidental launch would lead to retaliatory strikes and extinction within half an hour The American Prospect, 2/26/01
The bitter disputes over national missile defense (NMD) have obscured a related but dramatically more urgent issue of national security: the 4,800 nuclear warheads -weapons with a combined destructive power nearly 100,000 times greater than the atomic bomb that leveled Hiroshima -- currently on "hair-trigger" alert. Hair-trigger alert means this: The missiles carrying those warheads are armed and fueled at all times. Two thousand or so of these warheads are on the intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs)

targeted by Russia at the United States; 1,800 are on the ICBMs targeted by the United States at Russia; and approximately 1,000 are on the submarine-based missiles targeted by the two nations at each other. These missiles would launch on
receipt of three computer-delivered messages. Launch crews -- on duty every second of every day -- are under orders to send the messages on receipt of a single computer-delivered command. In no more than two minutes, if all went according to plan, Russia or the United States could launch missiles at predetermined targets: Washington or New York; Moscow or St. Petersburg. The early-warning systems on which the launch crews rely would detect the other side's missiles within tens of seconds, causing the intended -- or accidental -- enemy to mount retaliatory strikes. "Within a half-hour, there could be a nuclear war that would extinguish all of us," explains Bruce Blair. "It would be, basically, a nuclear war by checklist, by rote."

D. War Over Taiwan Goes Nuclear Chicago Tribune ’96 [“China Prepares New Show of Strength,” Uli Schmetzer, Feb. 6//uwyocrowe]

the Peoples Liberation Army have pledged to use force if necessary to regain the island on which the
While a peaceful solution remains a priority, both the politburo and Nationalists settled after losing the civil war to Mao Tse-tung in 1949. A PLA analysis--leaked to Western media--suggests that in the event of war with Taiwan, the U.S. would not intervene because U.S. commercial interests in China would be damaged and any intervention could lead to a new Sino-Russian alliance. The document, circulated among officers, concludes that even if the U.S. intervened, Washington could only retard--but not reverse--the

defeat of Taiwan, and a Sino-U.S. conflict might lead to a global nuclear holocaust.

87

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Weaponization already started
Not only is a war in space inevitable – The race to weaponize space has already started. Steven Lee Myers, [staff writer for the new your times and Phd in international relations, March 9, 2008, “Look Out Below. The Arms Race in Space May Be On.”, L/N//E.Berggren]
The consequences of war in space are in fact so cataclysmic that arms control advocates like Mr. Kimball would like simply to prohibit the use of weapons beyond the earth's atmosphere. But it’s already be too late for that. In the weeks since an American rocket slammed into an out-ofcontrol satellite over the Pacific Ocean, officials and experts have made it clear that the United States, for better or worse, is already committed to having the capacity to wage war in space. And that, it seems likely, will prompt others to keep pace. What makes people want to ban war in space is exactly what keeps the Pentagon's war planners busy preparing for it: The United States has become so dependent on space that it has become the country's Achilles' heel. ''Our adversaries understand our dependence upon space-based capabilities,'' Gen. Kevin P. Chilton, commander of the United States Strategic Command, wrote in Congressional testimony on Feb. 27, ''and we must be ready to detect, track, characterize, attribute, predict and respond to any threat to our space infrastructure.'' Whatever Pentagon assurances there have been to the contrary, the destruction of a satellite more than 130 miles above the Pacific Ocean a week earlier, on Feb. 20, was an extraordinary display of what General Chilton had in mind -- a capacity that the Pentagon under President Bush has tenaciously sought to protect and enlarge. Is war in space inevitable? The idea or such a war has been around since Sputnik, but for most of the cold war it remained safely within the realm of science fiction and the carefully proscribed American-Soviet arms race. That is changing. A dozen countries now can reach space with satellites -- and, therefore, with weapons. China strutted its stuff in January 2007 by shooting down one of its own weather satellites 530 miles above the planet. ''The first era of the space age was one of experimentation and discovery,'' a Congressional commission reported just before President Bush took office in 2001. ''We are now on the threshold of a new era of the space age, devoted to mastering operations in space.''

88

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Weaponization Inevitable
Space Weaponization inevitable, two reasons 1) Countries see space as key to successful military operations and are willing to fight for it 2) China already has the tech Areospace Daily, staff Monthly defense report, 3-12-07, [“Space can't be preserved as a weapons-free
'sanctuary’”, L/N//E.Berggren] WEAPONIZATION INEVITABLE:Curtailing the "weaponization" of space and preserving it as a peaceful sanctuary will prove impossible given the ever-growing importance of space to military operations, according to Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) "Future adversaries will be able to track and target American forces using satellites, and I find it inconceivable that in a war with such an adversary America would refrain from attacking those space assets at the expense of our warfighters," says Kyl, who chairs the Senate Judiciary subcommittee on terrorism, technology and homeland security. "Somehow preserving space as a sanctuary may sound appealing in theory, but it would be indefensible in practice," he says. Concerns over the vulnerability of America's space assets have been heightened by China's January test of a prototype anti-satellite weapon against one of their own defunct satellites.

89

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
SPACE RACE INEVITABLE AROUND 2013 Bruce Cordell, PhD planetary and space physics, Weizmann postdoctoral fellow at Caltech, exphysics professor at the California State University, space scientist, worked with NASA. May 11 08 ("Math and science education" http://21stcenturywaves.com/blog/category/perspectives/)[JWu] This is a hallmark of Maslow Windows: loosening of federal and other purse strings to pursue a lofty goal of international significance. In 1969 U.S. News & World Report reported that although initial cost estimates for the Moon project had been up to $ 40 B, “Congress raised hardly any questions (and)…Initial funds were appropriated swiftly to send Project Apollo on its way.” As we approach the 1960s-style economic boom of the next Maslow Window (fully ramped-up by 2015) these patterns will repeat. In short: 1) a major Sputnik-like shock will occur near 2013 (1957 + 56) involving probably China and their international partners; see Wave Guide 5, 2) the American public will raise urgent questions about the viability of American math and science education and demand reforms, and 3) the new “Space President”, a John F. Kennedy-like figure, will respond by committing the U.S. to spectacular, unprecedented activities in space with essentially unanimous support from Congress; see Wave Guide 3. International space race and colonization are inevitable Bruce Cordell, PhD planetary and space physics, Weizmann postdoctoral fellow at Caltech, exphysics professor at the California State University, space scientist, worked with NASA. May 11 08 ("Math and science education" http://21stcenturywaves.com/blog/category/perspectives/)[JWu] The intersection of projected trajectories for the world’s current and future space powers suggests there will be a major international event just prior to the opening of the next Maslow Window (near 2015). The Nominal Model timelines (see Forecasts page) suggest this will occur near 2013 (Sputnik year 1957 + 56) and will have an impact on the U.S. and world comparable to Sputnik’s launch in 1957. One likely model is that an international consortium of space powers (ICSP) – possibly led by China – will announce their comprehensive plan for the large-scale colonization and utilization of space, probably including the Moon and possibly Mars. In addition to lunar settlements and orbiting solar power stations, their agenda might include plans for LEO and lunar hotels. Moon hotels are hardly a new idea; the Shimizu Corporation (Tokyo) had impressive designs over 20 years ago when we had meetings with them in connection with a NASA rfp at General Dynamics space headquarters in San Diego. Interestingly, despite their sophisticated concepts, Shimizu did not feature their space projects on their website before and I am unable to find any mention of them now. Based on the current interest levels and cooperation capabilities of many countries, this ICSP scenario seems very reasonable. For example, both Japan and the U.S. have announced plans to send people back to the Moon within 12 years, and China (possibly in cooperation with Russia) wants to establish a lunar base shortly thereafter. India also has lunar ambitions. And Russia, through its American broker Space Adventures, already offers private citizens their own personal trip around the Moon (for a hefty fee). Russia also claims to be ahead in a “race to Mars” that they expect to win by 2025.

90

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Weaponizing now- China
Weaponization now – China is committed to a covert weapon strategy, recent attack on satellites prove. Craig Covault, [analysis for avation week and space technology think tanks, 3-5-07, L/N//E.Berggren]
There are least 30 Chinese anti-satellite concepts and tactics that could be a factor in any future U.S.-Chinese military space face-off. This is in spite of Chinese assertions that it is only working on civilian space projects now that its Jan. 11 anti-satellite (Asat) test was a success, says the U.S.-China Economic Security Review Commission (see p. 24). This political stance does not necessarily pass for reality, however, the report indicates. "The likelihood of Chinese hypocrisy, deception or merely lack of uniform policy implementation must be considered," the commission said. But it also found probable that "an aggressive Chinese analysis of U.S. space vulnerabilities and even covert systems development by the Chinese may be considered consistent with a Chinese view that the weaponization of space by the U.S. is inevitable and requiring a counterstrategy". Among the 30 Chinese Asat strategies uncovered by the commission, many are based on covert operations aimed at shielding China from blame for a loss of U.S. space capability, if a conflict looms between the two countries.

Space race now - China’s recent ASAT success prove there is no chance of space remaing neutral. BBC news, January 19, 2007,[ http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6276543.stm // E.Berggren]
It is thought that the Chinese used a ground-based medium-range ballistic missile to destroy a weather satellite that had been launched in 1999. Correspondents say this is the first known satellite intercept test for more than 20 years. China's foreign ministry refused to confirm or deny the report. While the technology is not new, it does underline the growing capabilities of China's armed forces, according to the BBC's Dan Griffiths in Beijing. Space arms race? Late on Thursday, US National Security Council spokesman Gordon Johndroe confirmed an article in the magazine American Aviation Week and Space Technology, which reported that the test had taken place. The report said that a Chinese Feng Yun 1C polar orbit weather satellite was destroyed by an anti-satellite system launched from or near China's Xichang Space Centre on 11 January. The test is thought to have occurred at more than 537 miles (865km) above the Earth. Foreign ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao said: "I can't say anything about the reports. I really don't know."

China is already creating new space weaponary for its military space systems Leonard Davis, [Senior space writer for space.com and political analyst, 8-1-04,
http://209.85.215.104/search?q=cache:5WJ7HMwsDbQJ:www.space.com/news/china_dod_030801.ht ml+china+space+weapons&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=4&gl=us //E.Berggren] China appears to be sharpening its war fighting space skills, from creating anti-satellite weaponry, building new classes of heavy-lift and small boosters, as well as improving an array of military space systems. That judgment comes courtesy of the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) which earlier this week released its annual report to Congress: The Military Power of the People's Republic of China. The report focuses on the current and probable future course of that country's growing military-technological prowess, including the use of space to assure military advantage. 91

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

China has already developed the capabilities for laser-weapons and ASATs Leonard Davis, [Senior space writer for space.com and political analyst,

8-1-04, http://209.85.215.104/search?q=cache:5WJ7HMwsDbQJ:www.space.com/news/china_dod_030801.ht ml+china+space+weapons&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=4&gl=us //E.Berggren] Flagged in the report is China's work in electronic warfare. In particular, the country is procuring state-of-the-art technology to improve its intercept, direction finding, and jamming capabilities. A possible target for the jammers: receivers utilized in the Global Positioning System (GPS) satellite constellation. The report also underscores China's "robust" research and development program for laser weapons. In 1999, the Chinese displayed a portable laser weapon, advertised for blinding human vision and electro-optical sensors. In addition, a radio-frequency weapons program is likely in place. "Beijing may have acquired high-energy laser equipment that could be used in the development of ground-based anti-satellite (ASAT) weapons," the DoD report says.

China will use EMP’s as a first strike against us – they see space as a must for military victory in the future Leonard Davis, [Senior space writer for space.com and political analyst, 8-1-04,
http://209.85.215.104/search?q=cache:5WJ7HMwsDbQJ:www.space.com/news/china_dod_030801.ht ml+china+space+weapons&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=4&gl=us //E.Berggren] This year's report cites a comment from Captain Shen Zhongchang from the Chinese Navy Research Institute. He envisions, according to the DoD, a weaker military defeating a superior one by attacking its space-based communications and surveillance systems. "The mastery of outer space will be a requisite for military victory, with outer space becoming the new commanding heights for combat," Shen is quoted as saying. He also is quoted in the report as observing that "lightning attacks and powerful first strikes will be more widely used in the future." In future wars, Shen highlights radar, radio stations, communications facilities, and command ships as priority targets vulnerable to smart weapons, electronic attack, and electromagnetic pulse (EMP) weapons.

92

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

China already has the tech to blind satellites and are pursuing offensive options for military purposes. Leonard Davis, [Senior space writer for space.com and political analyst, 8-1-04,
http://209.85.215.104/search?q=cache:5WJ7HMwsDbQJ:www.space.com/news/china_dod_030801.ht ml+china+space+weapons&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=4&gl=us //E.Berggren] Improving space-based reconnaissance and surveillance technologies is high on China's agenda. "These systems, when fully deployed, will provide a robust and versatile space reconnaissance capability with regional coverage," the just released DoD report explains. "Publicly, China opposes the militarization of space and seeks to prevent or slow the development of U.S. antisatellite (ASAT) systems and space-based missile defenses," the DoD reports states. "Privately, however, China's leaders probably view ASAT systems -- and offensive counterspace systems, in general -- as well as space-based missile defenses as inevitabilities." Meanwhile, the report adds, China is said to be acquiring a variety of foreign technologies that could be used to develop its own satellite-killing capability. On this score, China already may possess the ability to damage optical sensors on some spacecraft - at least those vulnerable to laser damage. Ground-based, satellite-blinding laser weaponry is likely being pursued. "Given China's current level of interest in laser technology, Beijing probably could develop a weapon that could destroy satellites in the future," the report notes. China is also thought on a path toward a direct-ascent ASAT system. This hardware could be fielded in the 2005-2010 timeframe, the DoD asserts. Space interceptors can destroy targets in space. Moreover, the report highlights a Hong Kong newspaper account in January 2001 that claimed China had developed and tested an ASAT system using a "parasitic microsatellite." Although the DoD review says this claim cannot be confirmed, it points out that home-grown microsatellite and nanosatellite technologies are being proliferated by a number of nations.

China is developing small satellites with rapid launch capabilities for military purposes and hopes to have a space station there for sustainable military prescence. Leonard Davis, [Senior space writer for space.com and political analyst, 8-1-04,
http://209.85.215.104/search?q=cache:5WJ7HMwsDbQJ:www.space.com/news/china_dod_030801.ht ml+china+space+weapons&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=4&gl=us //E.Berggren] In the booster department, China is proceeding with building a new modular family of heavy-lift launchers. Additionally, a new small, solid-propellant space lifter is being developed. A family of these smaller boosters would provide China the ability to hurl small satellites into orbit. This class of booster would give China a rapid launch capability, "and has broad military, civil, and commercial applications," the DoD report observes. As for China's human spaceflight program, the DoD acknowledges the fact that the country's first manned space mission may occur this year. "China also has long-term plans to launch its own space station, and possibly a reusable space plane as well. While one of the strongest immediate motivations for this program appears to be political prestige, China's manned space efforts almost certainly will contribute to improved military space systems in the 2010-2020 timeframe," the report concludes.

93

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt Weaponization now – China already has and impressive array of space weapons and is moving towards placing nuclear weapons in space. The Washington Times, January 11, 2008, [“China has gained and tested array of space weapons”,
http://www.washtimes.com/news/2007/mar/29/20070329-114710-9929r/ //E.Berggren] China is developing an "impressive" array of space weapons, including missiles and jammers, and is moving toward placing nuclear weapons in space to attack U.S. satellites, the commander of U.S. strategic forces told the Senate yesterday. The Chinese military has "undertaken what we would call a very disciplined and comprehensive continuum of capability against ... our space capabilities," Marine Corps Gen. James Cartwright yesterday told the Senate Armed Services strategic forces subcommittee. Their capabilities go "all the way from temporary and reversible effects -- [Global Positioning System] jamming, things like that, [communications] jamming, all the way through direct ascent ASAT," he said, referring to antisatellite weapons. "Eventually, they'll probably be looking at co-orbital" weapons -- missiles that orbit near a satellite and then explode. "Then, the one that you really worry about is introducing weapons of mass destruction into space on a missile," he said.

China is continuing to deploy and develop space weapons to deny the US access. Asia Times, June 6, 2008, “china take on the US in space”,
[http://209.85.215.104/search?q=cache:DO4IEuoJE8J:www.atimes.com/atimes/China/JF06Ad01.html+space+weapon+inevitable&hl=en&ct=clnk& cd=25&gl=us //E.Berggren] "Even as it tries to rally multinational coalitions and public opinion to oppose 'the weaponization of space', Beijing quietly continues to develop its own space-based weapons and tactics to destroy American military assets," Heritage Foundation vice president for foreign policy and defense studies, Larry M Wortzel, railed in a commentary. "China's strategy here is to blunt American military superiority by limiting and ultimately neutralizing its existing space-based defense assets, and to forestall deployment of new technology that many experts believe would provide the best protection from ballistic missile attack." Last month, Chinese President Hu Jintao sided with Russia in its long-running campaign to block the deployment of a US missile defense system covering much of East Asia that would partly operate from bases in Eastern Europe. Some analysts believe Beijing is worried the deployment of American space-based interceptors would block missiles the PLA has been upgrading to target what it calls the renegade island of Taiwan and US Pacific bases. Certainly, the Chinese military apparatus hasn't been sitting on its haunches while its diplomats have been getting all worked up over the Americans. Security analysts say it has poured cash into an electronic warfare capability designed to jam satellite transmissions, developed laser-based weapons and improved its heavylift rockets.

94

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
China's space programs are all in its national interests China's Information Office of the State Council, November 22, 2k ("China's Space Activities, a White Paper", viewed on Spacered; http://www.spaceref.com/china/china.white.paper.nov.22.2000.html)[JWu] The Chinese government has all along regarded the space industry as an integral part of the state's comprehensive development strategy, and upheld that the exploration and utilization of outer space should be for peaceful purposes and benefit the whole of mankind. As a developing country, China's fundamental tasks are developing its economy and continuously pushing forward its modernization drive. The aims and principles of China's space activities are determined by their important status and function in protecting China's national interests and implementing the state's development strategy. The aims of China's space activities are: to explore outer space, and learn more about the cosmos and the Earth; to utilize outer space for peaceful purposes, promote mankind's civilization and social progress, and benefit the whole of mankind; and to meet the growing demands of economic construction, national security, science and technology development and social progress, protect China's national interests and build up the comprehensive national strength.

China's space plans include monitoring and communication satellites, and space preeminence China's Information Office of the State Council, November 22, 2k ("China's Space Activities, a White Paper", viewed on Spacered; http://www.spaceref.com/china/china.white.paper.nov.22.2000.html)[JWu] The 21st century will witness vigorous development of space activities across the world. China is drafting a space development strategy and plans oriented to the 21st century according to the actual demands and long-term target of national development to spur the growth of the space industry. Development Targets The short-term development targets (for the next decade) are: - To build up an earth observation system for long-term stable operation. The meteorological satellites, resource satellites, oceanic satellites and disaster monitoring satellites can develop into an earth observation system for long-term stable operation to conduct stereoscopic observation and dynamic monitoring of the land, atmosphere, and oceanic environments of the country, the peripheral regions and even the whole globe. - To set up an independently operated satellite broadcasting and telecommunications system. Positive support will be given to the development of commercial broadcasting and telecommunications satellites such as geo-stationary telecom satellites and TV live broadcasting satellites with long operating life, high reliability and large capacity, so as to form China's satellite telecom industry. - To establish an independent satellite navigation and positioning system. This will be achieved by setting up a navigation and positioning satellite group step by step and developing a relevant application system, which will eventually bring into being China's satellite navigation and positioning industry; The long-term development targets (for the next 20 years or more) are as follows: To achieve industrialization and marketization of space technology and space applications. The exploration and utilization of space resources shall meet a wide range of demands of economic construction, state security, science and technology development and social progress, and contribute to the strengthening of the comprehensive national strength; - To establish a multi-function and multi-orbit space infrastructure composed of various 95

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
satellite systems and set up a satellite ground application system that harmonizes spacecraft and ground equipment to form an integrated ground-space network system in full, constant and long-term operation in accordance with the overall planning of the state; - To establish China's own manned spaceflight system and carry out manned spaceflight scientific research and technological experiments on a certain scale; and - To obtain a more important place in the world in the field of space science with more achievements and carry out explorations and studies of outer space. - To upgrade the overall level and capacity of China's launch vehicles. This will be achieved by improving the performance and reliability of the "Long-March" group, developing the next generation of launch vehicles with non-toxic, non-polluting, high-performance and lowcost qualities, forming a new group of launch vehicles and strengthening the capability of providing international commercial launching services; - To realize manned spaceflight and establish an initially complete R and D testing system for manned space projects; - To establish a coordinated and complete national satellite remote-sensing application system by building various related ground application systems through overall planning, setting up a remote-sensing data receiving, processing and distributing system covering the whole country for data sharing, and forming a fairly complete application system in major application fields of satellite remote-sensing; and - To develop space science and explore outer space by developing a scientific research and technological experiment satellite group of the next generation, strengthening studies of space micro-gravity, space material science, space life science, space environment and space astronomy, and carrying out pre-study for outer space exploration centering on the exploration of the moon. Chinese will go into space by 2015—the only issue is whether it will be cooperative or confrontational Bruce Cordell, PhD planetary and space physics, Weizmann postdoctoral fellow at Caltech, exphysics professor at the California State University, space scientist, worked with NASA. May 11 08 (Contributions from Anny Wong, PhD, political scientist. "10 reasons why china is good for space" http://21stcenturywaves.com/blog/2008/06/22/10-reasons-why-china-is-good-for-space/)[JWu] 3. Energy-hungry China may decide to lead solar power satellite development. Facing $ trillions of energy infrastructure costs in the next 20 years, China may decide to develop this inexhaustible energy source that would reduce both environmental pollution and strategic tensions. 2. China and U.S. (and others) may form a Grand Space Alliance for the 2015 Maslow Window. If indeed we’re “less than 5 years from a new generation of Chinese leaders with whom a far stronger relationship may be built,” — see Thomas Barnett — new options are possible. With joint interests in global security, new energy sources, and the exploration of space, China and the U.S. may decide that a “Football Game” model is more productive than the previous Cold War space experience was. In an American professional football game there are rules, big money, great excitement, intense competition, and winners and losers, but at the end of the game both teams survive, learn, and remain friends; they also look forward to the next game on the schedule. 1. A less attractive option is that China (and partners) may stimulate the rapid development of space by challenging the U.S. in a Cold War-style confrontation, complete with a Sputnik-like event. Reason #2 (above) is basically a model of greatly expanded International Geophysical Yearstyle friendly cooperation. However, in 1957 it led to the surprise launch of Sputnik which shocked America and triggered the 1960s race to space between two very unfriendly countries. As we draw closer to the 2015 Maslow Window it will become clearer which model of international space development — “Football Game” or “Cold War”– will occur.

96

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Weaponization Zero-Sum
Space is vital to the future of both countries making it a zero-sum situation and weaponization inevitable. Leonard Davis, [Senior space writer for space.com and political analyst, 8-1-04,
http://209.85.215.104/search?q=cache:5WJ7HMwsDbQJ:www.space.com/news/china_dod_030801.ht ml+china+space+weapons&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=4&gl=us //E.Berggren] In reviewing the DoD report, some Western China watchers don't see anything startling or new in the assessment of Chinese space interests. But the report does wave a cautionary flag, according to one expert. "Still lots of speculation of what the Chinese might be developing," said Joan Johnson-Freese, chair of the Naval War Colleges National Security Decision Making Department in Newport, Rhode Island. "Regarding space specifically, both countries see space as so vital to their futures," Johnson-Freese told SPACE.com. "Actions by one are seen as nearly zero-sum to the other," she said. Johnson-Freese said that the Chinese have read the 2001 Report of the Commission to Assess United States National Security Space Management and Organization as suggesting the inevitability that space will become a battleground. Therefore, the U.S. would be remiss not to prepare. "They also note that in the first U.S. Space War Game in 2001, American forces were pitted against an opponent threatening a small neighbor. Subsequently, the Chinese view that they would be remiss not to prepare for the inevitability of U.S. development of space weapons." There are lots of "inevitabilities" in both U.S. and China camps, Johnson-Freese said, that were not considered inevitabilities five years ago. "Lots of action-reaction on both sides," she added.

97

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Now is key to Weaponize- we must do it first
The US no longer has a choice about weaponization if we don’t act now it will just put us at risk from countries that have/ are determined to further develop them. Michael Bruno, [president of aerospace daily’s defense report, 1-30-07, “U.S. must develop offensive
space abilities”, L/N//E.Berggren] The United States cannot trust that China will restrain itself against exploiting space for weapons and other military uses, and it must bolster its defensive and offensive capabilities high above the Earth, a longtime Senate proponent of missile and space systems said Jan. 29. Conservative Arizona Sen. Jon Kyl, a leading Republican party policymaker in that chamber, also asserted that further arms control agreements regarding space could be "dangerous" in limiting the United States while adversaries continue their developments. "Military capabilities in space are likely to prove vital to our security in the future, and I do not believe we should consider forfeiting our right to build them," Kyl said in a speech at the Heritage Foundation in Washington. "The bottom line is this: We must not jeopardize our warfighters in the name of preserving an indefensible distinction between space and nonspace weapons," he continued. "If targeting an adversary's satellites allows our military to achieve victory more quickly or at lower cost in blood, such attacks must be considered. The Chinese seem to understand this point much better than we do." Kyl delivered his prepared speech because he said not enough concern and attention has been - or likely will be - given to U.S. must develop offensive space abilities China's Jan. 11 test of a ballistic anti-satellite (ASAT) capability. With Iraq preoccupying U.S. officials and Democrats in control of Congress, Kyl believes a strong voice against accepting or negotiating China's ASAT developments will be lost. Kyl criticized President Bush for not personally speaking out against the Jan. 11 test, as well as administration officials at the State Department for being too soft-spoken in response. The inevitable result could be an emboldened Beijing and limited U.S. options in a fight over Taiwan, among various potential flashpoints although he said the two countries ought to exist in cooperation. But Chinese ASAT efforts fly in the face of their peaceful declarations, and any space arms control deal would be unverifiable since so many defensive capabilities have inherent, offensive applications as well.

98

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

U.S. key to check Rogue Nations in space
Rogue nations and non state actors have the capabilities to employ space weapons – only a strong US presence in space can solve. Mark Prado, [writer for the non-profit organization “permanent” PhD. In international relations, 9-12- 99,
http://www.permanent.com/f-steroi.htm //E.Berggren ] Rogue nations are motivated for various reasons to catch up with and challenge the defense technology of the presently advanced countries. No country can keep all the rogue elements from doing what they want to do, and which in many cases is as much their sovereign right as it was a western country's to develop launch capability and ICBM's. The fact that the nuclear bomb is more than 50 years old and orbital missiles are more than 40 years old should be kept in mind, as regards what's likely to happen in these countries with modern computers and other current technologies. It's a lot easier now. The only way to stay ahead is on capabilities out of the reach of rogue nations. A key sector is space based capabilities. Our current space capabilities are limited by our ability to launch only small payloads of limited capability.

Effective satellites are key to preventing rogue nations from producing nuclear or biological weapons. Mark Prado, [writer for the non-profit organization “permanent” PhD. In international relations, 9-12- 99,
http://www.permanent.com/f-steroi.htm //E.Berggren] For defense purposes, a satellite constellation is needed to provide constant coverage of the surface of the Earth, e.g., so that an enemy can't launch a missile when there is no defence satellite above, or move their nuclear or biological weapons where there's no high resolution reconnaissance satellite above. Presently, our reconnaissance satellites are spread out and cannot provide continuous coverage, so this is easy. In fact, our space assets are pretty sparse and limited, and will remain so until we beef up our space infrastructure and assets. For large scale space development, where's the beef.

99

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Prolif= Extinction
Proliferation Risks Extinction Stuart Taylor Jr., journalist, LEGAL TIMES, September 16, 2002, LN.
The truth is, no matter what we do about Iraq, if we don't stop proliferation another five or ten potentially unstable nations may go nuclear before long, making it ever more likely that one or more bombs will be set off on our soil by terrorists or terrorist governments. Even an airtight missile defense will be useless against a nuke hidden in a truck, a shipping container, or a boat.

Unless we get serious about stopping proliferation, we are headed for "a world filled with nuclear-weapons states where every crisis threatens to go nuclear," where "the survival of civilization truly is in question from day to day," and where
"it would be impossible to keep these weapons out of the hands of terrorists, religious cults, and criminal organizations," So writes Ambassador Thomas Graham Jr., a moderate Republican who served as a career arms-controller under six presidents and led the successful Clinton administration effort to extend the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.

100

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space Radar key to diffuse conflict, and defend from asteroids
Space based radar is key to early warning detection so we can diffuse conflicts before they happen and from an inevitable asteroid Mark Prado, [writer for the non-profit organization “permanent” PhD. In international relations, 9-12- 99,
http://www.permanent.com/f-steroi.htm //E.Berggren ] The Russians used space based radar during the Cold War, and this application is just starting to emerge in US military. When the radar is directly overhead, it can see around objects that ground-based radar cannot. Firther, the radar cross section is dramatically higher for most objects seen from above, especially for aircraft and ground vehicles. Radar satellites to date have provided non-real-time data which is first collected and then sent down, and have been few and far between. What we need is a constellation of radar satellites to give constant coverage of the Earth. In space, radar can be used to discriminate between warheads and decoys, e.g., when the bus recoils from dropping off a high inertia device vs. a decoy. This helps make defense massively dominant over offense coming up from Earth. Other applications such as air traffic control and domestic police services can give commercial paybacks. The same assets can be used to defend the satellite platforms from aggressors, and defend Earth from natural asteroids by early detection. Defense of commercial satellites from orbital debris will also be a peacetime spinoff and practice ground, first finding the objects.

101

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Asteroids kill everything
Asteroid Impact Kills Everything, Even The Cockroaches Corey S. Powell 2000 [“20 Ways the World Could End Swept away” Discover v21 n10 online @
http://www.ldolphin.org/twentyways.html oct 2000] 1. Asteroid impact Once a disaster scenario gets the cheesy Hollywood treatment, it's hard to take it seriously. But there is no question that a cosmic interloper will hit Earth, and we won't have to wait millions of years for it to happen. In 1908 a 200-foot-wide comet fragment slammed into the atmosphere and exploded over the Tunguska region in Siberia, Russia, with nearly 1,000 times the energy of the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima. Astronomers estimate similar-sized events occur every one to three centuries. Benny Peiser, an anthropologist-cum-pessimist at Liverpool John Moores University in England, claims that impacts have repeatedly disrupted human civilization. As an example, he says one killed 10,000 people in the Chinese city of Chi'ing-yang in 1490. Many scientists question his interpretations: Impacts are most likely to occur over the ocean, and small ones that happen over land are most likely to affect unpopulated areas. But with big asteroids, it

doesn't matter much where they land. Objects more than a half-mile wide- which strike Earth every 250,000 years or so- would touch off firestorms followed by global cooling from dust kicked up by the impact. Humans would likely survive, but civilization might not. An asteroid five miles wide would cause major extinctions, like the one that may have marked the end of the age of dinosaurs.
For a real chill, look to the Kuiper belt, a zone just beyond Neptune that contains roughly 100,000 ice-balls more than 50 miles in diameter. The Kuiper belt sends a steady rain of

small comets earthward. If one of the big ones headed right for us, that would be it for pretty much all higher forms of life, even cockroaches.

102

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Weapons key to surveillance
Space provides critical survalience and navigation which that allow for a smaller and more effective military. Everett Carl Dolman, School of Advanced Studies (SAAS), 2003, “Space Power and US Hegemony:
Maintaining a Liberal World Order in the 21st http://www.gwu.edu/~spi/spaceforum/Dolmanpaper%5B1%5D.pdf //[E.Berggren] Century”,

103

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space key to Military
Absent access to space – the U.S. would be unable to conduct large military operations abroad and make us more vulnerable anti-space hostilities. Everett Carl Dolman, School of Advanced Studies (SAAS), 2003, “Space Power and US Hegemony:
Maintaining a Liberal World Order in the 21st http://www.gwu.edu/~spi/spaceforum/Dolmanpaper%5B1%5D.pdf //[E.Berggren] Century”,

104

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space Dominance key to Peace
Because of how valuable our space assets are – we must develop offensive capabilities to protect from or deter an attack on them. Everett Carl Dolman, School of Advanced Studies (SAAS), 2003, “Space Power and US Hegemony:
Maintaining a Liberal World Order in the 21st http://www.gwu.edu/~spi/spaceforum/Dolmanpaper%5B1%5D.pdf //[E.Berggren] Century”,

105

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt Space is the ultimate high-ground – The U.S. has a unique window of opportunity establish dominance. Once we establish space dominance it eliminates any chance of a space arms race or any other nation to secure space
Everett Carl Dolman, School of Advanced Studies (SAAS), 2003, “Space Power and US Hegemony: Maintaining a Liberal World Order in the 21st Century”, http://www.gwu.edu/~spi/spaceforum/Dolmanpaper%5B1%5D.pdf //[E.Berggren]

106

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

U.S. control of space creates the stability for lasting global peace and prosperity. Everett Carl Dolman, School of Advanced Studies (SAAS), 2003, “Space Power and US Hegemony:
Maintaining a Liberal World Order in the 21st http://www.gwu.edu/~spi/spaceforum/Dolmanpaper%5B1%5D.pdf //[E.Berggren] Century”,

107

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt Keeping space as a sactuary argument would only allow other nations to covertly develop these weapons – leaving us vulnerable for a surprise nuclear attack. Everett Carl Dolman, School of Advanced Studies (SAAS), 2003, “Space Power and US Hegemony:
Maintaining a Liberal World Order in the 21st http://www.gwu.edu/~spi/spaceforum/Dolmanpaper%5B1%5D.pdf //[E.Berggren] Century”,

108

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt If Space weaponization is inevitable – we might as well be ready to defend ourselves Everett Carl Dolman, School of Advanced Studies (SAAS), 2003, “Space Power and US Hegemony:
Maintaining a Liberal World Order in the 21st http://www.gwu.edu/~spi/spaceforum/Dolmanpaper%5B1%5D.pdf //[E.Berggren] Century”,

The U.S. must be the frontrunner in space or else other countries will put weapons into orbit John J. Miller, writer for National Review, the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, the New Criterion, 15 Jul 2002, "Our 'Next Manifest Destiny': America should move to control space — now, and decisively". National Review, FindArticles.com, http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_13_54/ai_87869078 [Bapodra] The lesson for space is that some country inevitably will move to seize control of it, no matter how much money the United States sinks into feel-good projects like the International Space Station. Americans have been caught napping before, as when the Soviet Union shocked the world with Sputnik in 1957. In truth, the United States could have beaten the Soviets to space but for a deliberate slow-down strategy that was meant to foster sunny relations with the world's other superpower. The United States is the world's frontrunner in space, with about 110 military satellites in operation, compared with about 40 for Russia and 20 for the rest of the world. Yet a leadership role in space is not the same as dominance, and the United States today lacks the ability to defend its assets against rudimentary ASAT technology or to deny other countries their own weapons in space. No country appears to be particularly close to putting weapons in orbit, though the Chinese are expected to launch their first astronaut in the next year or two and they're working hard to upgrade their military space capabilities. "It would be a mistake to underestimate the rapidity with which other states are beginning to use space-based systems to enhance their security," says the just-released annual report of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. At a U.N. disarmament conference two years ago, Chinese officials called for a treaty to keep weapons out of space -- a possible sign that what they really want is some time to play catchup.

109

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Hege High- Must go to space now
The U.S. is in a rare position of unprecedented hegemony – The time to go to space is now before nations catch up to us. Everett Carl Dolman, School of Advanced Studies (SAAS), 2003, “Space Power and US Hegemony:
Maintaining a Liberal World Order in the 21st http://www.gwu.edu/~spi/spaceforum/Dolmanpaper%5B1%5D.pdf //[E.Berggren] Century”,

110

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Moral imperative to go to space
The U.S. has a moral imperative to secure space and promote peace and prosperity – before any other state does gets control of space Everett Carl Dolman, School of Advanced Studies (SAAS), 2003, “Space Power and US Hegemony:
Maintaining a Liberal World Order in the 21st http://www.gwu.edu/~spi/spaceforum/Dolmanpaper%5B1%5D.pdf //[E.Berggren] Century”,

111

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

U.S. space dominance dissolves military need
A world in which the U.S. has control of space states would no longer need traditional military forces. Everett Carl Dolman, School of Advanced Studies (SAAS), 2003, “Space Power and US Hegemony:
Maintaining a Liberal World Order in the 21st http://www.gwu.edu/~spi/spaceforum/Dolmanpaper%5B1%5D.pdf //[E.Berggren] Century”,

112

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space is critical to the military John J. Miller, writer for National Review, the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, the New Criterion, 15 Jul 2002, "Our 'Next Manifest Destiny': America should move to control space — now, and decisively". National Review, FindArticles.com, http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_13_54/ai_87869078 [Bapodra] The Pentagon began to exploit the vast emptiness of space soon after. Military satellites have been in orbit for more than 40 years. In this sense, the militarization of space is old hat. Today, in fact, the armed services rely on space so much that they simply couldn't function as they currently do without access to it. Satellites facilitate communications, monitor enemy activity, and detect missile launches. Their surveillance capabilities are astounding: The KH-11 supposedly can spot objects six inches in size from hundreds of miles up. These functions were critical to the success of American campaigns against Iraq and Serbia in the 1990s, and they are essential to operations in Afghanistan. Even seemingly mundane uses of space have military value. The Global Positioning System is well known to civilian navigators, but it was designed for military navigational purposes, such as helping cruise missiles locate their targets and special-ops units find their rally points. On June 6, 1944, General Eisenhower surely would have appreciated a weather forecast of the type we now routinely get from satellites via local TV and radio broadcasts. On September 11, 2001, it was the space-enabled transmission of cell-phone signals and instant news that helped Todd Beamer and the other passengers of United Flight 93 prevent an already catastrophic day from turning even worse. Space serves as an advantage for future conflicts John J. Miller, writer for National Review, the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, the New Criterion, 15 Jul 2002, "Our 'Next Manifest Destiny': America should move to control space — now, and decisively". National Review, FindArticles.com, http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_13_54/ai_87869078 [Bapodra] The wrangling over weapons and budgets stems from a fundamental confusion over what space is and how we should use it. From the standpoint of physics, space begins about 60 miles above sea level, which is roughly the minimum height a satellite must attain to achieve orbit. In this sense, space is just another medium, much like land, water, and air, with its own special rules of operation. For military purposes, however, space is more: It's the ultimate high ground, a flank from above whose importance, for those able to gain access to it, may represent the critical difference in future conflicts. For arms-control fanatics, however, space is a kind of sanctuary, and putting weapons in it poses an unconscionable threat. U.N. secretary general Kofi Annan has called for ensuring "that outer space remains weapons-free." Theresa Hitchens of the Center for Defense Information warns of threats to "global stability" and "the potential for starting a damaging and destabilizing space race." With space, there's always the sense that weapons violate some pristine nature. This is clearly one of the sentiments behind the Kucinich bill. Yet it is exactly wrong -- there should be weapons way up there because then there will be fewer of them right down here.

113

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
Military offensive capabilities are critical for space superiority John J. Miller, writer for National Review, the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, the New Criterion, 15 Jul 2002, "Our 'Next Manifest Destiny': America should move to control space — now, and decisively". National Review, FindArticles.com, http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_13_54/ai_87869078 [Bapodra] The Rumsfeld commission also emphasized defense: how to protect American satellites from foreign enemies. It had almost nothing to say about offense: how to use space for projecting American power around the globe. The commission was a creature of consensus, so this does not necessarily represent Rumsfeld's own thinking. And defense certainly is important. Military satellites are tempting targets because they're so crucial to the United States in so many ways. They are protected by their remoteness, but not much else. Their frail bodies and predictable flight paths are a skeet shoot compared with hitting speedy ICBMs, an ability that the United States is just starting to master. They're also vulnerable to jamming and hacking. Hardening their exteriors, providing them with some maneuverability, and having launch-ondemand replacements available are all key ingredients to national security. Yet defense doesn't win wars. In the future, the mere act of protecting these assets won't be enough to preserve American military superiority in space.

114

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
U.S. hegemonic control of space will dissolve conflicts and ensure national security John J. Miller, writer for National Review, the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, the New Criterion, 15 Jul 2002, "Our 'Next Manifest Destiny': America should move to control space — now, and decisively". National Review, FindArticles.com, http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_13_54/ai_87869078 [Bapodra] With the right mix of intellectual firepower and political muscle, the United States could achieve what Dolman calls "hegemonic control" of space. The goal would be to make the heavens safe for capitalism and science while also protecting the national security of the United States. "Only those spacecraft that provide advance notice of their mission and flight plan would be permitted in space," writes Dolman. Anything else would be shot down. That may sound like 21st-century imperialism, which, in essence, it would be. But is that so bad? Imagine that the United States currently maintained a battery of space-based lasers. India and Pakistan could inch toward nuclear war over Kashmir, only to be told that any attempt by either side to launch a missile would result in a boost-phase blast from outer space. Without taking sides, the United States would immediately defuse a tense situation and keep the skies above Bombay and Karachi free of mushroom clouds. Moreover, Israel would receive protection from Iran and Iraq, Taiwan from China, and Japan and South Korea from the mad dictator north of the DMZ. The United States would be covered as well, able not merely to deter aggression, but also to defend against it. National security always has been an expensive proposition, and there is no getting around the enormous costs posed by a robust system of space-based weaponry. It would take a supreme act of national will to make it a reality. We've done it before: Winning the Cold War required laying out trillions of dollars, much of it on machines, missiles, and warheads that never saw live combat. Seizing control of space also would cost trillions, but it would lead to a world made immeasurably safer for America and what it values.

115

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Dominance Solves Space Arms Race
Don’t bother with your weaponization bad arguments – Once we secure space, countries wont be able to weaponize or attack Everett Carl Dolman, School of Advanced Studies (SAAS), 2003, “Space Power and US Hegemony:
Maintaining a Liberal World Order in the 21st http://www.gwu.edu/~spi/spaceforum/Dolmanpaper%5B1%5D.pdf //[E.Berggren] Century”,

116

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space Weapons BAD- Expeditionary force Add-on
Advantage shell: A. Development of SBSP requires reusable launch vehicles that are key to rapid launch missions like ESF Dewey Parker, Major, USAF, 4/99, “ACCESS TO SPACE: ROUTINE, RESPONSIVE AND FLEXIBLE IMPLICATIONS FOR AN EXPEDITIONARY AIR FORCE,” http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/acsc/99-154.pdf If a nation wishes to conduct surprise surveillance or reconnaissance on an adversary, that nation’s space assets must either be able to maneuver or be launched rapidly in response to a tasking. Maneuvering costs fuel, which is often in short supply on non-refueling, long-mission spacecraft placed in orbit by nonreusable launch vehicles. It is simply not economical from a launch cost perspective to increase the fraction of satellite weight represented by fuel. Unfortunately, rapidity and responsiveness are not characteristics of current US space launch systems.

B. Solar power satellites key to expeditionary force Kim Ramos, Major, Air Force, 4/00, “Solar Power Constellations Implications for the United States Air Force,” http://stinet.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=ADA394928 As the world population increases and natural resources used to produce energy decrease, alternative methods to produce sustainable, environmental cost effective energy are required. One proposed solution to the problem is solar power satellites. Solar power satellites are satellites, which collect the energy of the sun, convert it onto a beam, and beam that energy to a receiving antenna. The receiving antenna converts the beam into electricity and feeds the electricity into a power grid. The receiving antenna may be located on another satellite, or on Earth. Presented here are several solar power satellite proposals, architectures, incremental technology demonstrations and predictions as to when they will become commercially viable. Given the previous information, this paper analyzes the implications for the Air Force in relation to doctrine and future plans. The research method consisted of a search of scientific journals, published symposium papers, and research reports. The search focused on the current research on solar power satellites, and Air Force programs, which have power issues. Based on the research, the Air Force should plan to capitalize on the advantages of solar power satellite constellations. Solar power satellites can assist with implementing various plans (i.e., long endurance unmanned aerial vehicles, space-based radar, lasers, and small satellites), complying with public law, and reducing the logistics tail associated with an expeditionary force.

117

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

C. ESF model leads to treaty banning orbital space weapons Brian C. Ruhm, Major, U.S. Air Force, 4/03, “Finding the Middle Ground: The U.S. Air Force, Space Weaponization, and Arms Control,” http://www.scribd.com/doc/1459681/US-Air-Force-031394, pg. 40-41 Gray’s critique is accurate insofar as agreements that focus on limiting systems and hardware and their associated capabilities. Focusing on prohibited activities and behavior – most notably the actual deployment of space weapons into orbit – rather than on prohibited systems allows signatories to largely get around this problem. Agreements that prohibit the placement of weapons in space and limit the testing of these systems against space-based targets could be readily verified, especially if they also created a robust and mandatory launch notification regime, and if the signatories to this agreements develop better systems for tracking and characterizing space born objects. The central component of such an agreement would be the prohibition on the placement of weapons in orbit. Signatories would need to arrive at a common definition for the term “weapon in space,” but it would include any orbiting system capable of attacking or disabling other space-based systems, or any orbiting system capable of launching or releasing weapons towards earth. With respect to laser or directed energy devices that might provide legitimate communications or information services, the agreement would need to account for permissible power or wavelength thresholds.

118

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Expeditionary Space force prevents orbital weapons
ESF models differ from orbital weapons Brian C. Ruhm, Major, U.S. Air Force, 4/03, “Finding the Middle Ground: The U.S. Air Force, Space Weaponization, and Arms Control,” http://www.scribd.com/doc/1459681/US-Air-Force-031394, pg. 39 It may seem that there is little difference between orbiting space-based weapons and an expeditionary or sortie-based alternative. This overlooks two important distinguishing factors. The first is that an expeditionary approach, when implemented as part of a larger regime to regulate space weapons, counteracts the vulnerability and proximity issues that undermine stability. Expeditionary forces would reduce the fear of a surprise attack and diminish the likelihood of a preemptive attack in space. But what cost would the US be willing to pay for stability? Clearly it would be unwise to cede the initiative in space by withdrawing forces while allowing adversaries’ weapons to remain there, especially given the US military’s increasing dependence on space support systems. This is where the second important difference between ESF and orbiting weapons comes into play. An expeditionary capability, deployed only in times of war or imminent conflict and otherwise withheld from space, provides a clear and verifiable demarcation point for international agreements that would prevent states from placing weapons in space in times of peace.

Development of SBSP leads to development of low cost reusable launch system Eric R. Hedman, chief technology officer of Logic Design Corporation, 2/4/08, “If we build it, will they come?,” http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1050/1 When the US committed to landing a man on the Moon by the end of the sixties, it led to great improvements in education and built the foundation for our current level of technological development. It’s time for our political leadership to grab hold of a vision to lead us into the future. There is hope that technology can help lift us out of what seems like an endless stream of problems. Developing space-based solar power and a lower cost reusable launch system could spawn a whole series of technological innovations and entirely new industries. The SPBS report points out that eventually it may be more cost effective to build solar power satellites from lunar materials requiring an infrastructure throughout cislunar space. It may be prudent to wait for the results of a project to test the feasibility of solar power satellites before committing to developing a fully reusable launch system. But when one is eventually built, I believe it will open up other markets, including tourism as well as others we have yet to imagine. I believe that if we build it, they will come. I also believe that space-based solar power is worth looking into to see if it could be one answer—of possibly several—to our energy and trade deficit problems.

119

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
Reusable launch vehicles key to future space operations and government incentives are key to success Dewey Parker, Major, USAF, 4/99, “ACCESS TO SPACE: ROUTINE, RESPONSIVE AND FLEXIBLE IMPLICATIONS FOR AN EXPEDITIONARY AIR FORCE,” http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/acsc/99-154.pdf Both the administrator of NASA and leading members of the launch industry encouraged the development of government incentives, ranging from tax credits to guaranteed loans, to promote the development of new, low cost, reusable launch vehicles. Speaking at a hearing of the U.S. Senate's Science, Technology, and Space subcommittee Wednesday, September 23 [1998], NASA administrator Dan Goldin said current high launch costs is inhibiting not only the commercial development of space, but future uses by NASA. "The potential for the future seems almost limitless," Goldin said, but noting that NASA spends more than $4 billion a year on launch costs, "without affordable and reliable access to space, this potential will remain unrealized." Goldin said a NASA analysis of the launch industry indicated that if private industry developed a large reusable launch vehicle on its own, it could lower the price per pound to orbit to around $2,500. Government incentives, though, could lower that per pound cost to as little as $1,000. "The contrast is stark, and could make all the difference in opening up

120

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space Weapons not coming
U.S. not pushing for space weapons. Complications and other priorities ensure. Nina Tannenwald, Director International Relations Program, Brown University, Summer 04, “Law Versus Power on the High Frontie: The Case for a Rule-Based Regie for Outer Space,” http://www.cissm.umd.edu/papers/files/tannenwald.pdf, pg. 5 Although SPACECOM and its supporters aggressively assert their views, advocates of weapons in space may be in the minority, even in the Pentagon. As many observers recognize, the interests of the United States in space are much broader than SPACECOM presents. U.S. testing and deployment of orbital weapons could make using space for other military and commercial purposes more difficult. Many in the military, especially those involved in crucial military support activities, are quietly aware of this, as are officials at NASA and the international space station, and their supporters in Congress. Congressional support for antisatellite (ASAT) programs does not appear to be deep or widespread. Serious questions remain as to whether the threats to U.S. assets in space are really as great as SPACECOM argues, and whether, even if the threats were real, expensive and difficult space-based weapons would really be the most effective way to deal with them. In many cases, those wishing to hurt the United States will likely find it much easier, and more effective, to attack terrestrial targets.

121

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space Weapons Fail
Space weapons vulnerable due to inability to maneuver in space Bob Preston, and Calvin Shipbaugh et al., “Space Weapons, Earth Wars,” Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, pg. 104 Because achieving a particular orbit requires such enormous effort, significantly changing established orbits is not generally practical. As a result, it is hard to concentrate the efforts of a constellation of satellites in space and time. As defenses, space weapons are static in the same way that terrestrial fortifications are. Space-based defenses are inherently subject to saturation by a terrestrial opponent that is able to concentrate an attack against them in space and time. This limitation may be an advantage if a limited defense against a limited threat is needed that is observably incapable of destabilizing a deterrence relationship with another, larger threat.

122

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space Weapons undermine U.S. strength
Space weapons would undermine U.S. conventional strength Michael Katz-Hyman, research associate for the Space Security Project of the Henry L. Stimson Center, and Michael Krepon, co-founder of the Henry L. Stimson Center, directed defense policy and programme reviews at the US Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, April 03, “Assurance or Space Dominance? The Case Against Weaponizing Space,” pg. 89 Given the extraordinary and growing differential in power that the United States enjoys in ground warfare, sea power, and air power, it is hard to propound compelling arguments for seeking to supplement these advantages by weaponizing space. The current U.S. lead in the military utilization of space has never been greater and is unchallenged. If the United States pushes to extend its pronounced military dominance into space, others will view this through the prism of the Bush administration's national security strategy, which places emphasis on preventive war and preemption. Foreign leaders will not passively accept U.S. initiatives to implement a doctrine of space dominance. They will have ample, inexpensive means to take blocking action, as it is considerably easier to negate U.S. dominance in space than on the ground, at sea, and in the air. The introduction of space weaponry and ASAT testing are therefore likely introduce grave complications for the terrestrial military advantages that the United States has worked so hard, and at such expense, to secure.

123

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

U.S. has more to gain over negotiations of weapons
U.S. has more to gain over negotiations not deploying space weapons than deploying weapons Kenneth S. Blazejewski, a JD/MPA joint degree student at NYU School of Law and the Woodrow Wilson School, Spring 2008, “Space Weaponization and US-China Relations,” Strategic Studies Quarterly, Vol. 2, No. 1, pg. 45-6 A second reason for US commitment not to place weapons in space is the negotiating leverage such a concession would provide. Of course, such leverage cannot be taken for granted. Rather, agreement not to weaponize outer space could be loosely conditional on making progress in other areas of US security. There are at least three areas where the United States could expect to gain concessions from China in return for a commitment not to weaponize space. First, China's participation at the CD strongly suggests that it might be willing to begin negotiations on an FMCT, a top security priority of successive US governments, if the United States agrees to negotiate on space weapons. Since China's commitment to the FMCT can facilitate the FMCT commitments of India and Pakistan, its participation is critical. Second, the United States can demand greater support from China on the Proliferation Security Initiative. The PSI, which seeks to prevent illicit sea and air transport of fissile material, has been identified by the Bush administration as a key program in reducing the possibility of acquisition of nuclear weapons by a terrorist organization. To date, China's muted opposition to the PSI stands as one of the greatest impediments to a fuller development of the initiative. Chinese cooperation could be vital to this program's success. Third, the United States should demand greater transparency in Chinese military planning, especially with regard to ASAT and space-focused programs. Such transparency, long sought by US defense officials, would reduce the likelihood of potential conflicts over speculative intelligence and give the United States greater insight into how military decisions are made (and whether China indeed suffers from a stovepiped bureaucracy). I argue that progress in each of these three areas would represent a greater security gain than proceeding with the weaponization of space. If the United States is able to negotiate a quid pro quo in one or all of these areas in return for a commitment not to weaponize outer space, the agreement would represent a clear US net security gain.

124

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Chinese attack
China would retaliate to US space weapons deployment but favors an arms control over a weapons approach Hui Zhang, PhD in nuclear physics, research associate in the Project on Managing,and Pavel Podvig, 08, “Russian and Chinese Responses to U.S. Military Plans in Space,” Cambridge, MA: American Academy of Arts and Sciences, pg. 65 In summary, the development and deployment of U.S. missile defense systems, including weapons in space, would definitely encourage a number of responses from China including technological development, military counter- measures, and political realignment. The type of response would depend on the specific infrastructure of U.S. missile defense and space weaponization programs. At the moment and in the near future, China's major response would be to take an arms control approach, such as firmly advocating at the CD a legal instrument to prevent space weaponization. Facing very limited missile defense deployment, e.g., the initial GMD currently under deployment, China might focus on building more road-mobile ICBMs and developing a variety of penetration aids. If a stronger missile defense system with more interceptors is deployed, China would need to produce more fissile material to fuel more warheads, thus influencing its FMCT participation. If China is confronted with the deployment of a layered (or space-based) missile defense system, it could consider additional measures such as using ASAT weapons.

125

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Conventional Warfare better
Conventional warfare faster, easier and cheaper than space weapons Frank G. Koltz, 1/99, “Space, Commerce, and National Security,” Washington, D.C.: Council on Foreign Relations, pg. 19 Conventional military forces can also be employed to deny an adversary access to space goods and services. A satellite is only one segment of the total system that is required to deliver space products and services. Equally important are ground-based antennas, control centers, relay stations, and distribution nodes. All of these segments can be targeted by familiar military tactics (e.g., bombing or missile attack), as well as emerging techniques popularly referred to as information or cyber-warfare. In addition, the headquarters and other facilities in which space products and services are actually used by an adversary can also be attacked. In short, highly specialized weapons will not always be necessary to deny an adversary the use of space. In many cases, it may be faster, easier, and cheaper to accomplish the same objective using forces that perform other functions closer to the Earth's surface.

126

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Risks arms race and accidental nuke war
Space weapons risk arms races, accidental nuclear war, and are vulnerable to attack Lori Scheetz, Fall 06, “Infusing Environmental Ethics into the Space Weapons Dialogue,” Georgetown International Environment Law Review, Vol. 19, No. 1 (Fall 2006): 57-82, pg. 62 Many in the arms control community, on the other hand, believe that space weapons will destabilize the global community and promote a costly arms race. Emphasizing the destabilizing consequences of space weapons, Thomas Graham Jr. asserts that, because American missile interceptors in space could quickly wipe out Russian early warning satellites, the mere existence of these weapons will escalate tension between the two countries and place Russia on constant alert. One false signal from an early warning satellite could lead to a Russian nuclear strike. Moreover, weaponization of space might not significantly reduce American vulnerability to attack because most weapons systems will depend on ground facilities and radio links, which can be attacked through electronic hacking and jamming. The actual weaponry based in space is also susceptible to attack.

127

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space Weapons Bad- destroys military
Space weapons damage military power by increasing the vulnerability of its military center of gravity Bruce M. Deblois, Summer 03, “The Advent of Space Weapons,” Astropolitics, Vol. 1 No. 1 In this view, a space-weaponizing country creates both the powder keg of global instability (where it has weakened its own international posture) as well as the spark of regional instability (where it has made itself a target of pre- emption and escalation). Coupled with this very unstable environment, it can also be argued that the same country that weaponizes space may actually damage its own military power. Much of the impetus behind space weaponization stems from perceived military utility, to include national missile defense applications for boost-phase intercept, time-critical targeting, and defense mechanisms for critical space systems. Ironically, the posturing of more military assets in space could actually weaken the military posture of those that seek further military advantage in that domain. Space assets are already a center of gravity (CoG), or at least a critical concentration of military force enhancement assets. To deploy more systems in space in an attempt to protect this CoG only complicates the problem. In spite of the added defenses, the preponderance of threats will remain: denial and deception, electronic warfare (e.g. uplink and downlink jamming), ground facilities disruption, micro-satellites (e.g. space mines), direct ascent interceptors or even a nuclear detonation in space.

128

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Exacerbates fears of debris chain
Space weapons would exacerbate the fears of a debris chain Michael Katz-Hyman, research associate for the Space Security Project of the Henry L. Stimson Center, and Michael Krepon, co-founder of the Henry L. Stimson Center, directed defense policy and programme reviews at the US Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, April 03, “Assurance or Space Dominance? The Case Against Weaponizing Space,” pg. 122-3 The weaponization of space, particularly with respect to the flight-testing of antisatellite weapons, would greatly compound existing concerns over safe passage. In the event of a resumption of ASAT tests, the Pentagon would attempt to mitigate space debris, as it does with respect to missile defense tests, but the effectiveness of such efforts is questionable. Moreover, other states that test ASATs may not be as conscientious about debris creation. The actual use of ASATs would compound these dangers exponentially. Space warfare would not only constitute a threat to targeted satellites, it would also create debris fields that would threaten satellites operating in low earth orbit, including NTM, space transportation systems such as the U.S. space shuttle, and the International Space Station. The damage resulting from warfare that includes ASAT use could be more long lasting in space than on Earth.

129

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space weapons case pre-emptive attack
Space weapons increase likelihood of war. Creates incentives for pre-emptive attack. Nina Tannenwald, Director International Relations Program, Brown University, Summer 04, “Law Versus Power on the High Frontie: The Case for a Rule-Based Regie for Outer Space,” http://www.cissm.umd.edu/papers/files/tannenwald.pdf, pg. 34-5 In terms of their geostrategic impact, space-based weapons do not simply enhance existing threats but introduce a new and greater danger because of the threat they pose to strategic stability. The vulnerability of space-based weapons will likely create incentives for preemptive attack to protect them during a crisis, greatly increasing the likelihood of war. Further, although supporters of space weapons claim that, consistent with the United States' defensive orientation to the world, such weapons would be for defensive purposes, the reality is that, given their characteristics, many of them are inherently offensive weapons. It is widely recognized that space-based ballistic missile defense systems could carry out surprise attacks against terrestrial targets or satellites.

130

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

China Does Not Want Space Weapons
China has consistently advocated banning space weapons Hui Zhang, PhD in nuclear physics, research associate in the Project on Managing, 12/05, “Action/Reaction: U.S. Space Weaponization and China,” Arms Control Today, Vol. 35, No. 10, In China's view, the most effective way to secure space assets would be to agree on a ban on space weaponization. As its working paper to the CD emphasizes, "Only a treaty-based prohibition of the deployment of weapons in outer space and the prevention of the threat or use of force against outer space objects can eliminate the emerging threat of an arms race in outer space and ensure the security for outer space assets of all countries which is an essential condition for the maintenance of world peace." China's stance on banning weapons in outer space has been consistent since 1985 when it first introduced a working paper to the CD on its position on space weapons. China's most recent working paper on the issue, introduced in June 2002, emphasizes three basic obligations: Not to place in orbit around the Earth any objects carrying any kinds of weapons, not to install such weapons on celestial bodies, or not to station such weapons in outer space in any other manner. Not to resort to the threat or use of force against outer space objects. Not to assist or encourage other states, groups of states, and international organizations to participate in activities prohibited by this treaty.

China does not want space weapons. Too much space debris limits space accessibility. Keith R. Payne, Autumn 01, "Action-Reaction Metaphysics and Negligence,” Washington Quarterly, Vol. 24, No. 4 China also fears the increasing population of space debris. Such debris, resulting from 50 years of space activity, already poses a considerable hazard to spacecraft. Under U.S. space weaponization plans, this crowding problem could worsen as a large number of space weapons could be deployed in LEO. The launching and testing of weapons would also increase space debris. Moreover, deploying space-based weapons in the increasingly crowded realm of LEO would leave less room for civilian systems. Those problems would also occur during periods of peace. If a number of satellites were to be destroyed during the course of a war, some scientists warn, they would create so much debris that it would prevent future satellites from being stationed in space and generally limit space access. Indeed, pointing to the debris problem, Chinese scientists and officials have said that space weaponization should be considered an environmental threat as well as a security problem.

131

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Arms Control Solves
An arms control would prevent space weapons from destabilizing current US hegemony and putting civilian and commercial satellites at risk. Hui Zhang, PhD in nuclear physics, research associate in the Project on Managing,and Pavel Podvig, 08, “Russian and Chinese Responses to U.S. Military Plans in Space,” Cambridge, MA: American Academy of Arts and Sciences, pg. 74 A focused space weapons ban would reduce the proliferation of ASATs. It would reduce the risk of a "Space Pearl Harbor" for other military and civilian satellites. As many experts in the United States point out, the heavy dependence of the United States on its space assets means that it "has more to lose than to gain by opening the way to the testing and deployment of ASATs and space weapons." For example, the United States is now more dependent on satellites to perform important military functions than is any other state. By placing weapons in space, the United States might stimulate others to balance symmetrically and asymmetrically against U.S. space assets. It would be very difficult for the United States to maintain unchallenged hegemony in space weaponization, and many have argued that the United States' current military advantage in space assets would be lost or degraded by weaponization. Space weaponization would also threaten U.S. civilian and commercial assets. The economy and society of the United States are highly dependent on the applications of commercial satellites. Placing weapons in space would make these satellites much more vulnerable.

132

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space Col- K2 Helium-3
Solar powered satellites can provide us with a sustainable energy source and also lunar mining for clean fuel. James Plaxco, [Vice president for the NSS and over 30 years of experience in space exploration and studies, 12-9-05,
http://209.85.215.104/search?q=cache:qnoDsuoXp0QJ:www.astrodigital.org/ambassador/+solar+pow ered+satellites,+helium+3&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=13&gl=us // e.berggren] Powering Earth: Space and the Future of Energy: As Earth's energy consumption increases, scientists work to find new energy sources to power our planet. This presentation investigates the feasibility of space-based solutions to Earth's energy shortage including satellites that collect solar power and mines on the Moon . The program will examine and evaluate three scientists' blueprints for harnessing space resources to meet our growing demand for clean fuel. Solar Power from Space for Earth: A presentation detailing the idea of using a system of space-based Solar Power Satellites to meet the large increases in energy demand resulting from increasing world population and per capita energy consumption. Also discussed is the feasibility of mining the Moon for the necessary construction materials. A variety of architecture scenarios are explored. The presentation focuses on the ideas of Dr. Peter Glaser (the SPS concept), Dr. Gerard O'Neil (space manufacturing), and Dr. David Criswell (Lunar Solar Power)

Solar powered satellites can be used to mine and collect Helium-3 trapped in the moon’s surface. Gregg E. Maryniak, [Director and vice president of X prize and aerospace engineer, No month 2007,
http://209.85.215.104/search?q=cache:0_0iAPO_wvcJ:www.googlelunarxprize.org/lunar/education/w hy-the-moon+solar+powered+satellites+collecting+helium+3&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=12&gl=us //e.Berggren] In addition to using lunar materials to build solar power satellites we can collect energy on the moon’s surface and transmit it to the Earth. Eventually we may also collect Helium 3 trapped in moon soil which is an ideal low-radiation fusion fuel. The moon’s close proximity to the Earth makes it a great place for humans to learn to live and work in space while still having frequent rescue and return opportunities. The Moon provides an ideal place to backup the accumulated knowledge of mankind. By expanding the solution set to include resources outside the Earth’s biosphere we can solve seemingly intractable problems of energy and the environment and enable the remediation of the Earth.

133

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt Solar Space Crafts are key to the support and return of Helium-3. George T. Whiteside, [Executive director of the Nation Space Society, May 7, 2008, “Reauthorizing the
Vision for Space Exploration”, http://www.nss.org/Whitesides_Statement_Reauthorizing_VSE.pdf //e.berggren] Another potential space-based alternative energy source is atomic fusion using helium-3, an element rare on Earth, yet abundant on the lunar surface and in the atmospheres of the gas giants. This connects well with the Vision for Space Exploration, and offers a concrete material which NASA could prospect for. America’s new launch vehicles and manned spacecrafts are suitable to support a return to the moon and development of mining and refining technologies, and should therefore continue as planned. Our first outpost on the moon can be supported by engineering projects to create infrastructure supporting solar power satellite production as well as extraction and use of helium-3.

134

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Helium-3 Solves
Helium-3 is he only energy source that can support the growing population for thousands of years.
Julia Wakefield, lunar specialist for Space.com, http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/helium3_000630.html // e.Berggren] 6-30-00,

Researchers and space enthusiasts seehelium 3 as the perfect fuel source: extremely potent, nonpolluting, withvirtually no radioactive by-product. Proponents claim its the fuel ofthe 21st century. The trouble is, hardly any of it is found on Earth.But there is plenty of it on the moon. Society is straining to keep pace withenergy demands, expected to increase eightfold by 2050 as the world populationswells toward 12 billion. The moonjust may be the answer. "Helium 3 fusion energy may be thekey to future space exploration and settlement," said Gerald Kulcinski,Director of the Fusion Technology Institute (FTI) at the University ofWisconsin at Madison. Scientists estimate there are about1 million tons of helium 3 on the moon, enough to power the world for thousandsof years. The equivalent of a single space shuttle load or roughly 25 tonscould supply the entire United States' energy needs for a year, accordingto Apollo17 astronaut and FTI researcher Harrison Schmitt.

135

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Helium 3 Solves US-China Conflict
The moon has enough Helium 3 to solve the world’s energy crisis – preventing conflict Keith Kohl, lunar specialist for the energy and capital practical envestment analysisin the new energy economy, Feb 20, 2007, [“The Nuclear Side of the Moon”,
http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:7LgwVccbQSUJ:www.energyandcapital.com/articles/nuclearenergy-fusion/366+helium+3+and+energy+solution&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=19&gl=us //e.Berggren] Baltimore, MD - By 2050, the world will have an estimated population of 12 billion people. The demand for energy will be enormous. But one solution to the world's long-term energy demands may be 239,000 miles away. The world is desperately looking for an heir to oil. Among the contenders is the nuclear option. And the nuclear boom has already started. Uranium prices have increased dramatically. Prices may even reach $100/pound before 2007 is over. Also, current uranium production cannot meet demand. So Australia, holding 40% of the world's reserves, is beginning to open up new property for development. By 2050, the world will need about 900 nuclear plants to satisfy its energy requirements. Japan plans to build five by 2010, China expects 30 before 2020, and India already has 9 under construction. Even Canada is refurbishing over two dozen of its facilities. The 103 nuclear plants in the U.S. supply nearly 20% of our electricity. But the solution I was referring to is a different kind of nuclear power - nuclear fusion. Future Fusion: Essentially, fusion involves multiple nuclei joining together to form a heavier nucleus. Depending on the masses of the nuclei involved, energy is either released or absorbed. Fusing two nuclei heavier than iron or nickel will absorb energy. When they are lighter than iron or nickel, energy is released. One of the promising materials that may prove fusion to be a viable source of energy is helium-3. Since helium has an extremely low mass per nucleon, it is favored for the fusion process. And helium-3 presents a non-radioactive opportunity to contain the lone high-energy proton released using electric and magnetic fields. This results directly in the generation of electricity. Presently, scientists extract helium-3 by dismantling nuclear weapons - which still doesn't yield enough to make fusion a viable solution. Only $3 Billion Per Ton. You read that correctly - one ton of helium-3 would cost in excess of $3 billion. Imagine fueling the entire annual U.S. energy demand with roughly 25 tons of helium-3, or even the world's demand with 100 tons. Yet that amount seems impossible to produce given its rarity on earth. But spending $75 billion on energy is trivial compared to current U.S. expenditures. Remember that the U.S. government spent over $300 billion on oil imports in 2006 alone! In 2001, the Energy Information Agency reported that 107 million U.S. households spent nearly $159 billion on energy. Though we cannot produce even a fraction of the helium-3 reserves, the moon could hold enormous reserves. Lacking the magnetic field the Earth has allows the moon to absorb a significant amount of helium-3. In fact, scientists have estimated that the moon has more than a million tons of helium-3. That would be enough to power the world's energy

needs for tens of thousands of years.

136

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Solar Satellites K2 Space Colonization
The solar energy harnessed can be used to start and sustain critical long term colonies in space. Bryan Yager, [Assistant NASA/Ames Research Center Library Offical, July 10, 2002, “Space
Settlements: A Design http://www.nas.nasa.gov/About/Education/SpaceSettlement/75SummerStudy/s.s.doc.html //e.berggren] Study”,

Abundant solar energy and large amounts of matter from the Moon are keys to successfully establishing a community in space. Not only does the sunshine foster agriculture of unusual productivity, but also it provides energy for industries needed by the colony. Using solar energy to generate electricity and to power solar furnaces the colonists refine aluminum, titanium, and silicon from lunar ores shipped inexpensively into space. With these materials they are able to manufacture satellite solar power stations and new colonies. The power stations are placed in orbit around the Earth to which they deliver copious and valuable electrical energy. The economic value of these power stations will go far to justify the existence of the colony and the construction of more colonies.

The suns radiation can be harnessed by satellites to ensure a prosperous and sustainable space colony. SpaceMagazine May 26, 2005, [http://www.spacemagazine.co.uk/ //e.berggren]
Space is filled with radiant energy and beyond earth's atmosphere this energy flow more steadily and more intensely from the sun than that which penetrates to the surface of the Earth. So an abundant and essential source of energy that would be used in space for the space colony would be solar radiation by developing satellite solar power stations. To live in space, humans must be protected from the fierce intensity and penetrating wavelengths of unattenuated sunlight, but this same energy is one of the primary resources of space. The colony will have to have enough energy to maintain a fairly uniform temperature even though it is apace. The sun shines twentyfour hours a day and is not dimmed by an atmosphere. Shaded materials not exposed to direct sunlight will almost be at absolute zero. While the temperature in closed bodies exposed to the sun can soar above the boiling point. The colony will need to have both heaters and air conditioners. On the other hand, this sun's energy can be converted into electricity in the colonies. It will be converted with ten percent efficiency to electrical power which is sold at a rate of .012 kw/hr, a square kilometer of space would return more than $14,000,000 each year. Converting solar power to electricity in space, we would build satellite solar power stations that would intercept the sunlight and convert it into electricity. The satellite solar power stations would intercept enough sunlight to replace five nuclear reactors or coal plants. The stations could be as big as nine miles long and four miles wide and it would only weigh twenty thousand tons. It would be built with hollow triangular girders made of aluminum that is very fast and easy to build . Solar power satellites are a pollution free way to generate electricity and cost no more than coal or nuclear energy. There has been twomajor designed stations made so far. One is designed by Peter Glaser of Author D. Little Inc., which would use very large arrays of photo voltaic cells to make the conversion directly into energy. The other major design is by Gordon Woodcock of Boeing Aircraft Corporation, proposed having conventional turbogenerators operating on a Brayton cycle with helium as the working fluid. All in all radiation from the sun is a great source of energy for the future of space colonization. The use of the sun will cut down on the use of fossil fuels and any other chemicals that could be used to create energy in space. With more research and testing, the use of the sun's radiation will greatly enhance the space 137

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
colonization and will help in the everyday life of the colony.

Solar energy key to the success of space colonies.
Christian Science Monitor , January 2, 1992,[ “How Space Colonies Could Benefit Earth”, L/N //e.berggren] In addition to the workers and their families, space colonies would contain many of the professions found in any small terrestrial town. Space settlements would also address human needs beyond the physical and economic. By its very nature, each habitat would have a high degree of self-sufficiency and independence. Independence in space colonies need not, however, mean isolation. Communications between Earth and space colonies, or from one colony to another, would be a relatively simple matter with thousands of communities within a few lightseconds of each other. Although transport from Earth's surface to a colony or colony group is likely to remain relatively expensive, the cost of travel from one free-space habitat to another can be very small. Ultimately, space colonies could be built anywhere in the solar system. By increasing the size of the mirrors used to direct sunlight into the living and agricultural sections, it would be possible to support habitats beyond the orbit of Pluto if we so desire. Given the known resources of the asteroids, there is sufficient material to construct habitats capable of supporting populations thousands of times larger than that of Earth. By increasing our ecological niche to include the solar system, the human species would become much less likely to be destroyed by a single natural or made-man catastrophe.

138

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space Colonization Solves Extinction
Space Colonization prevents extinction
Christian Science Monitor , January 2, 1992,[ “How Space Colonies Could Benefit Earth”, L/N //e.berggren] Ultimately, space colonies could be built anywhere in the solar system. By increasing the size of the mirrors used to direct sunlight into the living and agricultural sections, it would be possible to support habitats beyond the orbit of Pluto if we so desire. Given the known resources of the asteroids, there is sufficient material to construct habitats capable of supporting populations thousands of times larger than that of Earth. By increasing our ecological niche to include the solar system, the human species would become much less likely to be destroyed by a single natural or made-man catastrophe.

Expansion into space is critical to averting extinction. James Oberg, space writer and a former space flight engineer based in Houston, 1999, Space Power
Theory, http://www.jamesoberg.com/books/spt/new-CHAPTERSw_figs.pdf //e.berggren We have the great gift of yet another period when our nation is not threatened; and our world is free from opposing coalitions with great global capabilities. We can use this period to take our nation and our fellow men into the greatest adventure that our species has ever embarked upon. The United States can lead, protect, and help the rest of [hu]mankind to move into space. It is particularly fitting that a country comprised of people from all over the globe assumes that role. This is a manifest destiny worthy of dreamers and poets, warriors and conquerors. In his last book, Pale Blue Dot, Carl Sagan presents an emotional argument that our species must venture into the vast realm of space to establish a spacefaring civilization. While acknowledging the very high costs that are involved in manned spaceflight, Sagan states that our very survival as a species depends on colonizing outer space. Astronomers have already identified dozens of asteroids that might someday smash into Earth. Undoubtedly, many more remain undetected. In Sagan’s opinion, the only way to avert inevitable catastrophe is for mankind to establish a permanent human presence in space. He compares humans to the planets that roam the night sky, as he says that humans will too wander through space. We will wander space because we possess a compulsion to explore, and space provides a truly infinite prospect of new directions to explore. Sagan’s vision is part science and part emotion. He hoped that the exploration of space would unify humankind. We propose that mankind follow the United States and our allies into this new sea, set with jeweled stars. If we lead, we can be both strong and caring. If we step back, it may be to the detriment of more than our country.

Extinction is inevitable by 2050 without space colonization
Daily Record 2002 [Graham Brough, “WOULD THE LAST PERSON TO LEAVE EARTH PLEASE TURN OUT THE LIGHTS; EXPERTS WARN WE NEED TO MOVE PLANET AS MODERN LIFE KILLS OURS,” Jul 8, LN// e.berggren] The Earth will be so gutted, wrecked, over-exploited and the barren seas so fished out that we will have to find a new planet – or even two - by 2050. Environmentalists at the World Wildlife Fund say we have just another halfcentury of luxury living left before the Earth becomes a spent husk. By that time, we will either have to colonise space or risk human extinction as population and consumption expand.

139

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
Space expansionism is critical to survival from diseases, war, cancer, pollution and hunger Sylvia Engdahl, American science fiction writer. She has published thirteen books, including seven science fiction novels, three nonfiction books, two science fiction anthologies, and a children's picture book. Engdahl is best known for her novel Enchantress from the Stars which was a 1971 Newbery Honor book, February 2003, “Space and Human Survival: My Views on the Importance of Colonizing Space” http://www.sylviaengdahl.com/space/survival.htm [Bapodra] Some of you are probably thinking that space travel isn’t going to be a big help with these problems, as indeed, the form of it shown in today’s mythology would not. Almost certainly, you’re thinking that it won’t solve the other problems of Earth, and I fear you may be thinking that the other problems should be solved first. One big reason why they should not is the “narrow window” concept. The other is that they could not. I have explained why I believe the problem of war can’t be solved without expansion. The problem of hunger is, or ultimately will be, the direct result of our planet’s limited resources; though it could be solved for the near-term by political reforms, we are not likely to see such reforms while nations are playing a “ zero-sum game” with what resources Earth still has. Widespread poverty, when not politically based, is caused by insufficient access to high technology and by the fact that there aren’t enough resources to go around (if you doubt this, compare the amount of poverty here with the amount in the Third World, and the amount on the Western frontier with the amount in our modern cities). Non-contagious disease, such as cancer, is at least partially the result of stress; and while expansion won’t eliminate stress, overcrowding certainly increases it. The problem of atmospheric pollution is the result of trying to contain the industry necessary to maintain our technology within the biosphere instead of moving it into orbit where it belongs. In short, all the worldwide problems we want to solve, and feel we should have solved, are related to the fact that we’ve outgrown the ecological niche we presently occupy. I view them not as pathologies, but as natural indicators of our evolutionary stage. I would like to believe that they’ll prove spurs to expansion. If they don’t, we’ll be one of evolution’s failures.

140

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space Colonization Solves Nuke war
Space colonization enables nuclear survival
Fred Koschara, [computer programmer/ major in planetary http://www.l5development.com/fkespace/financial-return.html // e.berggren] studies, 2001,

Potentially one of the greatest benefits that may be achieved by the space colonies is nuclear survival, and the ability to live past any other types of mass genocide that become available. We have constructed ourselves a house of dynamite, and now live in fear that someone might light a match. If a global nuclear war were to break out, or if a deadly genetic experiment got released into the atmosphere, the entire human race could be destroyed in a very short period of time. In addition, many corporate attitudes seem concerned with only maximizing today's bottom line, with no concern for the future. This outlook leads to dumping amazingly toxic wastes into the atmosphere and oceans, a move which can only bring harm in the long run. Humanity has to diversify its hold in the universe if it is to survive. Only through space colonization is that option available, and we had all best hope we're not to late.

141

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Solar Power Advantage
A single year’s solar flux is equal to the amount of energy contained in all the oil reserves today and could provide power for global military operations, disaster areas and developing nations Lara Farrar, CNN correspondent, June 1, 2008, (“How to harvest solar power? Beam it down from

space!” http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science/05/30/space.solar/index.html?eref=rss_space [Bapodra])

NASA revisited space solar power with a so-called "Fresh Look" study in the mid-90s but the research lost momentum when the space agency decided it did not want to further pursue the technology, Mankins told CNN. By around 2002 the project was indefinitely shelved -- or so it seemed. "The conditions are ripe for something to happen on space solar power," said Charles Miller, a director of the Space Frontier Foundation, a group promoting public access to space. "The environment is perfect for a new start." Skyrocketing oil prices, a heightened awareness of climate change and worries about natural resource depletion have recently prompted a renewed interest in beaming extraterrestrial energy back to Earth, Miller explained. And so has a 2007 report released by the Pentagon's National Security Space Office, encouraging the U.S. government to spearhead the development of space power systems. "A single kilometer-wide band of geosynchronous Earth orbit experiences enough solar flux in one year to nearly equal the amount of energy contained within all known recoverable conventional oil reserves on Earth today," the report said. The study also concluded that solar energy from satellites could provide power for global U.S. military operations and deliver energy to disaster areas and developing nations. "The country that takes the lead on space solar power will be the energy-exporting country for the entire planet for the next few hundred years," Miller said.

142

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Beaming is effective
Solar space satellites beam gigawatts of energy to ground receivers providing clean renewable energy Lara Farrar, CNN correspondent, June 1, 2008, (“How to harvest solar power? Beam it down from

space!” http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science/05/30/space.solar/index.html?eref=rss_space [Bapodra])
LONDON, England (CNN) -- Jyoti is the Hindi word for light. It's something Pranav Mehta has never had to live without. And he is lucky. Near where he lives in Gujarat, one of the most prosperous states in India, thousands of rural villages lack electricity or struggle with an intermittent supply at best. "We need to empower these villages, and for empowerment, energy is a must," Mehta said. "Rural India is suffering a lot because of a lack of energy." By 2030, India's Planning Commission estimates that the country will have to generate at least 700,000 megawatts of additional power to meet the demands of its expanding economy and growing population. Much of that electricity will come from coal-fired power plants, like the $4 billion so-called ultra mega complex scheduled to be built south of Tunda Wand, a tiny village near the Gulf of Kutch, an inlet of the Arabian Sea on India's west coast. Dozens of other such projects are already or soon will be under way. Yet Mehta has another solution for India's chronic electricity shortage, one that does not involve power plants on the ground but instead massive sun-gathering satellites in geosynchronous orbits 22,000 miles in the sky. The satellites would electromagnetically beam gigawatts of solar energy back to ground-based receivers, where it would then be converted to electricity and transferred to power grids. And because in high Earth orbit, satellites are unaffected by the earth's shadow virtually 365 days a year, the floating power plants could provide round-the-clock clean, renewable electricity. "This will be kind of a leap frog action instead of just crawling," said Mehta, who is the director of India operations for Space Island Group, a California-based company working to develop solar satellites. "It is a win-win situation." American scientist Peter Glaser introduced the idea of space solar power in 1968. NASA and the United States Department of Energy studied the concept throughout the 1970s, concluding that although the technology was feasible, the price of putting it all together and sending it to outer space was not. "The estimated cost of all of the infrastructure to build them in space was about $1 trillion," said John Mankins, a former NASA technologist and president of the Space Power Association. "It was an unimaginable amount of money."

143

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
Space solar power would meet our energy needs, eliminate oil dependence, and open new markets Jeff Foust, editor and publisher of The Space Review, August 13, 2007, “A renaissance for space solar power?” http://www.thespacereview.com/article/931/1 [Bapodra] a card with no warrants) For nearly four decades, one concept has tantalized space professionals and enthusiasts alike: space solar power. The ability to collect solar power in space, continuously and in effectively limitless quantities, and then transmit that energy back to Earth, could radically reshape not only the space industry but also society in general. That clean (or, in the current vernacular, carbon neutral) energy would, advocates claim, help meet the growing energy needs of an increasingly developed world without relying on sources that degrade the environment and/or come from politically unstable regions of the globe. That demand for energy, in turn, would create tremendous demand for launch and other space services, driving down costs that would, in turn, open other markets.

144

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
Space solar energy will restore the global environment, replace fossil fuel dependency, and sustain survival European Space Agency, 2005, “The Impact of Space Activities upon Society,” ESA Publications Divisi, Editors David Raitt & Bruce Battrick http://www.esa.int/esapub/br/br237/br237.pdf [Bapodra]

Already in the early years of the 21st century it is becoming acutely obvious that the impact of an expanding human species on a finite planet is resulting in situations that are having major impacts on global issues such as climate change, the environment, energy, politics and economics. Indeed, the sustainability of human society may soon be in question, unless immediate and effective measures are taken. Fortunately, space visionaries and pioneers long ago recognized this eventuality and they and their followers have quietly developed both the scientific rationale and the technological concepts to open the space frontier. Upon these works is the development of a concept called ‘The Space Option’ and, because this option offers humanity the most ‘optimistic’ pathway to sustainability, it is a choice humanity will most likely make in order to maintain its well-being and its ultimate survival. The Space Option concept is an evolutionary plan to meet the basic and anticipated needs of humanity through the utilization of near-Earth resources – especially that of energy from space. The wide-scale and successful implementation of the Space Option could contribute substantially to the restoration of the global environment by its reliance on unlimited, clean space solar energy to replace humanity’s dependence on fossil fuels, which are finite, or nuclear fuels, which have negative environmental and political aspects.
Space solar power is necessary to become independent from oil and space exploration European Space Agency, 2005, “The Impact of Space Activities upon Society,” ESA Publications Divisi, Editors David Raitt & Bruce Battrick http://www.esa.int/esapub/br/br237/br237.pdf [Bapodra] t(his card’s kind of funny) There are innumerable innovations from space which impact our daily life and which may come into reality the near future. One of the most important is the anticipated utilisation of space solar power, which will hopefully be available soon. Once available, it will help us to become independent from oil, which pollutes nature and is the cause of fighting and wars around the World. Another very important aspect is the exploration of the Universe by satellites, probes, manned spaceships and telescopes in orbit. These activities are widening our horizons and helping us to understand the World that we are living in. They may one day lead to the detection of another Earth-like planet in the infinity of space, and show us that we are not alone.

145

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Gets a lot of Sunlight
Space solar power is unaffected by cloud cover, atmospheric dust and “night”, receiving eight times sunlight as Earth’s surface Raji Patel, Associate Director of the Massachusetts Space Grant Consortium, April 25, 2008, “Power From Space: Its Time Has Come”, The TECH Online: Volume 128, Issue 21 http://wwwtech.mit.edu/V128/N21/spacesolarpower.html [Bapodra] Against this backdrop, it is time we gave serious consideration to energy from space. It is an old idea and most of the information below is widely available from NASA research. It was initiated after the oil embargo of the mid-1970’s when NASA, working with the DOE, began to study alternative energy sources to lessen dependence on foreign oil. Proposed space solar power (SSP) systems consisting of photovoltaic (PV) arrays and mirrors, placed in a geostationary Earth orbit where unaffected by cloud cover, atmospheric dust, or by the Earth’s day-night cycle, would receive eight times as much sunlight as they would on Earth’s surface. The energy could be converted and beamed to Earth. PV technology has improved considerably since this idea was developed adding to the argument that this source of energy should be revisited. In addition, the economics of the cost of energy have changed. According to Dr. Neville Marzwell and his colleagues at the Jet Propulsion Lab, an SSP system could generate energy at a cost including cost of construction of 60 to 80 cents per kilowatt-hour at the outset. He believes that “in 15 to 25 years we can lower that cost to 7 to 10 cents per kWh.” The average cost of residential electricity was 9.86 cents per kWh in the U.S. in 2006.

146

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Comparatively better than other renewables
Space Solar offers unending source of energy with little environmental impact, and is better than the biofuel or carbon credit solutions Raji Patel, Associate Director of the Massachusetts Space Grant Consortium, April 25, 2008, “Power From Space: Its Time Has Come”, The TECH Online: Volume 128, Issue 21 http://wwwtech.mit.edu/V128/N21/spacesolarpower.html [Bapodra] Admittedly, there are formidable challenges in making this work. However, historically, we have a great record in making technological advances even though our social and political advances have not been so stellar. We should examine SSP, at the highest levels, nationally and internationally, because space solar power offers us energy from an unending source with no emissions and very little environmental impact. Furthermore, our current “solution” of switching to bio fuels is increasing hunger around the world evidenced by riots for food in the developing countries, and, the international carbon-credit market, created as part of the Kyoto Protocol, seems to be doing more for padding middlemen such as EcoSecurities whose founder is quoted as calling the market “akin to sub prime,” than combating global warming. It is indeed time to revisit a space-based solution for the world’s energy needs, both at the national and international levels. Space solar power is necessary- fossil fuels and nuclear energy are terrible Martin I Hoffert, professor of physics at New York University, and Seth D Potter, a Research Scientist in Physics at New York University when this article was written. He is currently an engineer at The Boeing Company in Seal Beach, California, USA, and serves on the Board of Directors of the National Space Society, “Beam It Down: How the New Satellites Can Power the World”, Space Future, October 1997 http://www.spacefuture.com/archive/beam_it_down_how_the_new_satellites_can_power_the_world.shtml [Bapodra] The demand for space-based solar power could be extraordinary. By 2050, according to some estimates, 10 billion people will inhabit the globe--more than 85 percent of them in developing countries. The big question: How can we best supply humanity's growing energy needs with the least adverse impact on the environment? Dependence on fossil fuels is not the answer because burning coal, oil, and gas will pour carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, raising the risk of global climate change. (And of course these resources will not last forever.) Nuclear fission reactors avoid the greenhouse problem but introduce the so-far intractable problem of disposing of nuclear waste. Controlled nuclear fusion might someday provide an inexhaustible supply of clean energy--but after forty years of continuous funding, a practical fusion reactor is still not in sight.

147

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
Solar space power is intermittent and comparatively better than other energies Martin I Hoffert, professor of physics at New York University, and Seth D Potter, a Research Scientist in Physics at New York University when this article was written. He is currently an engineer at The Boeing Company in Seal Beach, California, USA, and serves on the Board of Directors of the National Space Society, “Beam It Down: How the New Satellites Can Power the World”, Space Future, October 1997 http://www.spacefuture.com/archive/beam_it_down_how_the_new_satellites_can_power_the_world.shtml [Bapodra] And the flow of power from terrestrial renewables is intermittent. Clouds blot out the sun; the wind stops blowing; lack of rainfall nullifies a hydro generator. Because these technologies do not deliver power continuously, they require some means of storing energy, adding to overall cost and complexity. A network of solar power satellites in low earth orbit could provide power to any spot on earth on a virtually continuous basis because at least one satellite will always be in "view" of the receiving station. Space solar energy is better than other renewables: it doesn’t take up land, kill ecosystems or increase food shortages Martin I Hoffert, professor of physics at New York University, and Seth D Potter, a Research Scientist in Physics at New York University when this article was written. He is currently an engineer at The Boeing Company in Seal Beach, California, USA, and serves on the Board of Directors of the National Space Society, “Beam It Down: How the New Satellites Can Power the World”, Space Future, October 1997 http://www.spacefuture.com/archive/beam_it_down_how_the_new_satellites_can_power_the_world.shtml [Bapodra] That leaves the menu of renewable energy sources. But terrestrial renewables pose environmental problems because of their relatively large land requirements. Hydropower, the most exploited renewable thus far, has significantly disrupted ecosystems and human habitats. Solar, biomass, and wind farms would similarly compete with people, agriculture, and natural ecosystems for land were they the basis of a global energy system. Moreover, ground-based renewable energy systems, such as terrestrial photovoltaics and biomass fuels, generate fewer than 10 watts of electricity per square meter, on a continuous basis. To generate enough electricity to meet demand could require developing countries either to divert land from agricultural use, and thus diminish the supply of food, or to destroy natural ecosystems, a move that could hasten the onset of global warming. Solar power satellites would require far less land to generate electricity. Each square meter of land devoted to the task could yield as much as 100 watts of electricity. And the power-receiving rectenna arrays--a fine metallic mesh--would be visually transparent, so their presence would not interfere with crop growth or cattle grazing.

148

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

SSP Preserves Biodiversity
Solar satellites will preserve biodiversity Martin I Hoffert, professor of physics at New York University, and Seth D Potter, a Research Scientist in Physics at New York University when this article was written. He is currently an engineer at The Boeing Company in Seal Beach, California, USA, and serves on the Board of Directors of the National Space Society, “Beam It Down: How the New Satellites Can Power the World”, Space Future, October 1997 http://www.spacefuture.com/archive/beam_it_down_how_the_new_satellites_can_power_the_world.shtml [Bapodra] The benefits are too large to walk away from. A network of solar power satellites such as what we propose could supply the earth with 10 to 30 trillion watts of electrical power - enough to satisfy the needs of the human race through the next century. Solar power satellites thus offer a vision in which energy production moves off the earth's surface, allowing everyone to live on a "greener" planet. Consider the philosophical implications: no longer need humankind see itself trapped on spaceship earth with limited resources. We could tap the limitless resources of space, with the planet preserved as a priceless resource of biodiversity.

149

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Solvency
The US federal government is essential to providing 3 key incentives to allow for commercial SBSP tech to occur. National Security Space Office Interim Assessment, 10/10/07, “Space-Based Solar Power As an Opportunity for Strategic Security,” http://spacesolarpower.files.wordpress.com/2007/11/final-sbsp-interimassessment-release-01.pdf, pg. 3 Several major challenges will need to be overcome to make SBSP a reality, including the creation of low‐ cost space access and a supporting infrastructure system on Earth and in space. Solving these space access and operations challenges for SBSP will in turn also open space for a host of other activities that include space tourism, manufacturing, lunar or asteroid resource utilization, and eventually settlement to extend the human race. Because DoD would not want to own SBSP satellites, but rather just purchase the delivered energy as it currently does via traditional terrestrial utilities, a repeated review finding is that the commercial sector will need Government to accomplish three major tasks to catalyze SBSP development. The first is to retire a major portion of the early technical risks. This can be accomplished via an incremental research and development program that culminates with a spaceborne proof-of-concept demonstration in the next decade. A spiral development proposal to field a 10 MW continuous pilot plant en route to gigawatts-class systems is included in Appendix B. The second challenge is to facilitate the policy, regulatory, legal, and organizational instruments that will be necessary to create the partnerships and relationships (commercial‐commercial, government‐ commercial, and government‐government) needed for this concept to succeed. The final Government contribution is to become a direct early adopter and to incentivize other early adopters much as is accomplished on a regular basis with other renewable energy systems coming on‐line today.

Incentives would include financing, and loan guarantees Space Frontier Foundation, 10/10/07, “The National Security Space Office Sponsored Study on Space-Based Solar Power,” http://www.space-frontier.org/Presentations/SBSPreport.html The Space Frontier Foundation, which has opposed many other federally-funded space programs as being wasteful and/or ineffective - strongly supports a new national SBSP initiative for the U.S. Government to finance and to incentivize the private industry investment SBSP. The Foundation is calling on the U.S. Congress to finance SBSP at least at the level of fusion energy research, and to give American SBSP companies the same loan guarantees that it currently gives to the nuclear power industry in order to close the SBSP business case.”

150

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Incentives solve
Government buying down risks of investment sparks industry SBSP tech Frank Morring, writer for Aviation Week, 10/11/07, “NSSO Backs Space Solar Power,” http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story.jsp?id=news/solar101107.xml&headline=NSSO%20Backs %20Space%20Solar%20Power%20&channel=space By buying down the risk with a demonstration at the tactical level, the U.S. government could spark a new industry able to meet not just U.S. energy needs, but those of its allies and the developing world as well. The technology essentially exists, and needs only to be matured. A risk buy-down by government could make that happen, according to the NSSO report. Government risk reduction paves way for business development Frank Morring, writer for Aviation Week, 10/11/07, “NSSO Backs Space Solar Power,” http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story.jsp?id=news/solar101107.xml&headline=NSSO%20Backs %20Space%20Solar%20Power%20&channel=space The Internet-based group of experts who prepared the report for the NSSO recommended that the U.S. government organize itself to tackle the problem of developing SSP; use its resources to "retire a major portion of the technical risk for business development; establish tax and other policies to encourage private development of SSP, and "become an early demonstrator/adopter/customer" of SSP to spur its development. That, in turn, could spur development of space launch and other industries. Damphousse said a functioning reusable launch vehicle - preferably single-stage-to-orbit - probably would be required to develop a full-scale SSP infrastructure in geostationary orbit. That, in turn, could enable utilization of the moon and exploration of Mars under NASA's vision for space exploration.

151

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Quantum Dots are effective PV’s
Quantum dots would be highly efficient PVs Kennedy Space Center, October 02 ("Spaceport Visioning Concept Study". Involving Rainer Meinke of Advanced Magnet Lab; Dr. John Olds of Georgia Institute of Technology, Department of Aerospace Engineering; Dr. James Powell of Star Tram, Inc; Edgar Zapata of NASA/KSC Systems Engineering Office http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/nexgen/Nexgen_Downloads/Spaceport_Visioning_Final_Report. pdf)[JWu] Very High Efficiency Photovoltaics In addition to the above activities, which may be characterized as development efforts, there are two longrange research investigations into higher efficiency solar cells being undertaken. The first involves utilization of specific ranges of sunlight focused through a prism onto cells tailored to the wavelengths and thusly is termed “Rainbow”. The other takes advantage of an ensemble of quantum dots in a size range that will capture most of the radiation from the terrestrial and space solar energy spectrum. Such a collection of different size quantum dots can be regarded as an array of semiconductors that are individually size tuned for optimal absorption at their bandgaps throughout the solar energy emission spectrum. If successful, theoretical efficiencies of 50 - 70% are possible.

Quantum dot panels are much more efficient and cheaper Rice University, May 4, 2007 (ScienceNews adaptation of Rice U materials, " Quantum Dot Recipe May Lead To Cheaper Solar Panels." http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/05/070502143631.htm)[JWu] Rice University scientists today revealed a breakthrough method for producing molecular specks of semiconductors called quantum dots, a discovery that could clear the way for better, cheaper solar energy panels The research, by scientists at Rice's Center for Biological and Environmental Nanotechnology (CBEN), appears this week in the journal Small. It describes a new chemical method for making four-legged cadmium selenide quantum dots, which previous research has shown to be particularly effective at converting sunlight into electrical energy. "Our work knocks down a big barrier in developing quantum-dot-based photovoltaics as an alternative to the conventional, more expensive silicon-based solar cells," said paper co-author and principal investigator Michael Wong, assistant professor of chemical and biomolecular engineering.

152

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

No Heat Problems
Silicon carbide electronics solve heat problems NASA Nov 9, 06 ("Solar system exploration," http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/SiC/benefits.html)[JWu] Present-day commercial satellites require thermal radiators to dissipate heat generated by the spacecraft's functional electronics. These electronics, currently based on silicon or gallium arsenide semiconductors, would fail if they were not properly cooled by the spacecraft's thermal radiators. Because silicon carbide electronics can operate at much higher temperatures than silicon or gallium arsenide, the size and weight of such radiators on a spacecraft could be greatly reduced or even elimated. This would enable substantial weight savings on a satellite, or at least allow greater functionality (i.e., more transponders in a communications satellite) by utilizing the space and weight formerly occupied by the termal management system. Furthermore, SiC electronic devices have also been shown to be less susceptible to radiation damage than corresopondingly rated silicon devices. Therefore, SiC electronics could also reduce the size and weight of shielding normally used to protect spacecraft electronic components from space radiation. Given the exorbitant per pound costs of launching payloads into earth orbit, the weight savings gained by using SiC electronics could have large economic and competitive implications in the satellite industry. Advanced Launch Vehicle Sensor & Control Electronics Silicon carbide electronics and sensors that could function mounted in hot engine and aerosurface areas of advanced launch vehicles would enable weight savings, increased engine performance, and increased reliability. Complex electronics and sensors are expected to enhance the capabilities and efficiency of advanced space launch vehicles. Many of these electronics and sensors monitor and control vital engine components and aerosurfaces that operate at high temperatures. Since today's silicon-based electronics technology cannot function at high temperatures, these electronics must presently reside in environmentally controlled areas. This necessitates the use of long wire runs between the sheltered electronics and the hot-area sensors and controls or the fuel-cooling of the electronics and sensors located in high-temperature areas. Both of these low-temperature-electronics approaches suffer from serious drawbacks, as the wire runs add a substantial amount of weight, fuel cooling has harmed aircraft fuel efficiency, and both have negatively impacted aircraft reliabiltiy. A family of high temperature silicon carbide electronics and sensors that could function in hot areas of the launch vehicle would alleviate the above-mentioned technical obstacles to enable performance gains. Uncooled operation of 300 - 600 C SiC electronics and sensors mounted would save weight and increase reliability by replacing hydraulic controls with "smart" electromechanical controls. SiC-based distributed control electronics would eliminate wiring and connectors needed in conventional sheltered-electronic control systems.

153

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Solar Satellites are environmentally clean
SBSP is environmentally clean Space Frontier Foundation, international organization composed of space activists, scientists and engineers, media and political professionals.10-10-07 ("Meeting Humanity’s Energy, National Security, Environmental
and Economic Development Needs" http://www.space-frontier.org/Presentations/ SFFViewsSBSPReport10Oct07.pdf)[JWu]

There are 6 billion human beings inhabiting this world. Six billion humans who place demands on this Earth. Humans who want the Western standard-of-living and who justifiably want all the conveniences of modern life. A fundamental challenge in this century is how to provide for the world's growing energy needs. While meeting this challenge, it is vital that we also protect the Earth's fragile biosphere. Space-Based Solar Power, or SBSP, may be part of a combined solution for both energy and the environment. SBSP has the potential to produce renewable energy in very large amounts, in an economic and environmentally-friendly manner. The development of SBSP will be environmentally friendly Space Frontier Foundation, international organization composed of space activists, scientists and engineers, media and political professionals.10-10-07 ("Meeting Humanity’s Energy, National Security, Environmental
and Economic Development Needs" http://www.space-frontier.org/Presentations/ SFFViewsSBSPReport10Oct07.pdf)[JWu]

In the Space Frontier Foundation's credo, we have committed ourselves to protect "the Earth's fragile biosphere" and to bring about a better life for the human race by "utilizing the unlimited energy and material resources of space." With these goals in mind, the Foundation is committed to an SBSP Campaign to reach out to the environmental community and to ensure that “green principals” are used throughout any development of SBSP in this nation. The Space Frontier Foundation agrees with the NSSO-led report finding that “although SBSP holds great promise to deliver clean and renewable energy to all nations of the world, the potential environmental impacts of the various systems and mitigation options to minimize those impacts require greater study.” Therefore, the Space Frontier Foundation intends to hold the U.S. Government to the specific recommendation in the report that “the U.S. Government ... must study the potential environmental impacts of the various approaches early enough to help make effective choices between the various technical alternatives. These studies should be led by agencies with the required scientific expertise, credibility, and independence, and need to include all relevant stakeholders. Environmental studies should be piggybacked to demonstrations of the technologies to minimize the environmental impact in the eventual large-scale use of SBSP; therefore, maximizing the environmental benefit of SBSP.” 154

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

155

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Federal Key
Federal action extension to space solar power is key Space Frontier Foundation, international organization composed of space activists, scientists and engineers, media and political professionals.10-10-07 ("Meeting Humanity’s Energy, National Security, Environmental
and Economic Development Needs" http://www.space-frontier.org/Presentations/ SFFViewsSBSPReport10Oct07.pdf)[JWu]

Extend Federal Incentives for Other Carbon-Neutral Energy Technologies to SBSP: The U.S. Government is providing major incentives to many other energy technologies, in support of energy independence and clean renewable energy objectives. The Space Frontier Foundation believes it is completely reasonable to ask for consistency in policy, and quite reasonable since the potential pay-off of SBSP is so large. The SBSP Study Group recommends that consistent with the U.S. Government incentives provided to other carbon-neutral energy technologies, it is critical for the U.S. Government to provide similar incentives to encourage private U.S. industry to co-invest in the development of SBSP systems. Specifically, the following incentives should be provided to U.S. industry as soon as possible to encourage private investment in the development and construction of SBSP systems: • Carbon/Pollution Credits and Offsets: The Space Frontier Foundation believes that it should be rather straight-forward for the U.S. Congress to clarify, to the extent necessary, that existing law and policy on carbon/pollution credits and offsets also apply to SBSP. o Legislation at both the federal and state level that specifies — and clarifies existing law as specifying — that SBSP is eligible for all pollution credits, carbon credits, and carbon off-sets that are available to other clean and renewable energy sources such as wind, hydro, ground solar, and nuclear • Extend Loan Guarantees to SBSP Developers & Operators: The nuclear power industry has been given loan guarantees by the U.S. federal government. The Space Frontier Foundation urges the Administration and the U.S. Congress to extend the same incentives to the SBSP industry. o A federal loan guarantee program of up to 80% should be created for U.S. companies engaged in the business of developing, owning and operating SBSP systems. This program should either be an extension of, or modeled after, the existing loan guarantee program provided to the nuclear power industry.

156

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Small efforts lead to Space Solar Farms
Small-scale prototype solar satellite development makes solar farms inevitable Martin I Hoffert, professor of physics at New York University, and Seth D Potter, a Research Scientist in Physics at New York University when this article was written. He is currently an engineer at The Boeing Company in Seal Beach, California, USA, and serves on the Board of Directors of the National Space Society, “Beam It Down: How the New Satellites Can Power the World”, Space Future, October 1997 http://www.spacefuture.com/archive/beam_it_down_how_the_new_satellites_can_power_the_world.shtml [Bapodra] What is certain is that the present push for deregulation has led to a scramble on the part of telecommunications, computer, cable TV, and utilities industries to enter each others' markets. Some electric power companies want to enter the telecommunications business as a way of capitalizing on the huge investment in wire and cable that reaches virtually every building in the country. It makes equal sense to propose that communications companies enter the power business. In practice, consortiums of power and communications companies might develop the proposed technology together. No single piece of this technology poses a fundamental stumbling block. The physics of photovoltaic cells and microwave generation are well understood. To move to the next stage, though, will require a demonstration that all the pieces of this system can work together: the solar panels, the phased-array microwave antennas, the receiving stations that separate the data signals from the power beams, and the computers that tell the satellites where on the ground to aim the beams. NASA could accelerate this development tremendously by placing into orbit a prototype of a solar power satellite. A small solar satellite pilot program within the decade will shape the future for a more advanced solar station Richard Macey, reporter at Sydney Morning Herald, October 17, 2007, “Pentagon offers a ray of hope in energy debate”, The Sydney Morning Herald of Australia, http://www.smh.com.au/news/environment/pentagon-offers-a-ray-of-hope-in-energydebate/2007/10/16/1192300768027.html [Bapodra] THE debate over whether nuclear, solar, wind or clean coal is the energy of the future now has a new player. A report commissioned by an arm of the US Department of Defence has instead proposed lofting power generation into space. Giant arrays of orbiting solar panels would collect sunlight, which would be beamed via low-power microwaves to massive receivers on the ground, or even directly to customers. Published by the Pentagon's National Security Space Office, the report says the US should demonstrate the technology by building a pilot "space-based solar power" station, big enough to continuously beam up to 10 megawatts of power to the ground, in the next decade. A more advanced station, "several kilometres across" and weighing more than 3000 tonnes, could deliver up to 10 gigawatts of electricity. While the report says the project would be a technological challenge, it "requires no fundamental scientific breakthroughs or new physics".

157

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
Space solar panels will lead to solar farms and possibly solar stations for space missions Graham Philips, Reporter from the Catalyst, 13 March 2008,“Solar Space Power” Audio and textual transcript, internally quotes Dr Charles H. Lineweaver, Senior Fellow of Planetary Science Institute (PSI) , Research School of Astronomy and Astrophysics (RSAA) and Research School of Earth Sciences, http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/2008/03/13/2187801.htm [Bapodra] Narration: In fact, there’s even talk of eventually moving the entire production of the space solar farms – ‘off planet’… Dr Lineweaver: Well its easier to build things in space than it is to … build them here and then launch them. For example if we had a moon base then instead of having to launch things through this much energy we would have to launch things through about 1/20th of that so you go to the moon you have a moon base and you get people to dig up things make some metal or make some silicon – there’s lots of silicon on the moon, in fact most of the moon is silicon and you then build the arrays there and then or only use that much energy to get it into geo stationary orbit, even though its very far away the amount of energy you need is very, very little If we can start to construct solar panels in outer space if all the pollution associated with such construction would be in outer space it wouldn’t be on earth and so wouldn’t contribute to our problems here. Narration: Orbiting power stations may even allow us to ‘boldly go where no one has gone before’ Dr Lineweaver: We can imagine a future not too distant in which space based solar power is used as a gasoline station for rockets and missions that we want to send to Mars send to the moon and Jupiter and even beyond possibly into another stellar system. Developing space solar panels open the path for exploration, planetary defense, and space commercialism and tourism Judith Burns, Science producer, BBC News, 12/7/07, “The final frontier for solar energy” http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7131617.stm [Bapodra] "It's a matter of developing the technology to make the solar panels cheaper, to send them into the sky and have the energy conversion to microwaves or optical lasers which then beam the energy down to Earth. "All of that is demonstrated to be technically feasible. Again it's a matter of economics". For Lt Col Damphousse, despite the technical and economic challenges, the advantages are clear. "It opens up all the other things that we are trying to do in space; our exploration strategy, our planetary defence, commercialism in space, space tourism. "If we're able to do this as an international effort this helps to relieve some of those pressures on resource shortages, overpopulation. This is something that's in the interest of the entire planet. "Once we open up the medium, there's a whole new world waiting for us out there."

158

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Construction is Feasible
Solar satellite construction is feasible, the cost remains an obstacle Judith Burns, Science producer, BBC News, 12/7/07, “The final frontier for solar energy” http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7131617.stm [Bapodra] A recent study by the Pentagon concluded that a solar array in space was close to being technologically feasible, and robotics should soon make the building of large structures in space safer and quicker. Nasa has already begun work on a successor to the shuttle, which should bring the costs of space transport down; currently, each launch costs nearly half a billion dollars. Leopold Summerer of the European Space Agency believes the generation of solar power from space may be only 20 years away. But he adds that the cost of the undertaking will mean it will have to be another international effort along the lines of the Space Station. Robert Laine from EADS Astrium, the Anglo-French space company, says private sector involvement could help reduce costs but governments would have to take the first steps. Solar satellite technology has improved from older designs and are economically viable Martin I Hoffert, professor of physics at New York University, and Seth D Potter, a Research Scientist in Physics at New York University when this article was written. He is currently an engineer at The Boeing Company in Seal Beach, California, USA, and serves on the Board of Directors of the National Space Society, “Beam It Down: How the New Satellites Can Power the World”, Space Future, http://www.spacefuture.com/archive/beam_it_down_how_the_new_satellites_can_power_the_world.shtml [Bapodra] The technology, as originally envisioned, posed daunting technical hurdles. Transferring electrical power efficiently from a satellite in geosynchronous orbit would require a transmitting antenna on board the satellite about one kilometer in diameter and a receiving antenna on the ground about 10 kilometers in diameter. A project of this scale boggles the mind; government funding agencies shied away from investing immense sums in a project whose viability was so unclear. NASA and the Department of Energy, which had sponsored preliminary design studies, lost interest in the late 1970s. In the last few years, however, the communications industry has announced satellite projects that suggest the time has come to revisit the solar power satellite idea. By early in the next century, swarms of communications satellites will be orbiting the earth at low altitude, relaying voice, video, and data to the most remote spots on earth. These satellites will relay communication signals to earth on beams of microwaves. The transmission of electrical power with a beam of microwaves was demonstrated as early as 1963, and projecting power and data along the same microwave beam is well within the state of the art. Why not use the same beam to carry electrical power? The new communications satellites will orbit at an altitude of only a few hundred miles. Instead of hovering above a spot on the equator, low-orbiting satellites zip around the globe in as little as 90 minutes, tracing paths that oscillate about the equator, rising and dipping as many as 86 degrees of latitude. Because they are closer to the earth's surface, the solar collectors on the satellite can be a few hundred meters across rather than 10 kilometers. And because the microwave beams they generate would spread out much less than those from geosynchronous satellites, the ground rectennas could be correspondingly smaller and less expensive as well. By piggybacking onto these fleets of communications satellites--and taking advantage of their microwave transmitters and receivers, ground stations, and control systems--solar power technology can become economically viable.

159

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

No Launch Harms
Launching solar satellites have no environment costs Graham Philips, Reporter from the Catalyst, 13 March 2008,“Solar Space Power” Audio and textual transcript, internally quotes Dr Charles H. Lineweaver, Senior Fellow of Planetary Science Institute (PSI) , Research School of Astronomy and Astrophysics (RSAA) and Research School of Earth Sciences, http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/2008/03/13/2187801.htm [Bapodra] Narration: And what will be the cost – not in dollar terms – but to the environment? Will launching all this stuff into space produce huge amounts of CO2? Dr Lineweaver: When you launch solar panels … into outer space the rockets are burning mostly hydrogen and oxygen and that produces as a waste gas water and so we’re not producing Co2 when we do that.

160

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

2AC Stuff- Now is key Exts
After previously being shelved, now is key time CNN 7/1/08 ("How to harvest solar power? Beam it down from space!" http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science/05/30/space.solar/index.html)[JWu] NASA revisited space solar power with a so-called "Fresh Look" study in the mid-90s but the research lost momentum when the space agency decided it did not want to further pursue the technology, Mankins told CNN. By around 2002 the project was indefinitely shelved -- or so it seemed. "The conditions are ripe for something to happen on space solar power," said Charles Miller, a director of the Space Frontier Foundation, a group promoting public access to space. "The environment is perfect for a new start." Skyrocketing oil prices, a heightened awareness of climate change and worries about natural resource depletion have recently prompted a renewed interest in beaming extraterrestrial energy back to Earth, Miller explained. And so has a 2007 report released by the Pentagon's National Security Space Office, encouraging the U.S. government to spearhead the development of space power systems. New sources of energy are needed now to keep up with rocketing demand NASA, 3-21-01 (Science and Technology Directorate at NASA, "Beam it down, Scotty", http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast23mar_1.htm)[JWu] With the world's population projected to skyrocket to 10 billion people by the year 2050, supplying cheap, environmentally friendly electricity to meet basic needs will be a daunting challenge. "We need new sources of electrical power," said John Mankins, Manager of Advanced Concepts Studies at NASA Headquarters Office of Space Flight, "and we have been studying a variety of space solar power concepts. Tremendous advances have been made in many relevant technologies in the last fifteen years."

161

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Now is key—Maslow Window
The next few years are key for a space boom—Maslow Window provides infinite opportunity the same time satellites come online Bruce Cordell, PhD planetary and space physics, Weizmann postdoctoral fellow at Caltech, exphysics professor at the California State University, space scientist, worked with NASA. May 11 08 ("Economic growth" http://21stcenturywaves.com/blog/category/perspectives/)[JWu] This long-term approach to 21st Century space forecasting is based on the concept of a “Maslow Window”, in which each successive economic boom (typically peaking every 56 years) does two things: 1) it fuels the societal affluence required to spur large-scale technology and engineering activities, and, more importantly, 2) it creates widespread ebullience by briefly elevating society to the highest levels in Maslow’s hierarchy. This ebullience creates the atmosphere of social well-being and confidence vital to undertake and support large, complex, risky, expensive, multi-year programs and explorations. The confluence of societal affluence and ebullience is seen only infrequently in modern times, when peaks in economic activity (following a 56 year cycle) triggered the four great explorations (Lewis and Clark, Dr. Livingstone in Africa, the Polar Expeditions, Apollo Moon) of the last 200 years. In July, 2007 Fortune magazine termed the current worldwide expansion “the greatest economic boom ever”. Continued rapid growth, assuming consistent government policies, is projected by the Congressional Budget Office at least to 2011. This is precisely the trend one would expect as we approach the economic boom presaging the next Maslow Window. For example, based on economic data corresponding to the previous four Maslow Windows, projected GDP for 2025 should reach between two and three times its current value. Evidence for the near-term approach to Maslow Window-style ebullience is also provided by travel industry statistics that indicate skyrocketing growth of adventure-type travel and extreme sports (e.g., high altitude mountaineering). Indeed, in 2003 the Wall Street Journal estimated the global market for adventure travel to be $ 245 billion. The beginning of the suborbital space tourist industry is another key step in this direction.

162

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
The Maslow Window will be around 2015 Bruce Cordell, PhD planetary and space physics, Weizmann postdoctoral fellow at Caltech, exphysics professor at the California State University, space scientist, worked with NASA. May 11 08 ("Economic growth" http://21stcenturywaves.com/blog/category/perspectives/)[JWu] As society ascends the Maslow hierarchy it eventually aspires to fulfill what Maslow called “esteem needs,” reflecting a desire for respect from others and for others, and for self-esteem. Data relevant to these needs has been tracked by The National Conference on Citizenship. Their Civic Health Index (CHI) monitors 40 indicators across nine categories, including connections to civic and religious groups, trust in other people, trends in philanthropy and volunteer work, and awareness of current and world events. Since 1975, subsequent to the close of the Apollo Maslow Window, the CHI has registered steep declines of 7%, a trend viewed as a “substantial and troubling pattern.” However, their data may indicate a turning point, demonstrating almost a 3 point recovery in the CHI since 1999, with a renewed ascent up the Maslow hierarchy. This is the trend we would expect as increasing affluence begins to elevate society back to the esteem and (eventually) the “cognitive” need levels that are characteristic of past Maslow Windows. Additional evidence favoring these projections comes from the well-documented “generations” concept of William Strauss and Neil Howe (Generations, 1991). Recently, the changing characteristics of successive generations have been correlated with long economic waves (about 56 years). As we approach the next Maslow Window in 2015, the Millennial generation will be coming of age. As “Civics” they will be especially supportive of Maslow Window space activities; two previous “Civics” presidents were John F. Kennedy (Apollo) and Ronald Reagan (Space Station). Growing international interest in non-space macro-engineering projects is also a reliable indicator of the impending Maslow Window opening in 2015. A prime example is the proposed $5B+ Panama Canal expansion project expected to be complete by 2015. The corresponding wave of ebullience that normally heralds such an achievement was recently reflected in the national referendum in 2006 where Panamanians approved the risky, expensive project by 76.8% of votes.

163

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
MASLOW WINDOWS ARE LIMITED—ONLY FOR A DECADE Bruce Cordell, PhD planetary and space physics, Weizmann postdoctoral fellow at Caltech, exphysics professor at the California State University, space scientist, worked with NASA. May 11 08 ("Public opinion" http://21stcenturywaves.com/blog/category/perspectives/)[JWu] On the basis of public opinion polls Launius claims that popular support for Apollo was not as high during the 1960s as typically assumed. He points to polls during the 1960s asking if the federal government should fund human trips to the Moon that never rose above 45% approval and usually slouched near 40%. In fact, in 1965 one third of the country favored reducing NASA’s budget, and by 1969 — the year of the first human landing on the Moon — that percent had increased to 40% (it skyrocketed to 55% in 1975!). This suggests that popular support for Apollo started to erode almost as soon as the program was established, and supports the notion that Maslow Windows can flourish for up to a decade but then rapidly decline.

164

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Timeframe Exts
Fully functional SPS will be fully developed by 2020 Kennedy Space Center, October 02 ("Spaceport Visioning Concept Study". Involving Rainer Meinke of Advanced Magnet Lab; Dr. John Olds of Georgia Institute of Technology, Department of Aerospace Engineering; Dr. James Powell of Star Tram, Inc; Edgar Zapata of NASA/KSC Systems Engineering Office http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/nexgen/Nexgen_Downloads/Spaceport_Visioning_Final_Report. pdf)[JWu] For purposes of coordinating activities among the various teams, “Model System Categories” (MSCs) were defined. These range from relatively small-scale demonstrations to very large-scale operational SPS systems. In broad terms, each MSC represents a notional projection of what may be achievable in a particular future timeframe in terms of scale, technology, missions, etc. Four are described here. MSC 1 year 2005, approx. power level 100 kW, Free-flyer, demo-scale commercial space option MSC 2 year 2010, 100 kWPlanetary Surface System; demo-scale; space exploration option MSC 3 year 2015, ~10 MW Free-flyer; WPT, SPG and PMAD, Transportation; Large demo; HEDS (“solar clipper”) option MSC 4 year 2020, 1 GW Free-flyer; Full-scale solar power satellite commercial space option Timeframe is by 2020 CNN 7/1/08 ("How to harvest solar power? Beam it down from space!" http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science/05/30/space.solar/index.html)[JWu] "It will take a great deal of effort, a great deal of thought and unfortunately a great deal of money," Keutersaid. "But it is certainly possible." And Miller, of the Space Frontier Foundation, said he thinks it will be possible in the next 10 years. "We could see the first operational power satellite in about the 2020 time frame if we act now," he said.

165

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Energy Solvency
Solar satellites contain more energy than all oil reserves on Earth CNN 7/1/08 ("How to harvest solar power? Beam it down from space!" http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science/05/30/space.solar/index.html)[JWu] "A single kilometer-wide band of geosynchronous Earth orbit experiences enough solar flux in one year to nearly equal the amount of energy contained within all known recoverable conventional oil reserves on Earth today," the report said. Space has near infinite untapped energy Arthur Smith, President Long Island Space Society, 8-11-03 ("the case for space based solar development", http://www.spacedaily.com/news/ssp-03b.html)[JWu] Space is big - there is an awful lot of energy out there, and the crumbs we fight about here on Earth are laughably tiny in comparison. Zettawatts from the Sun pass just through the region between Earth and Moon - that's enough energy for each man, woman and child in the US to sustainably power an entire US economy all to themselves. Even our terrestrial energy choices, fossil or renewable, fission or wind, almost all derive from the energy profligacy of our Sun and other stars before it. Gathering power in space and transmitting it to Earth should not be a mystery to us in this 21st century. Communications satellites already do it routinely. One significant obstacle to power applications, however, is regulatory: there is no spectrum allocated to power transmission, as there is for communications.

Solar satellites provide more energy than everything else combined NewScientist 10/11/07 ("Pentagon backs plan to beam solar power down from space" http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn12774)[JWu] At the same press conference, over a dozen space advocacy groups announced a new alliance to promote space solar power – the Space Solar Alliance for Future Energy. These supporters of spacebased solar power say the technology has the potential to provide more energy than fossil fuels, wind and nuclear power combined. The NSSO report says that solar-power-generating satellites could also solve supply problems in distant places such as Iraq, where fuel is currently trucked along in dangerous convoys and the cost of electricity for some bases can exceed $1 per kilowatt-hour – about 10 times what it costs in the US. The report also touts the technology's potential to provide a clean, abundant energy source and reduce global competition for oil.

One year of SBSP is almost all remaining oil energy combined James Bloom, The Guardian staff writer, 11-1-07, ("Power from the final frontier", http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2007/nov/01/guardianweeklytechnologysection.research)[JWu ] The space office sees energy supply as one of strategic importance as oil supplies dwindle; according to a report by Germany's Energy Watch Group published last week, "peak oil" output occurred last year, and will fall by 7% annually to half its present levels by 2030. The space office notes that all remaining oil resources are estimated to contain 250 terawatt-years of energy; but that a one-kilometre wide band in geosynchronous orbit receives about 212 TW-years of energy each year. 166

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

CHINA EXTS
China's space programs are all in its national interests China's Information Office of the State Council, November 22, 2k ("China's Space Activities, a White Paper", viewed on Spacered; http://www.spaceref.com/china/china.white.paper.nov.22.2000.html)[JWu] The Chinese government has all along regarded the space industry as an integral part of the state's comprehensive development strategy, and upheld that the exploration and utilization of outer space should be for peaceful purposes and benefit the whole of mankind. As a developing country, China's fundamental tasks are developing its economy and continuously pushing forward its modernization drive. The aims and principles of China's space activities are determined by their important status and function in protecting China's national interests and implementing the state's development strategy. The aims of China's space activities are: to explore outer space, and learn more about the cosmos and the Earth; to utilize outer space for peaceful purposes, promote mankind's civilization and social progress, and benefit the whole of mankind; and to meet the growing demands of economic construction, national security, science and technology development and social progress, protect China's national interests and build up the comprehensive national strength.

China's space plans include monitoring and communication satellites, and space preeminence China's Information Office of the State Council, November 22, 2k ("China's Space Activities, a White Paper", viewed on Spacered; http://www.spaceref.com/china/china.white.paper.nov.22.2000.html)[JWu] The 21st century will witness vigorous development of space activities across the world. China is drafting a space development strategy and plans oriented to the 21st century according to the actual demands and long-term target of national development to spur the growth of the space industry. Development Targets The short-term development targets (for the next decade) are: - To build up an earth observation system for long-term stable operation. The meteorological satellites, resource satellites, oceanic satellites and disaster monitoring satellites can develop into an earth observation system for long-term stable operation to conduct stereoscopic observation and dynamic monitoring of the land, atmosphere, and oceanic environments of the country, the peripheral regions and even the whole globe. - To set up an independently operated satellite broadcasting and telecommunications system. Positive support will be given to the development of commercial broadcasting and telecommunications satellites such as geo-stationary telecom satellites and TV live broadcasting satellites with long operating life, high reliability and large capacity, so as to form China's satellite telecom industry. - To establish an independent satellite navigation and positioning system. This will be achieved by setting up a navigation and positioning satellite group step by step and developing a relevant application system, which will eventually bring into being China's satellite navigation and positioning industry; The long-term development targets (for the next 20 years or more) are as follows: To achieve industrialization and marketization of space technology and space applications. The exploration and utilization of space resources shall meet a wide range of demands of economic construction, state security, science and technology development and social progress, and contribute to the strengthening of the comprehensive national strength; 167

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
- To establish a multi-function and multi-orbit space infrastructure composed of various satellite systems and set up a satellite ground application system that harmonizes spacecraft and ground equipment to form an integrated ground-space network system in full, constant and long-term operation in accordance with the overall planning of the state; - To establish China's own manned spaceflight system and carry out manned spaceflight scientific research and technological experiments on a certain scale; and - To obtain a more important place in the world in the field of space science with more achievements and carry out explorations and studies of outer space. - To upgrade the overall level and capacity of China's launch vehicles. This will be achieved by improving the performance and reliability of the "Long-March" group, developing the next generation of launch vehicles with non-toxic, non-polluting, high-performance and lowcost qualities, forming a new group of launch vehicles and strengthening the capability of providing international commercial launching services; - To realize manned spaceflight and establish an initially complete R and D testing system for manned space projects; - To establish a coordinated and complete national satellite remote-sensing application system by building various related ground application systems through overall planning, setting up a remote-sensing data receiving, processing and distributing system covering the whole country for data sharing, and forming a fairly complete application system in major application fields of satellite remote-sensing; and - To develop space science and explore outer space by developing a scientific research and technological experiment satellite group of the next generation, strengthening studies of space micro-gravity, space material science, space life science, space environment and space astronomy, and carrying out pre-study for outer space exploration centering on the exploration of the moon. China is researching deep space exploration and space life Space Daily, quoting a senior Chinese space official, Beijing Correspondent Staff Writers, Jul 20, 06 ("China To Develop Deep Space Exploration In 5 Years" http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/China_To_Develop_ Deep_Space_Exploration_In_5_Years_999.html)[JWu] A senior Chinese space agency official said Wednesday that China would actively plan its deep space exploration over the next five years, focusing on lunar and Mars exploration. Sun Laiyan, administrator of the China National Space Administration, said China would study the distribution and utilization of lunar resources and terrestrial planetary science as well as exploring scientific measures for supporting mankind's sustainable survival on Earth. Key research areas will also include astronomy and solar physics, space physics and solar system exploration, micro-gravity sciences and space life science. Sun urged Chinese scientists to increase their understanding of star and universe evolution through the observation and study of the sun and black holes. In the next five years, Sun said, China will independently develop and launch an astronomical satellite.

168

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
Chinese will go into space by 2015—the only issue is whether it will be cooperative or confrontational Bruce Cordell, PhD planetary and space physics, Weizmann postdoctoral fellow at Caltech, exphysics professor at the California State University, space scientist, worked with NASA. May 11 08 (Contributions from Anny Wong, PhD, political scientist. "10 reasons why china is good for space" http://21stcenturywaves.com/blog/2008/06/22/10-reasons-why-china-is-good-for-space/)[JWu] 3. Energy-hungry China may decide to lead solar power satellite development. Facing $ trillions of energy infrastructure costs in the next 20 years, China may decide to develop this inexhaustible energy source that would reduce both environmental pollution and strategic tensions. 2. China and U.S. (and others) may form a Grand Space Alliance for the 2015 Maslow Window. If indeed we’re “less than 5 years from a new generation of Chinese leaders with whom a far stronger relationship may be built,” — see Thomas Barnett — new options are possible. With joint interests in global security, new energy sources, and the exploration of space, China and the U.S. may decide that a “Football Game” model is more productive than the previous Cold War space experience was. In an American professional football game there are rules, big money, great excitement, intense competition, and winners and losers, but at the end of the game both teams survive, learn, and remain friends; they also look forward to the next game on the schedule. 1. A less attractive option is that China (and partners) may stimulate the rapid development of space by challenging the U.S. in a Cold War-style confrontation, complete with a Sputnik-like event. Reason #2 (above) is basically a model of greatly expanded International Geophysical Year-style friendly cooperation. However, in 1957 it led to the surprise launch of Sputnik which shocked America and triggered the 1960s race to space between two very unfriendly countries. As we draw closer to the 2015 Maslow Window it will become clearer which model of international space development — “Football Game” or “Cold War”– will occur.

169

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

A2 Status Quo Solves
No solar power research funding now Arthur Smith, President Long Island Space Society, 8-11-03 ("the case for space based solar development", http://www.spacedaily.com/news/ssp-03b.html)[JWu] A review by the National Research Council (2) found the program to have a credible plan which required significant funding increases. Rather than strengthening the program, however, all funding for the space solar power group ceased after September 2001, and essentially no R&D work on power from space is now being done in the US. New government action key to catalyzing space Frank Morring, Sr Space Tech. Editor, Aerospace Daily and Defense Report, 10-11-07 ("NSSO backs space solar power" aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story.jsp?id=news/solar101107.xml &headline=NSSO%20Backs%20Space%20Solar%20Power%20&channel=space)[JWu] The Internet-based group of experts who prepared the report for the NSSO recommended that the U.S. government organize itself to tackle the problem of developing SSP; use its resources to "retire a major portion of the technical risk for business development; establish tax and other policies to encourage private development of SSP, and "become an early demonstrator/adopter/customer" of SSP to spur its development. That, in turn, could spur development of space launch and other industries. Damphousse said a functioning reusable launch vehicle - preferably single-stage-to-orbit - probably would be required to develop a full-scale SSP infrastructure in geostationary orbit. That, in turn, could enable utilization of the moon and exploration of Mars under NASA's vision for space exploration.

170

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

A2 Unreliable
Space solar energy is continuous, abundant, and can be beamed to anywhere Andrzej Zwaniecki, USInfo Staff writer, site maintained by U.S. Department of State's Bureau of International Information Programs, 8-20-07, ("Space solar energy has future, U.S. researchers say" www.america.gov/st/washfile-english/2007/August/20070820153255saikceinawz0.864773.html)[JWu] Washington -- Beam solar energy directly from space, and disaster relief expeditions could power all their equipment with no more than a few portable antennas and converters. Campers could use such energy to cook dinners using nothing more than a cell phone-like device. But the primary beneficiaries of such a technological feat would be the many communities that would be able to tap into space solar energy fed into power grids. Terrestrial solar power stations already exist throughout the world. But sunlight is eight times less intense on the earth’s surface than in its geostationary orbit. So why not collect it in space and beam its energy to Earth via microwave power beam, which can penetrate the atmosphere more efficiently, ask U.S. researchers. They have proposed putting in orbit mega-satellites -- giant, possibly inflatable structures of photovoltaic arrays and antennas -- that would do just that. At receiving stations on Earth, the beam could be converted into electricity (or synthetic fuels), which, in contrast to power from terrestrial solar power stations, would flow continuously to the grid independent of the season, weather or location.

Space has infinite energy just waiting to be tapped Arthur Smith, President Long Island Space Society, 8-11-03 ("the case for space based solar development", http://www.spacedaily.com/news/ssp-03b.html)[JWu] We already have an immense fusion reactor working for us in our solar system, ultimately responsible for almost all our energy choices. All we really need to do is make better use of it by tapping into it more directly. Any rational energy policy for the United States must support the steps needed to make that happen: increased investment in reducing launch costs, reserving radio frequency spectrum for power transmission, and moving towards a billion dollars per year in a robust and diverse program of R&D on space solar power.

171

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

A2 Hurts environment
The development of SBSP will be environmentally friendly Space Frontier Foundation, international organization composed of space activists, scientists and engineers, media and political professionals.10-10-07 ("Meeting Humanity’s Energy, National Security, Environmental
and Economic Development Needs" http://www.space-frontier.org/Presentations/ SFFViewsSBSPReport10Oct07.pdf)[JWu]

In the Space Frontier Foundation's credo, we have committed ourselves to protect "the Earth's fragile biosphere" and to bring about a better life for the human race by "utilizing the unlimited energy and material resources of space." With these goals in mind, the Foundation is committed to an SBSP Campaign to reach out to the environmental community and to ensure that “green principals” are used throughout any development of SBSP in this nation. The Space Frontier Foundation agrees with the NSSO-led report finding that “although SBSP holds great promise to deliver clean and renewable energy to all nations of the world, the potential environmental impacts of the various systems and mitigation options to minimize those impacts require greater study.” Therefore, the Space Frontier Foundation intends to hold the U.S. Government to the specific recommendation in the report that “the U.S. Government ... must study the potential environmental impacts of the various approaches early enough to help make effective choices between the various technical alternatives. These studies should be led by agencies with the required scientific expertise, credibility, and independence, and need to include all relevant stakeholders. Environmental studies should be piggybacked to demonstrations of the technologies to minimize the environmental impact in the eventual large-scale use of SBSP; therefore, maximizing the environmental benefit of SBSP.”

SBSP is environmentally clean Space Frontier Foundation, international organization composed of space activists, scientists and engineers, media and political professionals.10-10-07 ("Meeting Humanity’s Energy, National Security, Environmental
and Economic Development Needs" http://www.space-frontier.org/Presentations/ SFFViewsSBSPReport10Oct07.pdf)[JWu]

There are 6 billion human beings inhabiting this world. Six billion humans who place demands on this Earth. Humans who want the Western standard-of-living and who justifiably want all the conveniences of modern life. A fundamental challenge in this century is how to provide for the world's growing energy needs. While meeting this challenge, it is vital that we also protect the Earth's fragile biosphere. Space-Based Solar Power, or SBSP, may be part of a combined solution for both energy and the 172

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
environment. SBSP has the potential to produce renewable energy in very large amounts, in an economic and environmentally-friendly manner.

173

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

A2 No Solar Panel Tech
Quantum dot panels are much more efficient and cheaper Rice University, May 4, 2007 (ScienceNews adaptation of Rice U materials, " Quantum Dot Recipe May Lead To Cheaper Solar Panels." http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/05/070502143631.htm)[JWu] Rice University scientists today revealed a breakthrough method for producing molecular specks of semiconductors called quantum dots, a discovery that could clear the way for better, cheaper solar energy panels The research, by scientists at Rice's Center for Biological and Environmental Nanotechnology (CBEN), appears this week in the journal Small. It describes a new chemical method for making four-legged cadmium selenide quantum dots, which previous research has shown to be particularly effective at converting sunlight into electrical energy. "Our work knocks down a big barrier in developing quantum-dot-based photovoltaics as an alternative to the conventional, more expensive silicon-based solar cells," said paper co-author and principal investigator Michael Wong, assistant professor of chemical and biomolecular engineering.

Quantum dots would be highly efficient PVs Kennedy Space Center, October 02 ("Spaceport Visioning Concept Study". Involving Rainer Meinke of Advanced Magnet Lab; Dr. John Olds of Georgia Institute of Technology, Department of Aerospace Engineering; Dr. James Powell of Star Tram, Inc; Edgar Zapata of NASA/KSC Systems Engineering Office http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/nexgen/Nexgen_Downloads/Spaceport_Visioning_Final_Report. pdf)[JWu] Very High Efficiency Photovoltaics In addition to the above activities, which may be characterized as development efforts, there are two longrange research investigations into higher efficiency solar cells being undertaken. The first involves utilization of specific ranges of sunlight focused through a prism onto cells tailored to the wavelengths and thusly is termed “Rainbow”. The other takes advantage of an ensemble of quantum dots in a size range that will capture most of the radiation from the terrestrial and space solar energy spectrum. Such a collection of different size quantum dots can be regarded as an array of semiconductors that are individually size tuned for optimal absorption at their bandgaps throughout the solar energy emission spectrum. If successful, theoretical efficiencies of 50 - 70% are possible.

174

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

A2 No Reception Tech
Space solar energy reception technologies already exist Kennedy Space Center, October 02 ("Spaceport Visioning Concept Study". Involving Rainer Meinke of Advanced Magnet Lab; Dr. John Olds of Georgia Institute of Technology, Department of Aerospace Engineering; Dr. James Powell of Star Tram, Inc; Edgar Zapata of NASA/KSC Systems Engineering Office http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/nexgen/Nexgen_Downloads/Spaceport_Visioning_Final_Report. pdf)[JWu] Solar Dynamic (SD) power systems concentrate sunlight into a receiver where the energy is transferred to a heat engine for conversion to electrical power. Brayton heat engines utilize a turbine, compressor, and rotary alternator to produce power using an inert gas working fluid. Lee Mason of GRC [Ref 7] has devised a system for use on a SSP shown in the schematic diagram of Figure 7. A system study was performed comparing the cost, mass, and technical risk of various Solar Power Generation (SPG) options for a solar dynamic system. For a 10MW SD system, the results show that at high power levels this technology is competitive with projected photovoltaic systems. Testing was performed by Wayne Wong of GRC [Refs. 8 and 9] to determine the characterization of high temperature secondary concentrator refractive materials in a typical SD environment. Existing analytical and design tools were utilized to design a prototypical refractive secondary concentrator with a concentration ratio of 10:1. This, combined with a primary concentrator of 1000:1 will result in a very high 10,000:1 ratio which permits a reasonable pointing accuracy requirement of 0.1°. The performance of the sapphire concentrator was evaluated via an on-sun calorimeter test. The tests were conducted in the NASA GRC Solarthermal/ Vacuum Facility

175

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

A2 No Beam-down Tech
Power beams down through lasers or microwaves James Bloom, The Guardian staff writer, 11-1-07, ("Power from the final frontier", http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2007/nov/01/guardianweeklytechnologysectio n.research)[JWu] The NSSO suggests that an orbiting spacecraft with solar panel arrays would be comparable to current ground-based installations spanning hectares and, eventually, a few square kilometres. Then that energy can be sent to the ground - using, the Pentagon suggests, a giant laser or microwave beam.

176

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

A2 No Launch Tech
All the technologies for shuttle launch will be available by 2nd generation RLV systems Kennedy Space Center, October 02 ("Spaceport Visioning Concept Study". Involving Rainer Meinke of Advanced Magnet Lab; Dr. John Olds of Georgia Institute of Technology, Department of Aerospace Engineering; Dr. James Powell of Star Tram, Inc; Edgar Zapata of NASA/KSC Systems Engineering Office http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/nexgen/Nexgen_Downloads/Spaceport_Visioning_Final_Report. pdf)[JWu] The MagLifter launch assist concept is based upon the advancement and combination of existing technologies to create a more efficient means to launch and propel vehicles and payloads to Earth orbit by replacing the flight vehicle first stage with a robust, ground based launch system. Implementation of the concept is expected to result in lower flight vehicle weight, greater payload capacity and lower per-poundtoorbit launch costs. Advancements in superconducting magnetic levitation and propulsion systems and development of rocket based combined cycle engines will be required before implementation of MagLifter is possible. Improvements in flight vehicle materials and systems reliability/serviceability will be necessary before MagLifter launches become routine. Proponents of the concept believe that required technological advancements are achievable within the time frame targeted by NASA for development of second-generation RLV systems.This study envisions the site characteristics, ground-based facilities, systems and infrastructure necessary to support the proposed launch technology. Second generation RLVs will be available by 2010 SpaceRef News, 10/27/ 2k (http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=2934)[JWu] To help make space travel dramatically cheaper and safer than it is today, NASA is asking industry, academia and others to propose technologies, experiments and other risk reduction activities to be conducted over the next five years for the 2nd Generation Reusable Launch Vehicle Program. This is the next major step in developing the "Highway to Space." "Technologies developed and tested under the 2nd Generation Reusable Launch Vehicle Engineering and Risk Reduction program will enable the start of full scale development of a reusable launch system in 2005 -- with flight operations anticipated in the 2010 timeframe," program manager Dan Dumbacher said.

177

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

A2 No Tech
Technology has developed greatly over last few decades Leonard David, special correspondent, Space News, 9-19-07 space.com/businesstechnology/070919_sps_airforce.html [JWu] Over the last few decades, the march of technology useful to SBSP has been significant, said Neville Marzwell, Manager of Advanced Concepts and Technology Innovation at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California. "We have made tremendous progress in technology from 1977 to 2007," Marzwell reported. He pointed to advances in micro and nano-electronics, lightweight inflatable composite structures, ultra-small power management devices, as well as laboratory demonstration of photovoltaic arrays that are close to 68 percent conversion efficiency. Space solar tech has greatly advanced—there are no technology barriers NewScientist 10/11/07 ("Pentagon backs plan to beam solar power down from space" http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn12774)[JWu] Space-based solar power was first proposed in 1968 by Peter Glaser, an engineer at the consulting firm Arthur D. Little. Early designs involved solar panel arrays of 50 square kilometres, required hundreds of astronauts in space to build and were estimated to cost as much as $1 trillion, says John Mankins, a former NASA research manager and active promoter of space solar power. Economically unfeasible After conducting preliminary research, the US abandoned the idea as economically unfeasible in the 1970s. Since that time, says Mankins, advances in photovoltaics, electronics and robotics will bring the size and cost down to a fraction of the original schemes, and eliminate the need for humans to assemble the equipment in space. Several technical challenges remain to be overcome, including the development of lower-cost space launches. A satellite capable of supplying the same amount of electric power as a modern fossil-fuel plant would have a mass of about 3000 tonnes – more than 10 times that of the International Space Station. Sending that material into orbit would require more than a hundred rocket launches. The US currently launches fewer than 15 rockets each year. In spite of these challenges, the NSSO and its supporters say that no fundamental scientific breakthroughs are necessary to proceed with the idea and that space-based solar power will be practical in the next few decades. "There are no technology hurdles that are show stoppers right now," said Damphousse. Solar space power is feasible now—the only stumbling block is perception of cost Popular Mechanics, January 08 (""Space-based solar power beams become next energy frontier." http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/air_space/4230315.html?series=35)[JWu]

The idea of using satellites to beam solar power down from space is nothing new—the Department of
Energy first studied it in the 1970s, and NASA took another look in the ’90s. The stumbling block has been less the engineering challenge than the cost. A Pentagon report released in October could mean the stars are finally aligning for space-based solar power, or SBSP. According to the report, SBSP is becoming more feasible, and eventually could help head off crises such as climate change and wars over diminishing energy supplies. “The challenge is one of perception,” says John Mankins, president of the Space Power Association and the leader of NASA’s mid-1990s SBSP study. “There are people in senior leadership positions who believe everything in space has to cost trillions.”

178

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

A2 Microwave Beams Bad
Microwave beams aren't harmful James Bloom, The Guardian staff writer, 11-1-07, ("Power from the final frontier", http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2007/nov/01/guardianweeklytechnologysection.research)[JWu ] The first units to go up will generate between 10MW and 25MW of continuous power, enough for a town of 25,000 people. If the energy is transmitted by microwave, a surface array one-tenth of a square kilometre in size will be needed to pick it up. Larger beams will require larger collector arrays. But wouldn't a microwave beam from space be equivalent to a deadly weapon? Unlike photovoltaic cells, these antenna arrays are practically transparent, so crops could be planted under them. "If a 2.45Ghz beam drifted off its target and ended up over a town, the effect would be negligible," says Lt Col Damphousse of the space office. "By the time the microwave reaches the surface it has spread out considerably. The power density is one-sixth that of the noonday sun." Beaming down microwaves isn't dangerous NASA, 3-21-01 (Science and Technology Directorate at NASA, "Beam it down, Scotty", http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast23mar_1.htm)[JWu] One possibility is to convert stored solar energy to microwave radiation and beam it down to a combination rectifier-antenna, called a rectenna, located in an isolated area. The rectenna would convert the microwave energy back to DC (direct current) power. According to Marzwell, the dangers of being close to the microwave beam would be similar to the dangers of cell phone transmissions, microwave ovens or high-power electrical transmission lines. "There is a risk element but you can reduce it," said Marzwell. "You can put these small receivers in the desert or in the mountains away from populated areas."

179

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

A2 Spending Link
Concentrating sunlight solves solar panel cost NASA, 3-21-01 (Science and Technology Directorate at NASA, "Beam it down, Scotty", http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast23mar_1.htm)[JWu] Even so, launching thousands of tons of solar arrays into space will be expensive. But there may be a way to reduce the needed area of the arrays -- by concentrating sunlight. "If you can concentrate the sun's rays through the use of large mirrors or lenses you get more for your money because most of the cost is in the PV arrays," said Marzwell. A drawback to concentrated sunlight is that it is hot. Focused radiation that's not converted to electricity turns into heat -- enough to damage the arrays if there's too much excess warmth. Marzwell and his colleagues at JPL are studying ways to capture waste heat and convert it to electricity by means of thermal voltaic processes. Special coatings on the mirrors and lenses can also reject portions of the sun's spectrum that PV arrays don't use, further reducing excess heat.

Trillion dollar costs were from 60s research—much progress has happened NewScientist 10/11/07 ("Pentagon backs plan to beam solar power down from space" http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn12774)[JWu] Space-based solar power was first proposed in 1968 by Peter Glaser, an engineer at the consulting firm Arthur D. Little. Early designs involved solar panel arrays of 50 square kilometres, required hundreds of astronauts in space to build and were estimated to cost as much as $1 trillion, says John Mankins, a former NASA research manager and active promoter of space solar power. Economically unfeasible After conducting preliminary research, the US abandoned the idea as economically unfeasible in the 1970s. Since that time, says Mankins, advances in photovoltaics, electronics and robotics will bring the size and cost down to a fraction of the original schemes, and eliminate the need for humans to assemble the equipment in space. Several technical challenges remain to be overcome, including the development of lower-cost space launches. A satellite capable of supplying the same amount of electric power as a modern fossil-fuel plant would have a mass of about 3000 tonnes – more than 10 times that of the International Space Station. Sending that material into orbit would require more than a hundred rocket launches. The US currently launches fewer than 15 rockets each year. In spite of these challenges, the NSSO and its supporters say that no fundamental scientific breakthroughs are necessary to proceed with the idea and that space-based solar power will be practical in the next few decades. "There are no technology hurdles that are show stoppers right now," said Damphousse.

180

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

A2 Ground Solar Conditions
There are no clouds in space.  Popular Science 6-13-08 ("10 audacious ideas to save the planet", http://www.popsci.com/environment/article/2008-06/10-audacious-ideas-save-planet)[JWu] Putting solar panels in space has one obvious advantage: It’s never cloudy 22,000 miles up. On average, there’s 8 to 10 times as much sunlight available in space as there is on Earth, where atmosphere and weather get in the way. Now, with satellite launch costs dropping (about five thousand dollars per pound today, versus $12,000 per pound a decade ago) and energy bills rising (already double what they were in 2005), researchers are finally warming to the idea.

Space solar power solves night and cloudy conditions NewScientist 10/11/07 ("Pentagon backs plan to beam solar power down from space" http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn12774)[JWu] Space-based solar power would use kilometre-sized solar panel arrays to gather sunlight in orbit. It would then beam power down to Earth in the form of microwaves or a laser, which would be collected in antennas on the ground and then converted to electricity. Unlike solar panels based on the ground, solar power satellites placed in geostationary orbit above the Earth could operate at night and during cloudy conditions.

Space solar power provides billions of times ground solar energy National Space Society, independent, educational organization; preeminent citizen's voice on space 10/07, (""An investment for today – an energy solution for tomorrow" http://www.nss.org/legislative/positions/NSS-SSP-PositionPaper.pdf)[JWu] The United States and the rest of the world need to find alternative sources of energy besides fossil fuels. The National Space Society believes that one of the most important long-term solutions for meeting those energy needs is Space Solar Power (SSP), which gathers energy from sunlight in space and sends it to Earth. We believe that SSP can solve our energy and greenhouse gas emissions problems. Not just help, not just take a step in the right direction; solve. SSP can provide large quantities of energy to each and every person on Earth with very little environmental impact. The NSS recommends that SSP be considered along with ground-based solar collectors and wind turbines as a safe, renewable, and clean energy option. Solar energy is routinely used on spacecraft today, and the solar energy available in space is literally billions of times greater than we use today. The lifetime of the sun is an estimated 4 to 5 billion years, making SSP a truly long-term energy solution. Space solar power can have an extremely small environmental footprint, perhaps competitive with ground-solar and wind, because with sufficient investments in space infrastructure, the SSP can be built from materials from space with zero terrestrial environmental impact. Only energy receivers need be built on Earth. As Earth receives only one part in 2.3 billion of the sun's output, SSP is by far the largest potential energy source available, dwarfing all others combined. Development cost and time, of course, are considerable. This makes SSP a long-term solution rather than a short-term stop-gap, although there are some intriguing near-term possibilities. In any case, SSP can potentially supply all the electrical needs of our planet.

181

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

A2 DoD CP
DoD is cashstrapped; can't pay for the plan Leonard David, special correspondent, Space News, 9-19-07 (http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/070919_sps_airforce.html)[JWu] Rouge said that moving out on the proposed SBSP effort would be the largest space venture yet, making the Apollo Moon landing project "look like just a small little program." As a caveat, however, he noted that the U.S. Department of Defense is cash-strapped and is not the financial backer for such an endeavor.

182

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

A2 International CP
PERM SOLVENCY: ___Country_X_ __ will cooperate with the US in space—GES proves Bruce Cordell, PhD planetary and space physics, Weizmann postdoctoral fellow at Caltech, exphysics professor at the California State University, space scientist, worked with NASA. May 11 08 ("International space" http://21stcenturywaves.com/blog/category/perspectives/)[JWu] Several countries recently signed the “Global Exploration Strategy” (GES), including Australia, Canada, China, ESA, France, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Russia, Ukraine, the U.K., and the U.S.. This strategy focuses on why we are returning to the Moon and what we envision doing there, with special emphasis on a comprehensive set of reasons for robotic and human exploration of the Moon. The GES is clearly only the beginning of a new style of international cooperation in space. Indeed, in his recent column in Aerospace America, Editor-atLarge Jerry Grey concludes that, “…despite the current ISS (International Space Station) concerns, there is no doubt that the internationalization of space is enjoying a new period of ascendancy.”(February, 2008).

183

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

A2 States CP
NASA key to explore space; only federal government can mandate NASA Frank Morring, Sr Space Tech. Editor, Aerospace Daily and Defense Report, 10-11-07 ("NSSO backs space solar power" aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story.jsp?id=news/solar101107.xml &headline=NSSO%20Backs%20Space%20Solar%20Power%20&channel=space)[JWu] The Internet-based group of experts who prepared the report for the NSSO recommended that the U.S. government organize itself to tackle the problem of developing SSP; use its resources to "retire a major portion of the technical risk for business development; establish tax and other policies to encourage private development of SSP, and "become an early demonstrator/adopter/customer" of SSP to spur its development. That, in turn, could spur development of space launch and other industries. Damphousse said a functioning reusable launch vehicle - preferably single-stage-to-orbit - probably would be required to develop a full-scale SSP infrastructure in geostationary orbit. That, in turn, could enable utilization of the moon and exploration of Mars under NASA's vision for space exploration. Federal action extension to space solar power is key Space Frontier Foundation, international organization composed of space activists, scientists and engineers, media and political professionals.10-10-07 ("Meeting Humanity’s Energy, National Security, Environmental
and Economic Development Needs" http://www.space-frontier.org/Presentations/ SFFViewsSBSPReport10Oct07.pdf)[JWu]

Extend Federal Incentives for Other Carbon-Neutral Energy Technologies to SBSP: The U.S. Government is providing major incentives to many other energy technologies, in support of energy independence and clean renewable energy objectives. The Space Frontier Foundation believes it is completely reasonable to ask for consistency in policy, and quite reasonable since the potential pay-off of SBSP is so large. The SBSP Study Group recommends that consistent with the U.S. Government incentives provided to other carbon-neutral energy technologies, it is critical for the U.S. Government to provide similar incentives to encourage private U.S. industry to co-invest in the development of SBSP systems. Specifically, the following incentives should be provided to U.S. industry as soon as possible to encourage private investment in the development and construction of SBSP systems: • Carbon/Pollution Credits and Offsets: The Space Frontier Foundation believes that it should be rather straight-forward for the U.S. Congress to clarify, to the extent necessary, that existing law and policy on carbon/pollution credits and offsets also apply to SBSP. o Legislation at both the federal and state level that specifies — and clarifies existing law as specifying — that SBSP is eligible for all pollution credits, carbon credits, and carbon off-sets that are available to other clean and renewable energy sources such as wind, hydro, ground solar, and nuclear • Extend Loan Guarantees to SBSP Developers & Operators: The nuclear power industry has been given loan guarantees by the U.S. federal government. The Space Frontier Foundation urges the Administration and the U.S. Congress to extend the same incentives to the SBSP industry. o A federal loan guarantee program of up to 80% should be created for U.S. companies engaged in the business of developing, owning and operating SBSP systems. This program should either be an extension of, or modeled after, the existing loan guarantee program provided to the nuclear power industry.

184

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Non-Uniques
Your arguments are non unique—small scale SBSP has been tested in the past James Bloom, The Guardian staff writer, 11-1-07, ("Power from the final frontier", http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2007/nov/01/guardianweeklytechnologysection.research )[JWu] Over the past 40 years, microwave and laser power transmission systems have been tested successfully in Europe, the US and Japan. Unmanned aircraft and lunar rovers receiving power from a remote beam are proven applications. The Japanese have tested reactions in the ionosphere to microwaves at the frequencies used for space solar power, and the results were positive. The only remaining issue is to test a large-scale system.

185

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Spending Non-Uniques
Space solar power is a drop in the bucket compared to nuclear fusion spending Tyler Hamilton, Toronto Star business columnist, author, 10-15-07 ("Space-based solar power back in play" http://www.thestar.com/columnists/article/266738)[JWu] Again, the discussion has come up before. NASA and the U.S. Department of Defence have together spent about $80 million (U.S.) over the last three decades studying the idea. Seems like decent money, until you see that the U.S. government has spent about $21 billion over 50 years on that elusive energy utopia called nuclear fusion. Perhaps it is time to give space-based solar power another look, given that such a system might already exist today had it received the money dumped into fusion. Oil has surged past $80 a barrel and there's a desperate need for low- or zero-carbon energy sources. Lob a few bombs at Iran and the situation gets worse, not better.

SBSP costs a fraction of the war in Iraq, and has market returns ABC News, 10-17-07 ("US considers solar energy from space," http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/10/17/2062368.htm)[JWu] Yet Dr Lineweaver says the Pentagon's drive to secure energy in an oil-constrained future could lead to the rapid development of a clean energy source. "I think that anything that would lessen the tension between energy-starved and energy-overflowing counties is very important," he said. "You may know that the war in Iraq is $7 billion a month, or something, so you take just a small fraction of that and put it into solar energy - that would be incredible. "Not only because it would boost solar panel production on earth in normal things, and people would have solar panels on their roofs, [but] because the price would probably come down by factors of two, three, four, five, depending, because of economy of scale. "And you'd have this interesting idea of putting photo panels in geostationary orbit."

SBSP will save money and create new markets Popular Mechanics, January 08 (""Space-based solar power beams become next energy frontier." http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/air_space/4230315.html?series=35)[JWu] The new report imagines a market-based approach. Eventually, SBSP may become enormously profitable—and the Pentagon hopes it will lure the growing private space industry. The government would fund launches to place initial arrays in orbit by 2016, with private firms taking over operations from there. This plan could limit government costs to about $10 billion.

186

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

A2: SBSP Energy Too Expensive
Cost of electricity generated from SBSP would be close to energy costs in Iraq today Space Frontier Foundation, 10/10/07, “Space-Based Solar Power (SBSP): Meeting Humanity’s Energy, National Security, Environmental and Economic Development Needs,” http://209.85.215.104/search?q=cache:eUrUz9kZq0QJ:www.space-frontier.org/Presentations/SFFViews SBSPReport10Oct07.pdf+ anchor+tenant+customer&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us Perhaps the biggest news of the NSSO-led study is that the team uncovered something new that might forever change the economic equation for space-based solar power. The report estimates that the Department of Defense (DoD) is paying about $1 per kilowatt-hour for electricity in forward bases in Iraq, when all indirect costs are included. This is an order of magnitude higher in price than what Americans pay for electricity in their homes. These higher electricity prices are not caused by gouging, but by the realities of war and how electricity is generated for the warfighter. Currently, we pump oil out of the ground in the Middle East or the continental United States, and then transport the oil to the Gulf coast where it is refined into kerosene. We then pump the kerosene onto tankers, which must be guarded by the U.S. Navy, and transport it to the Gulf region. We then pump the kerosene off the tankers into individual trucks, which must be heavily guarded by American ground forces. Then, these convoys, which are primary targets for asymmetric attacks by improvised explosive devices, must run a dangerous gauntlet through a war zone. Finally, the kerosene is delivered to the forward bases, where it is converted into electricity.

187

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

A2: ASATs Create Space Debris
ASATs can be built that do not create space debris Taylor Dinerman, consultant for the U.S. Defense Department, 1/22/07, “Sticky Airbags and Grapples: Kinetic ASATs Without the Debris,” http://www.thespacereview.com/article/789/1 Fortunately, a few years ago a proposal was floated for as class of weapons that would destroy target spacecraft without directly creating any debris. This type of "co-orbital" ASAT would approach its target and envelop it with an airbag covered in a type of sticky substance. It would then fire a thruster so that the conjoined satellites would burn up in the atmosphere. If it worked as designed, no debris would be created. In practice it would be no easy task to design, test, and operate such a weapon, but it is not beyond the state of the art and would not create any debris. Figuring out what kind of sticky material is right for such a system would, by itself, be a fascinating project. The substance might have applications in other military and perhaps civil space systems. If the sticky airbag solution proves too difficult, the same goals might be reached using an ASAT equipped with grappling arms that would grasp the target before pushing down towards the atmosphere. The challenges of such a system are evident, not the least of which would be the need for some sort of decision-making software that would choose the best places to seize the enemy satellite during the final moments before contact.

188

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Int’l PERM SOLVENCY:
___Country_X_ __ will cooperate with the US in space—GES proves Bruce Cordell, PhD planetary and space physics, Weizmann postdoctoral fellow at Caltech, exphysics professor at the California State University, space scientist, worked with NASA. May 11 08 ("International space" http://21stcenturywaves.com/blog/category/perspectives/)[JWu] Several countries recently signed the “Global Exploration Strategy” (GES), including Australia, Canada, China, ESA, France, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Russia, Ukraine, the U.K., and the U.S.. This strategy focuses on why we are returning to the Moon and what we envision doing there, with special emphasis on a comprehensive set of reasons for robotic and human exploration of the Moon. The GES is clearly only the beginning of a new style of international cooperation in space. Indeed, in his recent column in Aerospace America, Editor-atLarge Jerry Grey concludes that, “…despite the current ISS (International Space Station) concerns, there is no doubt that the internationalization of space is enjoying a new period of ascendancy.”(February, 2008).

189

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

A2 Micro-meteorides—
They don't cause functional failure (no impact), and centers of shattering bring Earth radiation into the Sunfacing solar panels, thus INCREASING output (turn) Aceti et al, (R. Aceti & G. Drolshagen, European Space Research & Technology Centre, Norway; J.A.M. McDonnell, Unispace Kent, UK; T.Stevenson, Mare Crisium, UK) November 94 ("0Micrometeoroids and Space Debris - The Eureca Post-Flight Analysis" ESA (European Space Agency) Bulletin Nr. 80, http://www.esa.int/esapub/bulletin/bullet80/ace80.htm)[JWu] Impact damage to Eureca hardware caused no system or subsystem failures. This is partly because the multi-layer (MLI) structure retains particles up to a certain size very efficiently. The critical size for complete penetration of the 20 layers of insulation was only exceeded in two places, luckily causing no further damage at either site. Any loss in thermal-control function due to the particle impacts was negligible. As far as the solar arrays are concerned, due to the massive redundancy and cross-strapping, even the most extensive form of damage - for example if a cell was completely cracked perpendicular to the current flow - would have caused only a small power loss. There is no evidence to suggest that extreme damage of this sort occurred anywhere on the Eureca arrays. Rather, it was confined to localised shattering of cells and cell cover glasses, thereby removing a tiny fraction of the sunlight-collecting area (curiously, it is possible to increase the output of solar cells slightly by introducing centres of scattering which bring in Earth albedo radiation not normally seen by Sun-pointing arrays). A significant number of impacts penetrated cells, and in some cases the structure. Despite the large number of impact sites recorded, their overall effect at system level was trivial. There is, however, evidence from elsewhere to suggest that impacts may cause electromagnetic and shock effects such as those seen on ESA's Giotto spacecraft during its Comet Halley encounter and on the Olympus geostationary telecommuni-cations satellite. No link has yet been established between the failures seen on Eureca and the disruptive effect of any impact. Nevertheless, work in this field continues, and definitive results may depend upon further measurements of in-orbit phenomena. Conclusion The main findings of the detailed visual survey of Eureca's external surfaces can be sum-marised as follows: There was no functional failure on Eureca that could be related to an impact. On the front sides of the solar arrays, more than 1000 impact features can be seen with the naked eye. 71 impact punctures in the outer layer of the thermal blankets were detected on the main spacecraft body (non-penetrating impacts Three impacts were found on the ESA logo plate and 11 more on the scuff plates. The impact features identified range in size from 100 microns to several millimetres. The largest crater diameter on the solar arrays is 6.4 mm. The largest feature on the main body is a 2 mm hole in the ESA/ERNO logo plate. A surprisingly high proportion of the impacts on the solar-cell cover glasses - about 30% - show signs of directionality by having a non-spherical crater shape.

190

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Politics Links- Congress Supports

Space based solar power recieving strong support from congress National Space Society, 2-28-08, “Space Exploration Alliance Members Press Congress
For Full Authorized Levels of NASA Funding”, http://209.85.215.104/search?q=cache:mNyybCscXG8J:www.nss.org/news/releases/pr20080228.html +space+exploration+congress+support&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us [E.Berggren] Other issues discussed during the meetings included continued support for NASA's robotic science missions and the integral role that space exploration plays in solving Earth's pressing energy and environmental needs. Several Congressional offices explicitly requested more details about the National Security Space Office's recent study of space-based solar power solutions, which noted that “[a] single kilometer-wide band of geosynchronous earth orbit experiences enough solar flux in one year to nearly equal the amount of energy contained within all known recoverable conventional oil reserves on Earth today.”

191

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Congress Supports Space Exploration
Congress overwhelming supports space exploration. Jeff Foust, Staff writer and reporter for the
space review, 6-30-08, http://209.85.215.104/search?q=cache:TA1NTReYIe4J:www.thespacereview.com/article/1160/1+spac e+exploration+congress+popular&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=8&gl=us [E.Berggren] You don’t notice these things until they’re taken away, he said, and cited the intense media coverage of the Columbia accident as an example: “That is not a sign of a country that is apathetic about the space program.” Likewise, the strong support given to the Vision for Space Exploration by Congress in 2005, when it overwhelmingly passed a NASA authorization bill that endorsed the exploration effort, is another sign of the deep support for space by the American public. “The evidence that our space legacy is part of our culture is that no one any longer actually pays attention to it, but the moment you take it away, [people ask], ‘What have you done with it?’”

Bipartisan support for NASA space exploration NYT,4-30-08,
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/15/us/15moon.html?_r=1&sq=space%20exploration&st=cse&adxn nl=1&oref=slogin&scp=3&adxnnlx=1216599009-XuQs+mFoNcTZ/p0hHAtXhQPs [E.Berggren] This push for additional NASA funding mirrors a similar effort in the Senate, lead by Senator Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) and Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX). The bi-partisan nature of both efforts illustrates how space exploration rises above the politically-charged bitterness that often divides members of Congress. The Committee for the Advocacy of Space Exploation strongly supports the effort to increase NASA funding. It is critical that Project Constellation receive necessary funding to accelerate the development of the Orion spacecraft and Ares rockets, so as to minimize the gap between the final flight of the Shuttle and the first flight of Orion. This will not only reduce American dependance upon Russia for access to Earth orbit, but will greatly advance the twin goals of returning astronauts to the Moon and sending an expedition to Mars.

Space exploration bipartisan States News Service, 6-20-08, “HOUSE BILL BOOSTS NASA AERONAUTICS AND SPACE
PROGRAMS”, L/N [E.Berggren] The funding plan is $2.9 billion more than the administration's budget proposal. "This is an important step forward for programs in two vital areas that affect our country," said Marion Blakey, AIA president and CEO. "The bill demonstrates continued bi-partisan support of the Next Generation Air Transportation System and our space exploration policy, both of which depend on a robust NASA budget." The House plan includes an additional $1 billion to accelerate development of the Orion spacecraft and Ares 1 launch vehicle. "The additional funding is a substantial step forward to reduce the impending five-year gap in our ability to travel to space when the space shuttle retires in 2010," Blakey said. "The House should be recognized for its leadership in taking action to reduce this gap." NASA's NextGen-related research will help increase the safety, security and capacity of air transportation operations while protecting the environment. NextGen improvements will be implemented over the next 10 years. 192

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space Weapons unpopular
Space weapons programs remain unpopular in congress
Theresa Hitchens, Vice President, Center for Defense Information, 9-14-05, http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2004_2009/documents/dv/hitchens-05_12_01_/hitchens05_12_01_en.pdf [E.Berggren] What I can also say is that even if the new presidential policy blesses the Pentagon’s space warfare strategy, it remains unclear whether Congress will be willing to fund it much beyond basic technology research. Space is an exceedingly expensive place. To fully implement the capabilities necessary to fight “in, from and through” space, hundreds of billions would have to be dedicated to developing new weapons, launching thousands of new on-orbit assts, and maintaining those systems once they are deployed. With launch costs remaining at $22,000 per kilogram, and current satellites in LEO weighing up to 4,000 kilograms, the price tag rapidly becomes exorbitant – hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars. Further, Congress is already expressing concerns about the costs of today’s Air Force space programs that have nothing to do with controversial ASAT or space-strike systems. Programs such as the Transformational Satellite System designed to replace current military communications satellites, and the Space Radar to replace aging U.S. early warning satellites, are years behind schedule and tens of millions dollars over budget. Congressional reaction to Air Force budget requests for new space weapons programs based on unproven and yet undeveloped technologies may well not be all that favorable. In addition, space weapons remain controversial politically and the concept unpopular with broad U.S. public opinion – and a unilateral move by the United States to weaponize space is likely to also face harsh international political resistance and possible backlash as other nations seek to compete with their own space weapons programs. Indeed, recognizing these facts, the House Armed Services subcommittee on strategic forces, which is responsible for the military space budget, plans to hold hearings sometime in June on the question of “space control” and space weaponization.

193

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

NASA Funding Bipartisan
Strong bipartisan support in the house and the senate for increased NASA funding STEWART M. POWELL, staff writer for the Houtson Chronical Washington Bureau, 6-11-08,
http://209.85.215.104/search?q=cache:naxCDdljWOUJ:www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/space/583004 5.html+nasa+funding+popular+congress&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=9&gl=us [E.Berggren] WASHINGTON — The White House on Tuesday forcefully rejected a popular, bipartisan effort in Congress to hand NASA $2.9 billion for three additional shuttle flights to the international space station before retirement of the shuttle fleet in 2010. Some, like Rep. John Culberson, RHouston, said they would push for additional NASA funding, with or without White House approval. There is strong bipartisan support for increased NASA funding in the Senate, which will act after the House gives its funding plan final approval.

NASA funding is bipartisan SapceRef.com, report on congressional budget hearing, 7-22-05, “Bipartisan Compromise Yields
Positive Results for NASA”, http://209.85.215.104/search?q=cache:bS_6pchkPs8J:www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html%3Fpid% 3D17475+space+exploration+bipartisan&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=4&gl=us [E.Berggren] Washington, DC) Intense, constructive negotiations produced NASA Authorization legislation that today received widespread bipartisan support in the U.S. House of Representatives. H.R. 3070, the NASA Authorization Act of 2005, passed by a vote of 383-15. "We've come a long way with regard to providing clear policy and funding direction in this bill," stated House Science Committee Ranking Member Rep. Bart Gordon (D-TN). "The large margin of passage today reflects the House's wisdom in funding the Administration's exploration initiative in a way that doesn't undercut NASA's other core areas. Make no mistake, overwhelming passage should not be misunderstood as a blanket endorsement of the Moon-Mars initiative. Rather it is strong policy guidance from the House that aeronautics, education and scientific research are key NASA areas that are at least as important as human exploration."

Bipartisan support for NASA funding Richard M. Jones, writer for theAmerican

Institute of Physics, 6-12-08, http://209.85.215.104/search?q=cache:4vAMPCXSW1gJ:www.aip.org/fyi/2008/065.html+space+expl oration+bipartisan&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=15&gl=us [E.Berggren] A strongly bipartisan bill to reauthorize NASA and its programs for FY 2009 is now being considered by the full House. While H.R. 6063, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Authorization Act of 2008, is expected to pass the House, the Office of Management and Budget has issued a statement declaring "the Administration strongly opposes" the bill.

194

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

NASA Funding Partisan
NASA funding is partisan Alex Howerton, writer

and reporter for The Space Review, 2-25-08, http://209.85.215.104/search?q=cache:9G5uHK15XkJ:www.thespacereview.com/article/1067/1+nasa+funding+partisan&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=25&gl=u s [E.Berggren] Space spending is a highly visible and easy target, especially because the public at large does not see the immediate relevance of space development, or how it can augment other desirable activities, such as environmental monitoring and job creation. Moreover, NASA and the space advocacy community on the whole do a rather lackluster job of communicating these benefits to a wider audience. The result is that space spending is usually in the front of the line for the budget guillotine. A Harris Poll conducted in April 2007 listed respondents’ answer to this question: “If spending had to be cut on federal programs, which two federal program(s) do you think the cuts should come from?” The space program received the sharpest blow of the hypothetical budget ax, at 51%, followed distantly by welfare and defense at 28%. This is the state of public perception, even though NASA’s fiscal year 2007 federal budget allocation was less than 1%, while defense came in at 19%, and unemployment and welfare registered 13 %. It is nearly impossible to establish stable NASA funding in this political and cultural climate.

195

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

NASA Funding unpopular
Increases in NASA funding unpopular
Space Politics Magazine, 4-17-07, “Bipartisan nonsupport and big targets”, http://209.85.215.104/search?q=cache:I_T_AF2bWe8J:www.spacepolitics.com/2007/04/17/bipartisannonsupport-and-big-targets/+nasa+funding+bipartisan&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=9&gl=us [E.Berggren] Was Calvert making an attack against the Democratic leadership in the House? No. “There is a dangerous trend of bipartisan nonsupport in funding NASA in Congress,” he said. He mentioned two amendments to the original FY07 appropriations bill on the House floor last summer that would have either prevented NASA from spending any money on Mars exploration efforts, and another that would have transferred NASA funds to other programs. While both amendments were defeated (a moot point, as it turned out, since that appropriations bill was never enacted and replaced with a continuing resolution), “The reality is that members of both parties supported these amendments, and by a large margin.” That doesn’t bode well for NASA during the FY2008 budget process. “You can bet that NASA will be the target again this year unless we prepare to defend NASA funding against grabs from other areas.”

196

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Plan Costs PC
Plan drains political capital Leonard David, special correspondent, Space News, 9-19-07 (http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/070919_sps_airforce.html)[JWu] Peter Teets, Distinguished Chair of the Eisenhower Center for Space and Defense Studies, said that SBSP must be economically viable with those economics probably not there today. "But if we can find a way with continued technology development ... and smart moves in terms of development cycles to bring clean energy from space to the Earth, it's a home run kind of situation," he told attendees of the meeting. "It's a noble effort," Teets told Space News. There remain uncertainties in SBSP, including closure on a business case for the idea, he added. "I think the Air Force has a legitimate stake in starting it. But the scale of this project is going to be enormous. This could create a new agency ... who knows? It's going to take the President and a lot of political will to go forward with this," Teets said.

197

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Negative Stuff- 1NC FRONTLINE
THE FALL OF U.S. HEGEMONY IS INEVITABLE—EVERY ATTEMPT TO SUSTAIN IT WILL CAUSE TERRORIST BACKLASH AND RESISTANCE Parag Khanna expert on geopolitics and global governance, Director of the Global Governance
Initiative and Senior Research Fellow in the American Strategy Program at the New America Foundation 08 ("Waving Goodbye to Hegemony".newamerica.net/publications/articles/2008/waving_goodbye_hegemony_6604, January 27)[JWu] It is 2016, and the Hillary Clinton or John McCain or Barack Obama administration is nearing the end of its second term. America has pulled out of Iraq but has about 20,000 troops in the independent state of Kurdistan, as well as warships anchored at Bahrain and an Air Force presence in Qatar. Afghanistan is stable; Iran is nuclear. China has absorbed Taiwan and is steadily increasing its naval presence around the Pacific Rim and, from the Pakistani port of Gwadar, on the Arabian Sea. The European Union has expanded to well over 30 members and has secure oil and gas flows from North Africa, Russia and the Caspian Sea, as well as substantial nuclear energy. America's standing in the world remains in steady decline. Why? Weren't we supposed to reconnect with the United Nations and reaffirm to the world that America can, and should, lead it to collective security and prosperity? Indeed, improvements to America's image may or may not occur, but either way, they mean little. Condoleezza Rice has said America has no "permanent enemies," but it has no permanent friends either. Many saw the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq as the symbols of a global American imperialism; in fact, they were signs of imperial overstretch. Every expenditure has weakened America's armed forces, and each assertion of power has awakened resistance in the form of terrorist networks, insurgent groups and "asymmetric" weapons like suicide bombers. America's unipolar moment has inspired diplomatic and financial countermovements to block American bullying and construct an alternate world order. That new global order has arrived, and there is precious little Clinton or McCain or Obama could do to resist its growth. TERRORISM DESTROYS THE GOVERNMENT, THE ECONOMY, AND OUTWEIGHS ALL OTHER IMPACTS Robert, Chesney, Law Clerk to the Hon. Lewis A. Kaplan (S.D.N.Y.); J.D., Harvard Law School November 97, November,
1997, 20 Loy. L.A. Int'l & Comp. L.J. 29

The horrible truth is that the threat of nuclear terrorism is real, in light of the potential existence of a  black market in fissile material. Nuclear terrorists might issue demands, but then again, they might not.  Their target could be anything: a U.S. military base in a foreign land, a crowded U.S. city, or an empty  stretch of desert highway. In one fell swoop, nuclear terrorists could      decapitate the U.S. government       or destroy its financial system. The human suffering resulting from a detonation would be      beyond   calculation, and in the aftermath, the remains of the nation would demand both revenge and protection.  Constitutional liberties and values might never recover.

198

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space exploration will cause environmental exploitation, nuclear wars, and epidemics Bruce Gagnon. Coordinator of the Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space, 1999 (Bruce K., "Space Exploration and Exploitation," http:/lwww.space4peace.orglarticleslscandm.htm)

199

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
Major wars rollback our Maslow Window and destroy SBSP investment, turning competitiveness Bruce Cordell, PhD planetary and space physics, Weizmann postdoctoral fellow at Caltech, exphysics professor at the California State University, space scientist, worked with NASA. May 11 08 ("Global conflict" http://21stcenturywaves.com/blog/category/perspectives/)[JWu] (MEP is macroengineering project) The last 200 years teach us that every 56 years or so, when an unparalleled economic boom produces the exceptional affluence and eventually even the widespread ebullience that we call a Maslow Window, there is both good news and bad news. The good news is major human explorations like Apollo and spectacular macro-engineering projects like the Panama Canal. The bad news is the tragic death and destruction associated with a major war like W.W. I. In the last 200 years there are no exceptions: every Maslow Window ended shortly before a major war. Although the wars themselves may not have directly terminated Maslow Windows, the destructive psychological and economic effects of the wars were sufficient to reduce the unusually high ebullience and affluence characteristic of society during a typical Maslow Window. However, one bad omen is that the most recent Maslow Window (Apollo) was clearly terminated directly by the intensification of the Vietnam War in 1968. During this time there was campus unrest, budget and political pressure, and considerable anti-war feeling across the U.S.. President Nixon responded by canceling the last three Apollo missions (18, 19, and 20) and eventually by terminating the entire manned space program except for the Shuttle. It is sobering to consider what might have happened if Vietnam had exploded just a few years earlier. All the Moon landings — not just the last 3 — might have been lost. Indeed, the most troubling and uncertain wildcard for the 2020s is the timing of future major military conflicts and their negative effects for society, including the potential loss of MEPs and the long-term postponement of human expansion into the cosmos. Many barriers to development CNN 7/1/08 ("How to harvest solar power? Beam it down from space!" http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science/05/30/space.solar/index.html)[JWu] But a number of obstacles still remain before solar satellites actually get off the ground, said Jeff Keuter, president of the George C. Marshall Institute, a Washington-based research organization. "Like any activity in space, there are enormous engineering challenges," he said. One major barrier is a lack of cheap and reliable access to space, a necessity for launching hundreds of components to build what will be miles-long platforms. Developing robotic technology to piece the structures together high above Earth will also be a challenge. Then there is the issue of finding someone to foot what will be at least a billion-dollar bill.

200

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
It takes 40 years to develop just 10% of US energy Popular Mechanics, January 08 ("Space-based solar power beams become next energy frontier." popularmechanics.com/science/air_space/4230315.html?series=35)[JWu] As envisioned, massive orbiting solar arrays, situated to remain in sunlight nearly continuously, will beam multiple megawatts of energy to Earth via microwave beams. The energy will be transmitted to mesh receivers placed over open farmland and in strategic remote locations, then fed into the nation’s electrical grid. The goal: To provide 10 percent of the United States’ base-load power supply by 2050. Ultimately, the report estimates, a single kilometer-wide array could collect enough power in one year to rival the energy locked in the world’s oil reserves. While most of the technology required for SBSP already exists, questions such as potential environmental impacts will take years to work out. “For some time, solar panels on Earth are going to be much cheaper,” says Robert McConnell, a senior project leader at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Colorado. “This is a very long-range activity.”

Solar cells are too inefficient to be deployed James E. Dudenhoefer and Patrick J. George, Glenn Research Center for NASA, July 2k, "Space solar power satellite technology development at the Glenn research center: an overview", http://gltrs.grc.nasa.gov/reports/2000/TM-2000-210210.pdf [JWu] Solar cells of the current generation are heavy, expensive and hard to deploy considering the enormous numbers needed for SSP. Thin film cells represent one viable option for the future [Fig5]. They hold promise for low mass, low cost, and high production capability by depositing special materials in very thin (microns) layers on rolled substrates similar to newspaper printing. In addition, they are flexible, which lends themselves for deposition on lightweight deployable / inflatable structures needed for packaging of extremely large arrays in launch vehicles. Unfortunately, the materials considered for these structures (i.e. kapton), do not have the high temperature properties needed to allow cell growth deposition.

Launch problems prevent space satellites Dewey Parker, Major, USAF, 4/99, “ACCESS TO SPACE: ROUTINE, RESPONSIVE AND FLEXIBLE IMPLICATIONS FOR AN EXPEDITIONARY AIR FORCE,” http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/acsc/99-154.pdf (Malek) If a nation wishes to conduct surprise surveillance or reconnaissance on an adversary, that nation’s space assets must either be able to maneuver or be launched rapidly in response to a tasking. Maneuvering costs fuel, which is often in short supply on non-refueling, long-mission spacecraft placed in orbit by nonreusable launch vehicles. It is simply not economical from a launch cost perspective to increase the fraction of satellite weight represented by fuel. Unfortunately, rapidity and responsiveness are not characteristics of current US space launch systems.

201

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
Micro-meteoroids in space will kill satellites Amateur Radio News, Nov 06 http://www.arrl.org/files/qst-binaries/nt0z.pdf [JWu] If you think there’s no danger—you’re wrong. Satellites have recently been killed by micrometeoroids
encountered during meteor showers far less active than those predicted for the 1997-2003 Leonids. And Mir, the Hubble Space Telescope and US space shuttles have been visibly damaged by debris and micrometeoroid collisions.

What might happen to the manmade satellites now in orbit during a meteor storm 10,000 times more intense than normal—with particle impact speeds exceeding 150,000 miles an hour?
What indeed! Those conditions were measured during the tremendous 1966 Leonids storm, and scientists are worried that we’ll see a repeat performance (or one or more showers of lesser, yet potentially destructive intensity) during November Leonids showers over the next several years.

Physical collisions alone are cause for concern, but a second threat may be even more ominous. Because of the tremendous impact velocities involved (closing with the Earth at 71 km per second, the Leonids are the fastest-colliding cometary fragments known), the highly charged plasma clouds generated by the impacts of even extremely small Leonids particles may be powerful enough to kill satellites that
would have been minimally affected by the physical collisions.

High-voltaic arcs will rip apart the platform Kennedy Space Center, October 02 ("Spaceport Visioning Concept Study". Involving Rainer Meinke of Advanced Magnet Lab; Dr. John Olds of Georgia Institute of Technology, Department of Aerospace Engineering; Dr. James Powell of Star Tram, Inc; Edgar Zapata of NASA/KSC Systems Engineering Office http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/nexgen/Nexgen_Downloads/Spaceport_Visioning_Final_Report. pdf)[JWu] The current state-of-the-art voltage level for photovoltaic arrays is 160v used on the International Space Station. It is estimated that the arrays for a SSP platform would have to operate at 1000v or higher. At these higher levels it is known that self-destructive arcing occurs [Fig 6]. Design and manufacturing techniques to prevent such damage are in the process of development by Dale Ferguson of GRC [Refs 5 and 6]. In order to utilize existing facilities and equipment, initial development is being performed at the 300-volt level.

202

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
Satellite arcing destroys satellites and solar cells T. Kitamura et al.; Sanmaru, Y.; Kawasaki, T.; Hosoda, S.; Toyoda, K.; Mengu Cho Discharges and Electrical Insulation in Vacuum, 2006. ISDEIV apos;06. International Symposium on Volume 2, Issue , 25-29 Sept. 2006 Page(s):nil4 - nil4 (http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/Xplore/login.jsp?url=/iel5/4193815/4194906/04194989.pdf?temp=x)[JWu] Recently, an arcing on satellite solar array due to interaction between space plasma and the array threatening safety of spacecraft is a big issue. The arcing causes degradation of solar array at malfunction of instruments on satellites. The discharge is caused by differential potential between satellite body and insulator surfaces like coverglass of solar array, which are charged by ambient plasma. This single shot discharge is called "primary arc". The primary arc can evolve to so-called "sustained arc" that permanently short-circuits adjacent solar cells or a solar cell and conductive substrate. In order to prevent arcs on the surface of solar array, it is necessary to carry out arc tests simulating discharge phenomenon on solar array. In this paper, we investigated the effect of plasma environments on sustained arcs. GaAs solar cells were used for the test. Laboratory tests were carried out with an external circuit simulating a spacecraft power system. Solar array coupon panels simulating the hot and return ends of a string circuit were tested under various combinations of string voltage and string current. We revealed that the threshold conditions for sustained arc formation were different in test plasma environment even when the string voltage and the string current are same.

203

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

COLONIZATION BAD EXTS – Virus Turn
Space travel causes virus epidemics Robert Roy Britt, Senior science writer, managing editor of LiveScience, 1/21/2k http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/planetearth/flu_in_space_000121.html So say Sir Fred Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe of the University of Wales at Cardiff. And while there is much doubt by many other scientists that the flu comes from space, Hoyle and Wickramasinghe are generating a lot of interest with their idea. In a new paper, to be published in an upcoming issue of the Indian journal Current Science, the researchers present data that show how previous periods of high sunspot activity coincided with flu pandemics (large-scale epidemics). A roughly 11-year cycle of solar activity is increasing now and is expected to peak soon, other scientists agree. Hoyle and Wickramasinghe say we can expect another flu pandemic to accompany the solar peak "within weeks." By that claim, perhaps debate over their research will soon be settled. Injecting the flu into our atmosphere The researchers say that the virus, or a trigger that causes it, is deposited throughout space by dust in the debris stream of comets, which are thought by many researchers to harbor organic material. As Earth passes through the stream, dust (and perhaps the virus) enters our atmosphere, where it can lodge for two decades or more, until gravity pulls it down.

New virus spread risks extinction David Franz, Chief Biological Scientist, Midwest Research Institute, 2005 MICROBE As Nobel laureate Josh Lederberg stated, “Pandemics are not acts of God, but are built into the ecological relations between viruses, animal species and human species. There will be more surprises, because our fertile imagination does not begin to match all the tricks that nature can play. The survival of humanity is not preordained. The single biggest threat to [hu]man’s continued dominance is the virus.

204

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

205

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

HEG BAD EXTS
Heg is unsustainable and will cause nuclear conflict and terrorism Christopher Layne, Prof Intl Relations at Texas A&M, 2006 The Peace of Illusions, p. 191-2 Hegemony has proven to be an elusive goal for the great powers that have sought it. The European great powers that bid for hegemony did so because they were on a geopolitical treadmill. For them, it seemed as if security was attainable only by eliminating their great power rivals and achieving continental hegemony. And it is this fact that invested great power politics with its tragic quality, because the international system’s power-balancing dynamics doomed all such bids to failure. The United States, on the other hand, has never faced similar pressures to seek security through a hegemonic grand strategy, and, too often, instead of enhancing U.S. security as advertised, America’s hegemonic grand strategy has made the United States less secure. In the early twenty-first century, by threatening to embroil the United States in military showdowns with nuclear great powers and exposing the United States to terrorism, the pursuit of hegemony means that “over there” well may become over here. Objectively, the United States historically has enjoyed an extraordinarily high degree of immunity from external threat, a condition that has had nothing to do with whether it is hegemonic and everything to do with geography and its military capabilities. Consequently, the United States has, should it wish to use it, an exit ramp—offshore balancing —that would allow it to escape from the tragedy of great power politics that befalls those that seek hegemony. The failure of the United States to take this exit ramp constitutes the real tragedy of American diplomacy.

Hegemony causes terrorism
Christopher Layne, Prof Intl Relations at Texas A&M, 2006 The Peace of Illusions, p. 144 Strictly speaking, terror attacks such as those mounted by al Qaeda are not balancing, because, in realist international relations theory, balancing is a form of state behavior. However, in the case of Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda, terrorism often is an asymmetric strategy pursued by groups that are not states but would like to control one (in this case, Saudi Arabia). Balancing’s core concept is the idea of a counterweight, specifically the ability to generate sufficient capabilities to match – or offset – those of a would-be, or actual, hegemon. Although nonstate terrorist organization like al Qaeda lack the material capabilities to engage in this type of counterbalancing, their behavior reflects some key attributes of balancing. Beyond connoting the creation of a counterweight, balancing also signifies opposition, or resistance, to a hegemon. Although groups like al Qaeda cannot counterbalance American hegemony, they are engaged in a related form of behavior: undermining U.S. hegemony by raising its costs to the United States. Deplorable though they are, from this perspective al Qaeda’s attacks on the American homeland and U.S. interests abroad are attempts to attain its own clearly defined geopolitical objectives of removing the U.S. military presence from the Persian Gulf, forcing Washington to alter its stance in the IsraelPalestinian dispute, and causing internal unrest that culminates in the overthrow of conservative Arab regimes aligned with the United States. In other words, while its actions may not fit the strict definition of counterbalancing, al Qaeda has sought to undermine U.S. hegemony and thereby compel changes in America’s hegemonic regional strategy in the Persian Gulf.

206

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

No Solar Cells
Status quo solar cells suck; "thin film" cells can't stand the heat Kennedy Space Center, October 02 ("Spaceport Visioning Concept Study". Involving Rainer Meinke of Advanced Magnet Lab; Dr. John Olds of Georgia Institute of Technology, Department of Aerospace Engineering; Dr. James Powell of Star Tram, Inc; Edgar Zapata of NASA/KSC Systems Engineering Office http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/nexgen/Nexgen_Downloads/Spaceport_Visioning_Final_Report. pdf)[JWu] Solar cells of the current generation are heavy, expensive and hard to deploy considering the enormous numbers needed for SSP. Thin film cells represent one viable option for the future [Fig 5]. They hold promise for low mass, low cost, and high production capability by depositing special materials in very thin (microns) layers on rolled substrates similar to newspaper printing. In addition, they are flexible, which lends themselves for deposition on lightweight deployable / inflatable structures needed for packaging of extremely large arrays in launch vehicles. Unfortunately, the materials considered for these structures (i.e. kapton), do not have the high temperature properties needed to allow cell growth deposition.

207

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Micrometeoroids Ext
A one millimeter micrometeoroid can cause holes in space satellites Aceti et al, (R. Aceti & G. Drolshagen, European Space Research & Technology Centre, Norway; J.A.M. McDonnell, Unispace Kent, UK; T.Stevenson, Mare Crisium, UK) November 94 ("0Micrometeoroids and Space Debris - The Eureca Post-Flight Analysis" ESA (European Space Agency) Bulletin Nr. 80, http://www.esa.int/esapub/bulletin/bullet80/ace80.htm)[JWu] Every spacecraft in Earth orbit is exposed to a flux of space debris and meteoroid particles. Currently more than 7000 large man-made objects orbiting in near-Earth space can be tracked from the ground with radar or by optical means. A much larger number of smaller man-made debris items and micrometeoroids that are orbiting the Earth cannot be detected from the ground. These particles are a hazard for both longterm missions and large spacecraft. While the risk of collision with a large piece of debris or a large meteoroid is very small, particles less than one millimetre in size cause craters visible to the naked eye. Typical impact velocities are 10 km/s for space debris and 20 km/s for meteoroids. Larger particles can penetrate the outer shielding of a spacecraft and can damage its internal equipment. As a result of this threat, designers have to consider the risk of particle impacts in the planning of every space mission. In addition, particle fluxes in space are also of considerable scientific interest.

208

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Requires too much Krypton
Each satellite requires 4 years of the world production of krypton Steve Oleson, Research Engineer at NASA Glenn Research Center, 08/’99, “Advanced Propulsion for Space Solar Power Satellites”, Glenn Technical Reports Server, http://gltrs.grc.nasa.gov/reports/1999/TM-1999-209307.pdf (alex werner)

Electric

Due to the large amounts of fuel required for the many nodes, a more plentiful fuel than the xenon used today will be needed for the Hall thruster. Krypton propellant was chosen over xenon propellant due to its better availability (roughly 10 times xenon) for so many large spacecraft. 7 As much as 2000 MT of krypton will be needed to deliver the entire sun tower spacecraft. Currently, the world yearly production of krypton is from 200 to 500 MT. Thus several years of production would need to be stockpiled for the complete mission.

209

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Treaty with Russia prevents Beaming
Treaty with Russia prevents laser beam-down NASA, 3-21-01 (Science and Technology Directorate at NASA, "Beam it down, Scotty", http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast23mar_1.htm)[JWu] Lasers are also under consideration for beaming the energy from space. Using lasers would eliminate most of the problems associated with microwave but under a current treaty with Russia, the U.S. is prohibited from beaming high-power lasers from outer space.

210

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space Causes Cancer
AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, SPACE CAUSES CANCER!!!!

Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, University of California, 12/80, Ionizing Radiation Risks to Satellite Power Systems (SPS) Workers in Space, for the U.S. Department of Energy (alex werner)
“Thus, for example, in 10,000 workers who completed ten missions with an exposure of 40 rem per mission, 320 to 2,000 additional deaths, in excess of the 1640 deaths from normally occurring cancer, would be expected. These estimates would indicate a 20 to 120 percent increase in cancer incidence in the work-population.”

211

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

DOD COUNTERPLAN
DOD COUNTERPLAN Text: The U.S. Department of Defense should ________________________________________. Space Frontier Foundation, international organization composed of space activists, scientists and engineers, media and political professionals.10-10-07 ("Meeting Humanity’s Energy, National Security, Environmental
and Economic Development Needs" http://www.space-frontier.org/Presentations/ SFFViewsSBSPReport10Oct07.pdf)[JWu]

DoD as Anchor Tenant Customer: The key to every business is having dependable and reliable customer(s). The availability of a dependable anchor tenant customer, who is willing to pay $1 or more per kilowatt hour for large amounts of power, is a major step forward. The SBSP Study Group recommends that the DoD should immediately conduct a requirements analysis of underlying long-term DoD demand for secure, reliable, and mobile energy delivery to the warfighter, what the DoD might be willing to pay for a SBSP service delivered to the warfighter and under what terms and conditions, and evaluate the appropriateness and effectiveness of various approaches to signing up as an anchor tenant customer of a commerciallydelivered service, such as the NextView acquisition approach pioneered by the National GeoSpatial-imaging Agency.

212

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

EFFICIENCY COUNTERPLAN
Energy efficiency and renewables are critical to save the Army vast energy consumptions Eileen Westervelt, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, 2005, “September Energy Trends and Implications for U.S. Army Installations”, http://static.cbslocal.com/station/wcco/news/ specialreports/projectenergy/06_0420_projectenergy_energytrendsreportfromarmycorps.pdf (Bapodra) World oil production is at or near its peak and current world demand exceeds the supply. Saudi Arabia is considered the bellwether nation for oil production and has not increased production since April 2003. After peak production, supply no longer meets demand, and prices and competition increase. The proved reserve lifetime for world oil is about 41 years, most of this at a declining availability. Our current throw-away nuclear cycle will consume the world reserve of low-cost uranium in about 20 years. Unless we dramatically change our consumption practices, the Earth’s finite resources of petroleum and natural gas will become depleted in this century. Coal supplies may last into the next century depending on technology and consumption trends as it starts to replace oil and natural gas. We must act now to develop the technology and infrastructure necessary to transition to other energy sources and energy efficient technologies. Policy changes, leap-ahead technology breakthroughs, cultural changes, and significant investment is requisite for this new energy future. Time is essential to enact these changes. The process should begin now. Our best options for meeting future energy requirements are energy efficiency and renewable sources. Energy efficiency is the least expensive, most readily available, and environmentally friendly way to stretch our current energy supplies. This ensures that we get the most benefit from every Btu used. It involves optimizing operations and controls to minimize waste and infusing state of the art technology and techniques where appropriate. The potential savings for the Army is about 30 percent of current and future consumption. Energy efficiency measures usually pay for themselves over the life cycle of the application, even when only face value costs are considered.

213

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

IRAQ NEG
Too many alternate causalities for the plan to solve in Iraq Andrew Garfield, Senior Fellow at the FPRI, is a former European director of the Terrorism Research Center, deputy director of International Policy Institute (IPI) at King's College London, and senior director of Influence and Insight for the Lincoln Group, former senior British military, former senior policy advisor at the UK Ministry of Defense. 2006 ("British perspectives on the US effort to stabilize and reconstruct Iraq" http://www.unc.edu/depts/diplomat/item/2006/1012/fpri/garfield_british.html)[JWu] By invading Iraq, the U. S. and its Coalition partners have undertaken probably the most challenging nation building exercise since the end of World War II. The Coalition has set itself the task of fundamentally transforming Iraqi society, restoring stability to a war- and sanctions-ravaged country and reconstructing Iraq's political order. This monumental task has been further complicated by a succession of well-documented strategic errors, tactical blunders, and operational shortcomings. The list would surely include: the commitment of too few troops, often with the wrong equipment and training for counterinsurgency warfare; hasty turnover of responsibility to unready Iraqis in the search for an early exit; and failure to seal the borders as part of a larger strategy to gain regional support for the project. Further aggravating the situation is the predictable emergence of a tenacious, resilient, and complex insurgency. This enemy continues to demonstrate its ability to challenge the most powerful conventional military in the world. So far, the U. S. military has achieved only tactical parity with this adversary. Many alt causes for Iraq Eric Peltz et al, senior management systems analyst and director of the logistics program within RAND Arroyo Center; Marc Robbins, senior management scientist at RAND; Ken Girardini is a senior operations researcher at RAND, Spring 06 ("Iraq and beyond", rand.org/publications/randreview/issues/spring2006/sustain.html)[JWu] When ground forces attacked in March 2003, there were not enough cargo trucks to move the needed supplies. This shortage was due to both higher-than-anticipated demands on trucks and factors that limited their number. As a result, supplies ran low for all commodities except fuel. (Compared to other commodities — such as food, water, and ammunition — fuel had been the subject of better planning and received greater resources.) The advancing combat units also lacked the communications equipment needed to order repair parts while on the move. This became particularly problematic for the army’s 3rd Infantry Division, because it had to rely on parts, prepositioned in Kuwait, that fell far short of adequate. Soon after the invasion, severe problems cropped up in the distribution of supplies from the United States. These problems substantially delayed delivery of repair parts to U.S. troops in Iraq. In fact, the inventories of repair parts held by major combat units shrank to less than ten percent of the parts needed to repair broken equipment. Shipments from the United States were hobbled initially by miscommunication between the army and the U.S. Defense Logistics Agency on how to consolidate shipments stateside. This generated an unexpected re-sorting workload in theater, which in turn led to delays and some “lost” shipments, as units in Iraq often received items intended for other units. Later, as the scale and pace of stability operations grew, the demand for repair parts and other supplies outstripped the capacity of the major stateside distribution center supporting OIF. It took nine months for the Defense Logistics Agency to gain funding approval, increase capacity, and work off the backlog. As the heavy pace of operations continued into the summer of 2003 and beyond, the army’s inventories ran low on a wide range of repair parts. There were insufficient national war reserves, insufficient replenishment capabilities, and insufficient funding. Combined, these factors caused 214

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
the backorder rate for key repair parts managed by the army, such as engines, to skyrocket to 35 percent of all orders (see the centerpiece). Recovery from these problems extended into late 2005. Satellites destroy trust and relations with Iraq Chicago Tribune, June 2 2008, "US satellite spying on Iraq, officials say" http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-intel-iraq-02-jul02,0,4980992.story?track=rss [JWu] WASHINGTON -- Caught off guard by recent Iraqi military operations, the United States is using spy satellites that ordinarily are trained on adversaries to monitor the movements of the Americanbacked Iraqi army, current and former U.S. officials say. The stepped-up surveillance reflects breakdowns in trust and coordination between the two forces. Officials said it was part of an expanded intelligence effort launched after American commanders were surprised by the timing of the Iraqi army's violent push into Basra three months ago. The use of the satellites puts the United States in the unusual position of employing some of its most sophisticated espionage technology to track an allied army that American forces helped create, continue to advise, and often fight alongside. The satellites are "imaging military installations that the Iraqi army occupies," said a former U.S. military official, who said slides from the images had been used in recent closed briefings at U.S. facilities in the Middle East. "They're imaging training areas that the Iraqi army utilizes. They're imaging roads that Iraqi armored vehicles and large convoys transit." Military officials and experts said the move showed concern by U.S. commanders about whether their Iraqi counterparts would follow U.S. guidance or keep their coalition partners fully informed. "It suggests that we don't have complete confidence in their chain of command, or in their willingness to tell us what they're going to do because they may fear that we may try to get them not to do it," said John Pike, director of GlobalSecurity.org, a website about intelligence and military issues. Relations key to Iraqi stability Office of Press Secretary, Nov 26 07 http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/11/20071126-1.html The U.S. and Iraqi "Declaration of Principles" is a shared statement of intent that establishes common principles to frame our future relationship. This moves us closer to normalized, bilateral relations between our two countries. With this declaration, leaders of Iraq and the United States commit to begin negotiating the formal arrangements that will govern such a relationship. Iraq's leaders have asked for an enduring relationship with America, and we seek an enduring relationship with a democratic Iraq. We are ready to build that relationship in a sustainable way that protects our mutual interests, promotes regional stability, and requires fewer Coalition forces. US-Iraq relationship helps fight terrorism Office of Press Secretary, Nov 26 07 http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/11/20071126-1.html The relationship envisioned will include U.S.-Iraqi cooperation in the political, diplomatic, economic and security arenas. The United States and Iraq intend to negotiate arrangements based upon a range of principles: Political and Diplomatic: The U.S. and Iraq have committed to strengthening Iraq's democratic institutions, upholding the Iraqi Constitution, supporting Iraqi national reconciliation, and enhancing Iraq's position in regional and international organizations, so that it may play a constructive role in the region. Economic: Both countries have agreed to support the development of Iraqi economic institutions and further integration into international financial institutions, to encourage all parties to abide by their commitments made in the International Compact with Iraq, to assist Iraq in its efforts to recover illegally exported funds and properties and to secure debt relief, and to encourage the flow of foreign investments to 215

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
Iraq. Security: To support the Iraqi government in training, equipping, and arming the Iraqi Security Forces so they can provide security and stability to all Iraqis; support the Iraqi government in contributing to the international fight against terrorism by confronting terrorists such as Al-Qaeda, its affiliates, other terrorist groups, as well as all other outlaw groups, such as criminal remnants of the former regime; and to provide security assurances to the Iraqi Government to deter any external aggression and to ensure the integrity of Iraq's territory.

216

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

NO CHINA RACE
China's space guiding principles are peaceful and cooperative China's Information Office of the State Council, November 22, 2k ("China's Space Activities, a White Paper", viewed on Spacered; http://www.spaceref.com/china/china.white.paper.nov.22.2000.html)[JWu] IV. International Cooperation China persistently supports activities involving the peaceful use of outer space, and maintains that international space cooperation should be promoted and strengthened on the basis of equality and mutual benefit, mutual complementarity and common development. Guiding Principles The Chinese government holds that international space cooperation should follow the fundamental principles listed in the "Deceleration on International Cooperation on Exploring and Utilizing Outer Space for the Benefits and Interests of All Countries, Especially in Consideration of Developing Countries' Demands," which was approved by the 51st General Assembly of the United Nations in 1996. China adheres to the following principles while carrying out international space cooperation: - The aim of international space cooperation is to peacefully develop and use space resources for the benefit of all mankind. - International space cooperation should be carried out on the basis of equality and mutual benefit, mutual complementarity and common development, and the generally accepted principles of international law. - The priority aim of international space cooperation is to simultaneously increase the capability of space development of all countries, particularly the developing countries, and enable all countries to enjoy the benefits of space technology. - Necessary measures should be adopted to protect the space environment and space resources in the course of international space cooperation.

217

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
China's space program is marked by multilateral cooperation China's Information Office of the State Council, November 22, 2k ("China's Space Activities, a White Paper", viewed on Spacered; http://www.spaceref.com/china/china.white.paper.nov.22.2000.html)[JWu] China's participation in international space cooperation started in the mid-1970s. During the last two decades or more, China has joined bilateral, regional, multilateral and international space cooperation in different forms, such as commercial launching service, which have yielded extensive achievements. 1. Bilateral Cooperation: Since 1985, China has successively signed inter-governmental or inter-agency cooperative agreements, protocols or memorandums, and established long-term cooperative relations with a dozen countries, including the United States, Italy, Germany, Britain, France, Japan, Sweden , Argentina, Brazil, Russia, Ukraine and Chile. Bilateral space cooperation is implemented in various forms, from making reciprocal space programs and exchanges of scholars and specialists, and sponsoring symposiums, to jointly developing satellite or satellite parts, and providing satellite piggyback service and commercial launching service. In 1993, a Sino-German joint venture - EurasSpace GmbH - was established, and a contract on the development and manufacture of Sinosat-1 was signed with DASA and Aerospeciale in 1995. Sinosat-1, which was successfully launched in 1998, was the first cooperative project on satellite development between the Chinese and European aerospace industries. The collaboration between China and Brazil on the project of an earth resources satellite is making good progress, and the first such satellite was successfully launched by China on October 14, 1999. In addition to cooperation on complete satellites, China and Brazil are cooperating in the areas of satellite technology, satellite application and satellite components. The cooperation between China and Brazil in the space sector has set a good example for the developing countries in "South-South Cooperation" in the high-tech field. 2. Regional Cooperation: China attaches great importance to space cooperation in the Asia-Pacific region. In 1992, China, Thailand, Pakistan and some other countries jointly sponsored the "Asian-Pacific Multilateral Space Technology Cooperation Symposium. " Thanks to the impetus of such regional cooperation, the governments of China, Iran, the Republic of Korea, Mongolia, Pakistan and Thailand signed the "Memorandum of Understanding on Cooperation in Small Multi-Mission Satellite and Related Activities" in Thailand in April 1998. Besides the signatory countries, other countries in the Asia-Pacific region may also join the cooperative project, which has helped to enhance the progress of space technology and space application in the Asia- Pacific region. 3. Multilateral Cooperation: In June 1980, China dispatched an observer delegation to the 23rd Meeting of UN COPUOS for the first time, and on November 3, 1980, China became a member country of the committee. Since then, China has participated in all the meetings of UN COPUOS and the annual meetings held by its Science, Technology and Law Sub-committee. In 1983 and 1988, China acceded to the "Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies," "Agreement on the Rescue of Astronauts, the Return of Astronauts and the Return of Objects Launched into Outer Space," "Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects, " and "Convention on Registration of Objects Launched into Outer Space," and has strictly performed its responsibilities and obligations.

218

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

BIZCON LINK
Plan hurts business confidence Leonard David, special correspondent, Space News, 9-19-07 (http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/070919_sps_airforce.html)[JWu] Peter Teets, Distinguished Chair of the Eisenhower Center for Space and Defense Studies, said that SBSP must be economically viable with those economics probably not there today. "But if we can find a way with continued technology development ... and smart moves in terms of development cycles to bring clean energy from space to the Earth, it's a home run kind of situation," he told attendees of the meeting. "It's a noble effort," Teets told Space News. There remain uncertainties in SBSP, including closure on a business case for the idea, he added. "I think the Air Force has a legitimate stake in starting it. But the scale of this project is going to be enormous. This could create a new agency ... who knows? It's going to take the President and a lot of political will to go forward with this," Teets said.

219

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

OIL DA LINKS
SSP would provide all the energy in the world, making oil obselete National Space Society, independent, educational organization; preeminent citizen's voice on space 10/07, (""An investment for today – an energy solution for tomorrow" http://www.nss.org/legislative/positions/NSS-SSP-PositionPaper.pdf)[JWu] Solar energy is routinely used on spacecraft today, and the solar energy available in space is literally billions of times greater than we use today. The lifetime of the sun is an estimated 4 to 5 billion years, making SSP a truly long-term energy solution. Space solar power can have an extremely small environmental footprint, perhaps competitive with ground-solar and wind, because with sufficient investments in space infrastructure, the SSP can be built from materials from space with zero terrestrial environmental impact. Only energy receivers need be built on Earth. As Earth receives only one part in 2.3 billion of the sun's output, SSP is by far the largest potential energy source available, dwarfing all others combined. Development cost and time, of course, are considerable. This makes SSP a long-term solution rather than a short-term stopgap, although there are some intriguing near-term possibilities. In any case, SSP can potentially supply all the electrical needs of our planet.

One year of SBSP provides almost all remaining oil energy combined James Bloom, The Guardian staff writer, 11-1-07, ("Power from the final frontier", http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2007/nov/01/guardianweeklytechnologysection.research)[JWu ] The space office sees energy supply as one of strategic importance as oil supplies dwindle; according to a report by Germany's Energy Watch Group published last week, "peak oil" output occurred last year, and will fall by 7% annually to half its present levels by 2030. The space office notes that all remaining oil resources are estimated to contain 250 terawatt-years of energy; but that a one-kilometre wide band in geosynchronous orbit receives about 212 TW-years of energy each year.

Space has infinite energy that will replace oil Arthur Smith, President Long Island Space Society, 8-11-03 ("the case for space based solar development", http://www.spacedaily.com/news/ssp-03b.html)[JWu] We already have an immense fusion reactor working for us in our solar system, ultimately responsible for almost all our energy choices. All we really need to do is make better use of it by tapping into it more directly. Any rational energy policy for the United States must support the steps needed to make that happen: increased investment in reducing launch costs, reserving radio frequency spectrum for power transmission, and moving towards a billion dollars per year in a robust and diverse program of R&D on space solar power.

220

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

SPENDING LINKS
Plan costs 1 trillion dollars CNN 7/1/08 ("How to harvest solar power? Beam it down from space!" http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science/05/30/space.solar/index.html)[JWu] NASA and the United States Department of Energy studied the concept throughout the 1970s, concluding that although the technology was feasible, the price of putting it all together and sending it to outer space was not. "The estimated cost of all of the infrastructure to build them in space was about $1 trillion," said John Mankins, a former NASA technologist and president of the Space Power Association. "It was an unimaginable amount of money."

Plan costs 10 billion and takes 10 years NewScientist 10/11/07 ("Pentagon backs plan to beam solar power down from space" http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn12774)[JWu] Space-based solar power would use kilometre-sized solar panel arrays to gather sunlight in orbit. It would then beam power down to Earth in the form of microwaves or a laser, which would be collected in antennas on the ground and then converted to electricity. Unlike solar panels based on the ground, solar power satellites placed in geostationary orbit above the Earth could operate at night and during cloudy conditions. "We think we can be a catalyst to make this technology advance," said US Marine Corps lieutenant colonel Paul Damphousse of the NSSO at a press conference yesterday in Washington, DC, US. The NSSO report (pdf) recommends that the US government spend $10 billion over the next 10 years to build a test satellite capable of beaming 10 megawatts of electric power down to Earth.

221

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

NASA WON'T DO PLAN
NASA would not pursue space solar power. Current priorities prove Taylor Dinerman, author and journalist based in New York City, 5/19/08, “NASA and Space Solar Power,” http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1130/1, Malek There was no follow-up to this study, partly because of a lack of urgency in the era of cheap energy that existed a decade ago and also because NASA did not, and does not today, see itself as an auxiliary to the Department of Energy. NASA does science and exploration and not much else. Along with its contractors it can develop new technologies that apply directly to those two missions, but outside of that it will resist being forced to spend money on projects that it does not see as falling within those two missions. Technology development in general has been cut back. The NASA Institute for Advanced Concepts has been closed. There is a minimal ongoing effort to build up some technologies that may in the future be useful for reusable launch vehicle development, but it is hard to see how this fits into a coherent future program. The agency has its priorities and is ruthlessly sticking to them.

Space solar power through NASA is seen as encroachment onto other department’s turfs Taylor Dinerman, author and journalist based in New York City, 5/19/08, “NASA and Space Solar Power,” http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1130/1, Malek NASA is not the US Department of Spatial Affairs: it does not have the statutory authority to control, regulate, or promote commercial space activities such as telecommunications satellites, space tourism, space manufacturing, or space solar power. Such powers are spread throughout the government in places like the FAA’s Office of Commercial Space Transportation, the Department of Commerce, and elsewhere. Even if NASA were somehow to get the funds and the motivation to do space solar power, these other institutions would resist what they would recognize as an encroachment on their turf.

NASA has no room for space solar power programs Taylor Dinerman, author and journalist based in New York City, 5/19/08, “NASA and Space Solar Power,” http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1130/1, Malek Until the shuttle is retired and NASA has a new and secure method of getting people into space, either with the Orion capsule on top of the Ares 1 or perhaps another rocket, or using the SpaceX Dragon capsule and Falcon 9 combination, there is no room for any other major programs. It will require all they can do to cope with their current programs and to deal with a new president and his or her administration. They don’t need any more distractions right now.

222

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

SQUO SOLVES
Space based solar energy inevitable Taylor Dinerman, author and journalist based in New York City, 5/19/08, “NASA and Space Solar Power,” http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1130/1, Malek At some point within the next four years the president is going to have to decide whether to go ahead with this new and potentially unlimited source of energy or to put it back into limbo. The case for it is growing stronger every time the price of oil goes up or, more to the point, every time we suffer from a blackout or a near-miss. For example, a couple of months ago many large electric customers in Texas were asked to shut down their operations because there was not enough wind to spin the numerous wind turbines that have been sprouting up all over that state.

Plan to be enacted in the near future Space Frontier Foundation, 10/10/07, “Space-Based Solar Power (SBSP): Meeting Humanity’s Energy, National Security, Environmental and Economic Development Needs,” http://209.85.215.104/search?q=cache:eUrUz9kZq0QJ:www.space-frontier.org/Presentations/SFFViews SBSPReport10Oct07.pdf+ anchor+tenant+customer&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us, Malek For this reason, the business case for Space-Based Solar Power may close in the very near future with reasonable and appropriate actions by the U.S. Government. Reusable launch vehicle capabilities are being solved for at rapid rates with out government incentives Dewey Parker, Major, USAF, 4/99, “ACCESS TO SPACE: ROUTINE, RESPONSIVE AND FLEXIBLE IMPLICATIONS FOR AN EXPEDITIONARY AIR FORCE,” http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/acsc/99-154.pdf, Malek International and US companies are currently “…racing to build the world’s first commercial reusable launch vehicle to serve the booming telecommunications satellite market. The winner of this new space race could earn a lock on…lucrative contracts to launch up to 2,000 next-generation communications satellites over the next decade.”7 There are currently at least five US companies participating in the commercial race. These companies have articulated some pretty heady goals and “…plan to slash launch costs to just a third or even a fifth of today’s average launch price of $5000/lb.”8 Such a reduction in launch costs would continue fueling the boom in satellite operations. It is important to note that the government does not fund these companies and “…unlike most history-making spaceplane projects, these efforts will be funded largely with private money from wealthy individuals and companies.”9 The government is funding a completely separate reusable launch vehicle effort in coordination with industry. The Government RLV Status section of this chapter details this combined effort. The combination of these two programs may yield success much earlier than either program would produce in isolation. The rapid development of small and inexpensive Global Positioning System (GPS) receivers by the commercial sector in response to commercial economic forces is an apt analogy. These commercial receivers in turn greatly influenced the design and implementation of military receivers. The launch vehicle government and private industry effortmay well follow the same model. The most apparent haracteristic of this government-industry fusion in the GPS receiver analogy was the speed at which developments occurrence.

223

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

PRIVATE INVESTMENT NOW
There's private investment in the space industry now Bruce Cordell, PhD planetary and space physics, Weizmann postdoctoral fellow at Caltech, ex-physics professor at the California State University, space scientist, worked with NASA. May 11 08 ("space entrepreneurs" http://21stcenturywaves.com/blog/category/perspectives/)[JWu] As the space tourism industry prepares for launch, today’s aspiring space adventurers are not limited to just reading about cosmic joys, but will soon experience them personally. Bert Rutan, the dean of spacetourism advocates, who won the $ 10 million X-Prize in 2004, believes he can fly 100,000 passengers on his suborbital spaceships by 2020! Rutan is currently supplying spaceships to British billionaire Richard Branson’s Virgin Galactic and expects the first launch in 2010 for about $ 200,000 per person. Branson’s passengers will zoom to 60 miles altitude and officially enter space. The first-ever space tourism price war is taking shape according to the Wall Street Journal (3/26/08) as XCOR Aerospace will offer thrill-seekers a ride to 37 miles altitude featuring 2 minutes of zero-g, for only $ 100,000.

Private space industry is on the rise Bruce Cordell, PhD planetary and space physics, Weizmann postdoctoral fellow at Caltech, ex-physics professor at the California State University, space scientist, worked with NASA. May 11 08 ("space entrepreneurs" http://21stcenturywaves.com/blog/category/perspectives/)[JWu] (MEP is macro-engineering project) The space tourism industry can be thought of as a spectacular, but secondary MEP — analogous to the famous 1912 passenger ship the Titanic (minus the sinking!) — heralding the approaching Maslow Window of 2015. Because of their innovations, space entrepreneurs stimulate public, business, government, and even international interest in space as they develop new concepts that challenge historical approaches and promise new adventures and profits. Wave Guide 6 posts will monitor the space entrepreneurs’ progress and their impact on the rapidly approaching 2015 Maslow Window.

224

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt

Space Inevitable
SPACE RACE INEVITABLE AROUND 2013 Bruce Cordell, PhD planetary and space physics, Weizmann postdoctoral fellow at Caltech, ex-physics professor at the California State University, space scientist, worked with NASA. May 11 08 ("Math and science education" http://21stcenturywaves.com/blog/category/perspectives/)[JWu] This is a hallmark of Maslow Windows: loosening of federal and other purse strings to pursue a lofty goal of international significance. In 1969 U.S. News & World Report reported that although initial cost estimates for the Moon project had been up to $ 40 B, “Congress raised hardly any questions (and)… Initial funds were appropriated swiftly to send Project Apollo on its way.” As we approach the 1960s-style economic boom of the next Maslow Window (fully ramped-up by 2015) these patterns will repeat. In short: 1) a major Sputnik-like shock will occur near 2013 (1957 + 56) involving probably China and their international partners; see Wave Guide 5, 2) the American public will raise urgent questions about the viability of American math and science education and demand reforms, and 3) the new “Space President”, a John F. Kennedy-like figure, will respond by committing the U.S. to spectacular, unprecedented activities in space with essentially unanimous support from Congress; see Wave Guide 3.

International space race and colonization are inevitable Bruce Cordell, PhD planetary and space physics, Weizmann postdoctoral fellow at Caltech, ex-physics professor at the California State University, space scientist, worked with NASA. May 11 08 ("Math and science education" http://21stcenturywaves.com/blog/category/perspectives/)[JWu] The intersection of projected trajectories for the world’s current and future space powers suggests there will be a major international event just prior to the opening of the next Maslow Window (near 2015). The Nominal Model timelines (see Forecasts page) suggest this will occur near 2013 (Sputnik year 1957 + 56) and will have an impact on the U.S. and world comparable to Sputnik’s launch in 1957. One likely model is that an international consortium of space powers (ICSP) – possibly led by China – will announce their comprehensive plan for the large-scale colonization and utilization of space, probably including the Moon and possibly Mars. In addition to lunar settlements and orbiting solar power stations, their agenda might include plans for LEO and lunar hotels. Moon hotels are hardly a new idea; the Shimizu Corporation (Tokyo) had impressive designs over 20 years ago when we had meetings with them in connection with a NASA rfp at General Dynamics space headquarters in San Diego. Interestingly, despite their sophisticated concepts, Shimizu did not feature their space projects on their website before and I am unable to find any mention of them now. Based on the current interest levels and cooperation capabilities of many countries, this ICSP scenario seems very reasonable. For example, both Japan and the U.S. have announced plans to send people back to the Moon within 12 years, and China (possibly in cooperation with Russia) wants to establish a lunar base shortly thereafter. India also has lunar ambitions. And Russia, through its American broker Space Adventures, already offers private citizens their own personal trip around the Moon (for a hefty fee). Russia also claims to be ahead in a “race to Mars” that they expect to win by 2025.

225

Space Based Solar Panel Satellite AFF DDI ’08 Lab: KNOCK OUT Eric, Anuj, Alex, Jackie, Matt
NASA has plans for space by 2020 Bruce Cordell, PhD planetary and space physics, Weizmann postdoctoral fellow at Caltech, ex-physics professor at the California State University, space scientist, worked with NASA. May 11 08 ("Nasa programs and MEPs" http://21stcenturywaves.com/blog/category/perspectives/)[JWu] Since its inception in 2004, NASA’s official Vision for Space Exploration (VSE) has met with mixed reviews. It promised a return to the Moon by 2020 and eventually a crewed mission to Mars. Along the way a new Orion crew vehicle will fly by 2014 and Shuttle-Derived Launch Vehicles will be developed. Critics’ complaints include unrealistic cost estimates and schedules. Former NASA scientist Paul Spudis has deeper concerns, “The VSE in NASA terms has become all about building the new Orion and Ares vehicles with very little tying these spacecraft to their destinations….NASA still doesn’t really understand what its mission is…” Spudis recommends: “We’re going to the Moon to learn how to live and work on another world. It’s that simple.”

Space renaissance, race, and colonization are inevitable Bruce Cordell, PhD planetary and space physics, Weizmann postdoctoral fellow at Caltech, ex-physics professor at the California State University, space scientist, worked with NASA. May 11 08 ("Economic growth" http://21stcenturywaves.com/blog/category/perspectives/)[JWu] A variety of long-term indicators – economic, social, technological, and political – strongly suggest that a new international space race will take shape during the next 5 – 10 years. This unprecedented thrust into space is expected to significantly exceed the scale and scope of the 1960’s Apollo Moon program and will culminate by 2025 in a variety of major activities in space such as humans on Mars, tourists on the Moon, and solar power satellites in LEO. Long-term patterns in the economy, technology, and exploration over the last 200 years appear to have predictive power for the 21st Century. In particular, a roughly 56-year cycle was identified, where macro-engineering projects (e.g., Panama Canal), significant human explorations (e.g., Lewis and Clark), and major military conflicts (e.g., Civil War) tended to cluster together, near economic booms. The bottom-line forecast is that the decade from 2015 to 2025 will be the analog of the 1960s, bringing a global focus on achievement in space exploration and a Camelot-like zeitgeist. The purpose of this Weblog is to evaluate these forecasts based on macroeconomics and macrohistory, by comparing them to events and trends from around the world in 10 Wave Guide areas.

226

You're Reading a Free Preview

Descarga
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->